No “Global Warming” in Arizona – Coldest June on Record Since 1913
Posted By Vicki McClure Davidson on June 22, 2009
My potted geraniums are still thriving, and here it is June 22.
I bring this up only because, as Frugal Café readers know, I live in Arizona. By now, typically, my geraniums have shriveled up and died, my parsley and basil and cilantro would be brown and crunchy, and just about anything else I planted that is non-indigenous to the southwest would be hanging on for dear life if they haven’t already croaked.
Father’s Day weekend was also fabulously tolerable. I’ve lived here since I was in 7th grade, and to the best of my knowledge, Arizona has been “colder” this year than I can ever remember for the month of June. Local weather forecasters on the AZ news have said the same thing: this has been the very coldest June on record since 1913. I’m planning on dancing a “Snoopy Dance of Joy” when the air conditioning bill for June arrives. Woo hoo!
From Arizona Republic, June hasn’t been this nice since … 1913, June 19, 2009:
Meteorologists are reluctant to call a month “nice.” They have their data and their science and typically do not describe the weather in such subjective terms.
Except now, because the data prove it.
“It’s probably the best June since I’ve been here, and I’ve been here most of my life,” said the National Weather Service’s Valerie Meyers, who is in her late 40s. “It’s been really nice.”
Possibly the nicest June ever.
It’s that type of thing that is fun to say but hard to quantify.
Thursday, however, was the 14th consecutive day to stay below 100 degrees. That’s the longest stretch of its kind in any June since 1913.
The lower temperatures have allowed people to sleep with windows open and drive with their arms out vehicle windows. Evenings, too, have been spent chatting with neighbors while children or grandchildren play. Those events are not life-changing, but they are, well, nice.
Typically in June, high-pressure systems begin to form above the Valley. High pressure means clear skies and little wind. And, in June, clear skies let in the sunshine, sending the temperatures soaring.
This June, though, has remained cool because of what Meyers called “a persistent area of low pressure off the West Coast.”
The low pressure has prevented the high-pressure systems from getting into place.
Alas, all good things must come to an end. This weekend, the days will heat up. Temperatures are expected to be back in the 104-105 range by the middle of next week.
So, Al Gore: where’s the global warming?
From Say Anything, Global Warming: Record Number of Days In Arizona Under 100 Degrees
Certainly a localized weather pattern doesn’t mean much. But we all know if there was record high temperatures the global warming fools would be using this as proof that their socialistic agenda agenda is necessary.
Just a few climate cooling situations in the past two years that have baffled climate scientists, who for some wacky reason, want to believe in the hoax and that make global warming fanatics scramble to find a way to disregard or discredit them. Usually, it’s to assert that a trend in a cooling of climate means nothing, but that a trend in the heating of climate means everything:
Gateway Pundit: Brrrr… It’s Snowing in North Dakota– In June! and Brrrr… South America Has Coldest Winter in a 90 Years and Brrrr… China Suffers Coldest Winter in 100 Years and Antarctica Ice Cap Growth Reaches Record High Levels (Photos) and Iraqis See First Snow in 100 Years As Sign of Peace.
Related reading:
Washington Monthly: GO, SPEED READER, GO
Founding Bloggers: Nothing Says Global Warming Like 59 Degrees On July 1st!
An Honest Climate Debate: Brisbane has its coldest October morning since 1976
Famous DC: Capitol Hill Circus: Democrats Hire Speed Reader. Bearded Lady Booked Till June.
All American Blogger: US government’s climate con-job | Obama administration “report” on climate change is deceitful, scare-mongering, bogus science
Mofo Politics: European Union President believes climate change is a myth
Walter E. Williams, AMinority View, WND: How much cooling is enough?
Green Hell Blog: Skeptics beating Al Gore: Dem advisors say drop global warming as lead message
Stop The ACLU: How Dare Those Incas Thrive When It Was Warm!
The Heritage Foundation: CBO Grossly Underestimates Costs of Cap and Trade
Jared Allen, The Hill: Democrats break logjam on climate change bill
MasterResource: Climate Impacts of Waxman-Markey (the IPCC-based arithmetic of no gain)
Noel Sheppard, NewsBusters: Gallup Poll Editor: Al Gore Is Losing Global Warming Debate
Doug Powers, Michelle Malkin: Eco-hypocrite of the week
Pronk Palisades: Gore Grilled & Gingrich Gouged–American People Oppose Massive Carbon Cap and Trade Tax Increase–Videos
Prison Planet: IPCC Scientists Caught Producing False Data To Push Global Warming
Telegraph.co.uk: The world has never seen such freezing heat
Gateway Pundit: Brrrr… It’s Snowing in North Dakota– In June! and Brrrr… South America Has Coldest Winter in a 90 Years and Brrrr… China Suffers Coldest Winter in 100 Years and Antarctica Ice Cap Growth Reaches Record High Levels (Photos) and Iraqis See First Snow in 100 Years As Sign of Peace
Red Dot in a Red State’s Blog: Waxman – About as Sharp as a Bag of Wet Mice
Frugal Café Blog Zone: Weatherman Takes on MSNBC for Its Global Warming Arrogance, Al Gore Lies about Money Pocketed from Global Warming Crusade
Michelle Malkin: Bogus cap-and-trade statistic of the day and Waxman clueless about his cap & trade bill: “You’re asking me?!” and The ever-increasing cost of c(r)ap-and-t(i)rade and Stop Al Gore and the eco-taxers and Waxman shortcircuits debate to ram eco-taxes through Congress and Support the Cap-and-Trade Tax Disclosure Act
Adam Baldwin, Big Hollywood: A “Cultural Fix”?: Global Citizen Educators Rethinking Sustainability into Population Control vs. Academic Freedom
After Gutenberg: Democrats not aboard the Sinking Ship Waxman-Markey
MotorCityTimes.com: Rasmussen: Only 24% Know What Cap & Trade Is
US Carbon Report: Waxman vows cap-and-trade passage while GOP vow fight
RedState: It’s Only Spending by Black Democrats that I Don’t Like
Gateway Pundit: Al Gore’s Environmental Group Helping Design US Cap & Trade Program
Capital Weather Gang, Washington Post: The Sureness of Global Warming Skeptics
Phelim McAleer & Ann McElhinney, Big Hollywood: Bono Discovers Sustainable Development Isn’t Sustainable
Jeffrey Jena, Big Hollywood: Beware the Earth Day Scam
Radio Vice Online: No More Carbon Dioxide and Global Warming officially rebranded “Climate Change” and My goodness, the Sun determines the earth’s temperature?
Heritage Foundation: Son of Waxman-Markey: More Politics Makes for a More Costly Bill and Morning Bell: Al Gore’s Morals vs Your Pocketbook and Al Gore, You’ve Truly Outdone Yourself and The Unintended Consequences of Global Warming Hysteria
Peace and Freedom Global Future: Democrats, Gore called “Cowards,” Won’t Allow Non “Climatista” In Same Hearing With Gore and “Mister Green” Obama Flies To Iowa on Gas Guzzling Jet To Visit Wind Factory On Earth Day
Phelim McAleer & Ann McElhinney, Big Hollywood: Come Fly With Me | Obama’s Broadway date and Eco-Hyprocrisy
Politik Ditto: Al Gore Slammed By Congress Over Global Warming
John T. Simpson, Big Hollywood: Earth Day: Then They Came for the Overweight and A Republican Platform For The 21st Century
Wired, Danger Room, What’s Next in National Security: Army: Sun, Not Man, Is Causing Climate Change (Updated)
PA Pundits – International: The Waxman Markey Bill – Electrical Power Horror
Scared Monkeys: Can’t we have just a little warming? Democrat Rep. Henry Waxman Says He will move “quickly and decisively” to push legislation curbing greenhouse gases (Global Warming)
Finding Ponies in Piles of Poop: Cap and Trade Analysis, But When?
‘
About the author
You do realize that global warming is just one aspect of climate change, right? And that one place being colder than usual does not disprove it at all?
Well, to echo the phrasing of your question, YOU do realize that I’ve written nearly a dozen pieces calling global warming a hoax and a deception, and this one was the first that took a lighthearted, tongue-in-cheek approach?
If you read all the other posts, with all the information that explores and exposes the hoax and lies of global warming/climate change and the financial motivation of the so-called cap-and-trade bill, as well as the assorted hyperlinks, maybe you’ll understand me and my stance better. I’m no expert, but the faulty data has alarmed me for months.
It’s impossible to tax people for using LESS energy to save the planet from melting the ice cap. There is no significant money to be made from panic about global cooling. Except maybe sales of heating gear and home insulation.
Cap-and-trade is an ugly, shameful money-making scheme, a virtual golden “cash cow” for any government that implements it… and more evidence is being dug up on this being a fraud, based on global warming’s cherry-picked data and government-run studies with specific desired outcomes and committees with partisan panels. It’s a royal scam.
Al Gore has gotten VERY rich on his global warming/climate change rhetoric, none of which is supported by real, respected science (I have nothing against the man making money, but it is in the perpetuating of a lie, supported by the hype of Hollywood and hand-picked scientists. Investigate them and I am quite confident you’ll find that 98 percent of them are paid through some offshoot of Gore’s and the government’s “climate change club” or have other vested, compromising interests in beating the drum to stir up the panic of climate change/global warming).
Being “colder” in Arizona, having a record cooling this month over the past 96 years, doesn’t DISPROVE the global warming hoax, either. Nor does snow falling in North Dakota in May, nor record cold in the UK and many other locales. The data are simply NOT there to support that Earth’s climate is warming up from man’s intervention. I point to the weather just as a convenience and because it’s easier for some people to understand. It reflects what the scientific data reflect because weather IS climate.
Just a few climate cooling situations in the past two years that have baffled climate scientists that believe in the hoax and that make global warming fanatics scramble to find a way to disregard or discredit them. Usually, it’s to assert that a trend in a cooling of climate means nothing, but that a trend in the heating of climate means everything:
Gateway Pundit: Brrrr… It’s Snowing in North Dakota– In June! and Brrrr… South America Has Coldest Winter in a 90 Years and Brrrr… China Suffers Coldest Winter in 100 Years and Antarctica Ice Cap Growth Reaches Record High Levels (Photos) and Iraqis See First Snow in 100 Years As Sign of Peace.
The term “climate change” is a transparent joke. Earth’s climate has gone through “change” since its inception, millions of years before homo sapiens were even here to mess it up, so what in the heck is that all about? The “global warming” term was changed as a hasty retreat, a self-serving renaming by the global warming “head honchos,” to prevent naysayers from pointing out the documented cooling trend our planet’s climate has been going through for a few years now. Earth is gonna do what Earth is gonna do… to believe we are able to long-term affect CLIMATE is short-sighted and arrogant. We aren’t that important or significant to the utter enormity of climate, believe me.
Fill me in: what OTHER aspects, other than “global warming,” accelerate or affect “climate change”? What are humans responsible for in the attributing to the climate becoming colder?
You try to sell me the idea that people stand to profit from a global warming hoax. What about the people who stand to lose from a global warming reality?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ExxonMobil#Funding_of_global_warming_skeptics
Companies whose actions and policies are likely damaging the environment have a pretty big potential interest in creating criticism of climate change theories and man’s effect on the environment. The same goes for the many politicians who have ties to those companies. If you don’t see spreading bad science in order to stop losing money as believable a conspiracy as spreading bad science to make money….well, I don’t know what to say.
As for the rest of your argument, you imply I should do some research, so I hope you’ll take in good faith my suggestion you do some as well:
http://rationalwiki.com/wiki/Global_warming#Claims_by_global_warming_denialists
http://rationalwiki.com/wiki/Global_warming#Anthropogenic_climate_change
Chris,
Your point is well taken that on both sides of the fence, there are those that would profit. I agree with you on that.
Your links for research, however, are not considered by most as reliable resources and would not be accepted as a peer-level reference in a technical paper on the subject. Rational Wiki prides itself (per its “about” page) on being anti-conservative and pro-global warming. The stories/articles are authored by any writer with an approved account who shares the creators’ agenda. In the section to which you provided a link, some of the author’s theories are uncredited – for instance, there is no citation for the declaration that the sun has nothing to do with Earth’s climate. Which members of the scientific community support such a bogus claim? The research of Dr. Bruce West, with the Army Research Office, does not support this claim: Army: Sun, Not Man, Is Causing Climate Change (Updated). Without the sun, all life on Earth would be dead from lack of heat. So, for someone to state that the sun has no influence on our climate is being unscientific and ridiculous.
I noticed that the section titled “Rational arguments against global warming” had nothing but animated tumbleweeds. I’m guessing this is some sophomoric inside joke by the site’s creators. There is a tremendous amount of rational arguments against global warming, and by not acknowledging them, the site has lost all credibility. Steven Milloy, founder of JunkScience.com, has debunked most of what is posted on Rational Wiki. Milloy holds a B.A. in Natural Sciences from the Johns Hopkins University, a Master of Health Sciences in Biostatistics from the Johns Hopkins University School of Hygiene and Public Health, a Juris Doctorate from the University of Baltimore, and a Master of Laws from the Georgetown University Law Center. He has also authored more than 500 articles or columns, many of which expose global warming as a hoax or science using selective or faulty data. He sent a survey to IPCC participating scientists; the following is intriguing (and reveals that even among IPCC scientists, there is no consensus):
IPCC scientists have been found guilty of using false data to support their global warming agenda: IPCC Scientists Caught Producing False Data To Push Global Warming and Telegraph.co.uk: The world has never seen such freezing heat. There is no consensus among scientists, as many global warming enthusiasts claim. In a December 2008 Senate report (Environmental & Public Works): UN Blowback: More Than 650 International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims; in a March 2009 Senate report: Update: More Than 700 International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims, Outpouring of Skeptical Scientists Continues as 59 Scientists Added to Senate Report.
Just last week, another article in the New York Times exposed misrepresented data in a federal report, seemingly as an effort to prove man-made climate change: New York Times, Tierney Lab: U.S. Climate Report Assailed:
Most of the links on Rational Wiki are from 2005 which are outdated and/or filled with hyperbole (your term), a few are dead links. It’s curious that while there is citation of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the main international body funded primarily by the United Nations, there is also the glaring omission of the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC), indicative of one-sided reference. Rather than striving to be a true encyclopedia, it is a liberal mouthpiece for global warming zealots. Scientists who have left the IPCC are no longer being silent about the faulty data and propaganda of the IPCC.
Similar bias has been discovered at Wikipedia on a number of political or controversial entries, which are also authored and edited by readers, thus rendering it unreliable as a non-partisan resource. Wikipedia’s online community of editors have been discovered to sabotage anti-global warming entries, remove information that is factual but unflattering about Barack Obama, and John Edwards entries about his extramarital affair and “love child” were also scrubbed (since he confessed, those entries are now permitted, but prior to that, were not). People who have written purely factual but unflattering pieces on Obama have had their privileges to post revoked. (The Heartland Institute: Global Warming Alarmists Sabotage Wikipedia Entries; Mid Day: Wikipedia vigilance on Obama articles questioned; FOX News: Obama’s Wikipedia Page Distances President From Wright and Ayers; NewsBusters: Wikipedia Disallows Any Mention of Alleged John Edwards Scandal; Ground Report: Wikipedia ‘edits’ Obama’s history; John Lott’s Website: What is wrong with Wikipedia).
So, with all due respect, I did indeed delve into what you provided, but as asserted above, they are not deemed reliable sources. Upon conclusion, I still stand by my convictions and my references about everything I’ve written about humans’ influence/impact on climate change/global warming. Climate change has been a reality for millions of years, most of which has occurred long before humans roamed the Earth. The cycles of warming and cooling of Earth’s climate through the ages are not disputed, just the faulty science that tries to claim, and thus tax offenders, that man is responsible for those changes.
Chris, you’re a leftwing nutjob. Anything to embrace Obummer, huh? Even when science is growing louder and louder about the scam global warming=climate change is.
Admin answered your lame questions, but you failed to answer his/hers. And I bleieve the links you were given were a hell of a lot better than those pitiful ones you gave to Wikipedia and Rational wiki. I’ve never heard of Rational wiki before, but it is comon knowledge that Obama supporters troll Wikipedia and remove anything they don’t like – it was on the news. Here are the questions you conveniently didn’t answer.
What OTHER aspects, other than “global warming,” accelerate or affect “climate change”?
What are humans responsible for in the attributing to the climate becoming colder?
LIberal moron…
RedBloodedPatriot
“Chris, you’re a leftwing nutjob. LIberal moron….”
With all due respect, I don’t believe this name-calling is productive. This is the way we are treated when we try to post on an AGW site. I believe that if we respond in a logical, rational manner, always respecting the right of others to hold a differing opinion, then we shall achieve more progress in the long run.
Excellent response, and excellent supporting resources. Non-alarmist, credible scientific reports, logical presentation. I think you’ve proven your case on global warming being a fraud.
To Chris – You’ve been outclassed and outmatched. Admit defeat.
You lost the moment you thought those wiki sites were valid.
Climate change (the new version since it was obvious Global Warming wasn’t selling) seems to have some flaws. Whether or not you “believe” in it, it seems to be another way to tax to death an economy that provides so much to so much of the world in the form of technology, business, aid and jobs.
CBO Grossly Underestimates Costs of Cap and Trade http://bit.ly/9sYC8
Predictably, global warming believers rely on Wikipedia as a source of information…. or as National Review Online author Lawrence Solomon titled it, “Wikipropaganda” http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NjU1ZDBhOGExOWRlNzc5ZDcwOTUxZWM3MWU2Mjc5MGE= in his article that rather nicely points out, shall we say, just a few accuracy problems Wikipedia has with global warming facts.
They give non-stop deflective statements about Wikipedia and exxonsecrets.org in an attempt to distract the general public from the “800lb gorilla in the room”: with all their claims of the global warming debate being settled, global warming believers refuse to answer “when, where, who, how, why” about the debate. If it is truly over, WHEN exactly did it occur, WHERE was it, WHO attended, HOW were expert scientists offering conclusions contradictory to IPCC reports addressed and disproved beyond a shadow of a doubt, and is there any reason WHY the “Climate Change Reconsidered: The 2009 Report of the NONgovernmental International Panel on Climate Change” (NIPCC – http://www.nipccreport.org/ ), a collection of peer-reviewed published scientific papers, should not be considered as a second opinion to the IPCC reports?
You’d think that with all their evidence of Singer’s report being a flimsy and easily debunked fabrication written by incompetent bunglers bought-and-paid-for by big oil / coal CEOs, they would have gotten such a headline splashed across the nation’s largest media outlets already, erasing all further opposition by politicians and shame-faced deniers.
Global warming believers seem oddly oblivious of this point, they continually weaken their position by choosing to censor and smear skeptic scientists, instead of taking the easier and more effective option of disproving the skeptics’ scientific conclusions. It looks like a Watergate-style cover up that they can’t actually defeat the skeptics purely on the science. When the general public fully understands this, the global warming crisis will collapse like a house of cards.
Well, as a retired engineer living in AZ, I am going to be skeptical. It appears to me that the AlGore’s hockey stick chart did show an increase in global temperature. However, considering the data for the past three years, it appears that a common mistake was made: what was in all probability part of a cyclical pattern was used to extrapolate linearly. If you take engineering statistics, they teach you to avoid such errors. So, the climate warmed up for some years, now the temperature has leveled off and it will probably decrease for a few years. No long term change, but rather just short term cyclical variations. OTOH, there is less ice at the North Pole (it has, at the same time, become colder at the South Pole). This might be due to particulate pollutants collecting on the ice. Then we had the global dimming caused by said pollutants which has now been partially reversed by reduction in such pollutants, but now it is probably starting again due to the industrialization of China. The point here is that it isn’t as simple as the Greens would have us believe.
If Global Warming advocates can’t sustain an argument with science, they change the subject. They can’t prove Global Warming, so they invent another menace, and pretend that they didn’t change the subject.
The official Global Warming projections in 1998 about where the climate would be by 2008 were so far off that the Global Warming –oops — Climate Change advocates refuse to discuss those projections and the reality. They were off by a factor of 400%. I could guess better than that with a dart board. But then, what do I know? I’m not getting the big bucks to publish “studies” and “projections.” See Michael Crichton’s last (?) book, “State of Fear.”
So, when are we going to go back to scaring people with Global Cooling again, as we saw in the 1970s? Come on, Mr. Gore, get with it.
My wife and I believe in fuel efficiency. In fact, we’re building a partially earth-sheltered home with a geothermal heating source and radiant heat, not because of Al Gore, but because it is responsible use of resources — also, we’re concerned about the real environmental menace: Cap’n'Trade.
We need to get over the Iran/Russia/Saudi Arabia oil and gas dependence, if we are to remain sovereign. Cap’n'Trade will make us more dependent, not less.
Ed,
Kudos to you and your wife for being such frugal consumers and advocates for fuel efficiency. I commend and agree with you.
As you and I would also agree, this is your choice, not a mandate from the government. And there lies the difference.
The Waxman-Markey energy tax bill will bankrupt our country while solving little, since CO2 is not a poison, but a natural byproduct of our world. Regulating it is nonsense. Guess taxing the expulsion of water vapor into the atmosphere was just too difficult. The global warming/climate change hoax is losing support, and I pray that our Senate will be wiser and more prudent than the House of Representatives were.
I’m with you all the way Vicki, but you’ve gotta laugh at this!
Global Warming is Now Imminent !!
THE ARIZONA REPUBLIC July 29, 2009
Hottest month ever
July ‘09 shaping up to be warmest month ever in Phoenix area
by John Faherty
July 2009 will go into the history books as the hottest month the Valley has ever seen.
The National Weather Service looked at all the data for this July, then added the forecast temperatures for the last few days of the month.
The news was grim.
The average temperature for July will be 98.2 degrees. That includes the morning lows and afternoon highs. The previous record was 97.6, set in July 2003.
This July will also set the record for the highest average minimum temperatures for the month. The average low will likely be 87.1 degrees.
The average high temperature is expected to be 109.4, the third highest on record.
The reasons for the heat are complicated, but much of the trouble stems from a lack of moisture. No moisture means less cloud cover and fewer thunderstorms to cool things off.
Relief – a relative term – is on the way. Today’s high is expected to reach only about 108 degrees.
“That might feel, almost, a little bit pleasant,” said Leslie Wanek of the Weather Service.
So enjoy.
July 2009
Average temperature: 98.2
Average low: 87.1
Average high: 109.4
All temperatures include forecasted data for the rest of the month.
Source: National Weather Service
More in Valley got power cut off in June
http://www.azcentral.com/php-bin/clicktrack/email.php/8862943
http://www.wrh.noaa.gov/psr/pns/2009/July/Brief3.php
Yes, we’ve had a real wimpy monsoon season so far. June and July in 1990 was the worst summer for heat that I can recall (late June, it hit 122 F, and Sky Harbor Airport had to be closed down because the tarmac was too soft for planes and they lacked a contingency plan for any temps reaching that high).
Anyway, I was in my last months of pregnancy back then with my first-born. So, July 1990 sure SEEMED a whole heck of a lot hotter to me than this July…
Guess Mother Nature doesn’t keep a precise eye on the calendar. Mark my words, it will swing back in August… or, not… LOL.
Thanks for in the input and the giggle – hope to see you back soon.
