WALLY'S WINTER WEATHER PAGE 2016-2017
CLICK HERE for official (National Weather Service) forecast.
Saturday - May 27, 2017 - 11:30 am
S = snow showers F = snow flurries
Now, for the summer. Keeping it simple -- June appears to be on the slighly cooler side. July and August should be near normal, but if they vary some, July my be slightly cooler, and August slightly warmer. Precip looks to go rather wet overall. Of course, we may get short periods of hot and dry, but the overall picture should be as I described.
Hurricane threats will be from storms forming closer to the US. A normal to slightly less than normal year for number and intensity of storms. Remember, some years that have few storms can still have a hum-dinger of ONE big storm.
This forecast is given as is ... with no warranty of any kind. It is for entertainment purposes only. Any action regarding life or property should be contingent on the official forecast of the National Weather Service, an agency of the U.S. Government. Only the National Weather Service is the source of official forecasts ... not the Weather Channel, Accuweather, Weatherbug, WSI [which many TV stations use] or any other private group.
CLIMATE NOTE - Kinda for fun. But, let's dig in.
I want you to know that I don't just guess (or hope) in this area. I use and cite strong and well-recognized sources -- from good and true, pure climate scientists. I'm not saying there cannot be alternate views by some good scientists. But, I find great reasoning by ... well, certain giants in the field, and often the ones that are, unfortunately, NOT in the papers/TV. You can skip the footnotes, etc.I will still deal with the supposed disappearing ice caps soon, but I can hardly sit still when I continue to read articles in the press that so badly distort and ignore data to force the image of run-away global warming, by people who seem to be clueless about very important factors that some climate giants are clearly pointing out. Just bear with me a little, and you'll be stunned.
First, we ARE warmer. Quite a bit right now. Warmer than we have ever been? or should be? Not even close. Take a look:
The far right shows the last orange segment where we are in a warm period, but NOT like the Holocene climate max 4-5 and 6-8 thousand years ago. During those times, the global average temp was at least a full degree (Centigrade, so equals 1.8° Fahrenheit) higher than the 15 degree (59° Fahrenheit) baseline -- all without man's nasty CO2 addition. We are having a hard time averaging .6° C so we could basically double before reaching those historic levels. Our temps now mainly dance below that .8° above normal purple line below. UPDATE: Lately, the lines have sunk to nearer .4 C values (May 27, 2017).
Right now, very noticeable is that our oceans are (in the majority) on the warm side of normal. That the oceans are warming over a longer term is handled nicely in a paper that seems to get no publicity in the world of climate. The late Dr. William Gray's great paper -- http://tropical.atmos.colostate.edu/Includes/Documents/Publications/gray2012.pdf -- not only predicted our current climate but explained why, and how it is NORMAL. Did you know that warmer water (oceans) releases CO2? You mean, an uptick in CO2 lately has to at least account for this? Yes. And everyone should.
Our air is also warmer than normal. Even climate change skeptics see and understand that with no problem. Why are we so warm right now? Could it be that we have concluded a 100-year period of very high solar activity? It's kinda unprecented (the solar level sustained), and is called the "Modern Maximum." As we rapidly drop off into a likely period of a major deep solar sleep, thing are likely to change. And, as badly as climate alarmists understand today's setup, they're really going to miss what's coming.
For one thing we may actually see more hurricanes (during a time of less or no sunspots during a solar minumum). FSU researchers suggest:
But, more important is solar irradience -- the light energy coming in to us. It drops. Oh, not so much in visible light as UV (ultra-violet) energy, solar-storm energy, and cosmic rays. Are we really dropping? The observed trend is VERY clear. So clear that some scientists worry that we may enter a new cold period solar minimum.
You can see, it doesn't take much to change the global temp rather significantly. The Maunder Minimum was terribly cold across the planet. I'll recount stories next article. Meanwhile, the solar peaks are now fading -- well, for a while, maybe decades or more. I (and many good climatologists) do not feel ready to totally buy us going back to a Maunder Minimum level, yet. But, the trend and effects are clear. The degree is the question. In NASA’s David Hathaway’s own words, "cycle 23 has been a cycle like we have not seen in century or more. The irradiance dropped 50% more than recent cycles, the solar wind was at the lowest levels of the satellite age. There were over 800 sunspotless days, well more than double those of the recent cycles. The cycle lasted 3 years longer than cycle 22, longest since cycle 6 that peaked in 1810."
I read articles that throw sand on the value of solar-change impacts on temperatures. Really? Okay, .1% of light change isn't much. But, looking at all radiation (cited above) along with observational data shows a real impact. The total magnetic flux leaving the sun has increased by a factor of 2.3 since 1901. That's a lot. Two recent studies that have drawn clear connections between solar changes and the Earth’s climate are Soon (2005) ...
Soon, W.H., "Variable Solar Irradiance as a Plausible Agent for Multidecadal Variations in the Arctic-wide Surface Air Temperature Record of the Past 130 Years," Geophysical Research Letters , Vol. 32,doi:10.1029/2005GL023429.
Soon, W.H., Posmentier, E., Baliunas, S.L. (1996), Inference of solar irradiance variability from terrestrial temperature changes 1880-1993: an astrophysical application of the sun-climate relationship. Astrophysical Journal 472, pp 891-902
... and Kärner (2004). Soon (2005 GRL) showed how the arctic temperatures (the arctic of course has no urbanization contamination) correlated with solar irradiance far better than with the greenhouse gases over the last century (see Figure below). For the 10 year running mean of total solar irradiance (TSI) vs Arctic-wide air temperature anomalies (Polyokov).
Solar energy and arctice temps coorelate quite closely in the graph above. So, I just get bemused when some climate folks say, "Ah, the sun just doesn't have much to do with earths climate changes, including todays warmth.
There are other additional reasons for our current warm period, which I'll add later.
Well, our (unusual) warmth is going to fade. We may actually get warmer still for a while, including some record warmth in the scale of brief recent time. But, the writing is on the wall. The sun has tipped his hand. The gaff has been blown, and it's not going to be easy to refute it.
I'm sad about it actually. There are good scientists which suggest that global warming is and always has been VERY GOOD in the main. With warmth, crop areas may have shifted, but with much better overall coverage, it has been good for our planet's people. Clearly, the Mideval warm period brought increased prosperity and population growth (loved hearing The Discovery Channel say that on a special about the middle ages). Going cold will hurt the world.Final note. Those good scientists just mentioned are getting blasted, sometimes fighting for their career just for even suggesting that warming could be good. Those like Dr. William Happer, a top-class physicist at Princeton University...
... He is Professer Emeritus and holds the title Cyrus Fogg Bracket Professor of Physics. Such vitrolic demonization of him by climate alarmists just has no place in science. He has not been removed, yet, but there are others who are fighting to stay alive in their careers.
(With all this, I will listen to all views in the discussion. Please don't be one of those who go ballistic and horribly condemning with different views, including stopping their ears to even listening to alternative suggestions. The history of science is replete with that action against those who ended up right. Nobody knows who's perfectly right on that which is less than an exact science. We should admit that and go on in open scientific inquiry.)
You can send any comments to firstname.lastname@example.org or see me!
SREF - Short Range Ensembles
DICLAIMER AND COMMENT: This page is just for fun, and my forecast, may vary from the National Weather Service by quite a bit a times. There is no liability assumed for anything resulting from this page. Do not use this page to plan anything. Refer to official National Weather Service forecasts for responsible action. I studied some meteorology at The Florida State University School of Meteorology and do study various models and internal weather service discussions, and was fully trained in surface weather observation as an ASOS augmenter in preparation for working at a surface weather station. In any case, any forecast on this page which is more than 8-12 hours old should be disregarded as out-of-date. If you have any comments, leave me e-mail.