> If Global Warming wasn't more prevalent in the 30s, then why are most U.S. RECORD HIGHS from 1930s?

If Global Warming wasn't more prevalent in the 30s, then why are most U.S. RECORD HIGHS from 1930s?

Posted at: 2015-03-12 
1. The lower 48 is not the Globe.

2. Over time, with no change in climate, the rate of records being broken decreases. The first year, every thing is a RECORD! The next year, only about half. After a hundred years, only a "once in a century" breaks a record.

3. Early USA thermometers read a little higher than the ones now in use.

4. Yes, be skeptical. So look at corrected average surface temperatures, weather balloon temperatures, satellite data, meting ice, sea level rises, migration patterns, and the troposphere vs. the stratosphere. And compare the signs of rising global temperatures with the declining output of the Sun.

I like the way this question starts of by asking about "global warming" and then immediately switches to a U.S. region temperature record. Why is painfully obvious, because if you look at global temps for the 30's then you have nothing to talk about.

When deniers play this claim it is usually in reference to 1934.

This link

http://climate.nasa.gov/

Has at it's bottom, a global temperatures link, on a global scale the 1930's where considerably lower than the temps we have now, 1934 came in at -0.09c we currently have temps hitting 0.6c with 2014 at 0.68c. Even the few cooler years we have had like 2008 or 2011 are far warmer than any year in the 1930's, yet deniers still try to play their fiction.

update: on your empty comment, I guess you have no choice but to try and claim my scientific source is biased given you have no scientific source of your own, of course the UK data shows much the same trend but I guess you would try and claim that was biased as well.

If you wish to make empty claims about just the U.S. data (without any link to back them, but a denier blog) that's up to you, but given what the actual data shows I can see why you would not want to post it.

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cag/time-series...

The assumptions made by "scientists" who obviously ignore "inconvenient" data are a great cause for concern. Especially when you add to their erroneous input the fact that Elitist Despots in Washington DC use that data as means to confiscate assets and grant themselves More Power over the lives of responsible citizens.

So it is up to citizens to educate themselves and honestly acquire as much legitimate data as possible. List the facts and be responsible.

Your example is just one more to add to the growing pile of information needed to keep this issue appropriately balanced so it may be addressed in a logical manner.

Consider the fact that we have been dumping mega-tons carbon into the air. That single fact Must have some consequences. Lab tests can easily demonstrate the fact that CO2 is a greenhouse gas. What the outcome of those facts is when you consider the added fact that there is no good way to duplicate the effect on the complex actions of the Earth's entire ecology in a laboratory test is a major issue. No reasonable solution can be created and tested. Risks can not be calculated but we can categorically state that any propose "solution" will be risky and expensive and could cause greater problems.

So where do we go from here?

Reducing the use of fossil fuels makes sense. Don't dump the carbon into the atmosphere in the first place.

So, continue to Reduce the use of carbon fuels and look for adequate alternative energy supplies. Don't eliminate nuclear energy as a potential partial solution.

Now, next step? We all know a lot of effort, much wasted, has been expended with little results so far, but continuing the effort is essential. I believe we will resolve the issues but Keep Government out of it if you value sane solutions.

In Australia some of there hottest ever temperatures were achieved in the late 1800's especially 1896 way hotter than anything experienced in the last decade, so what does the BOM do, declare that Australia"s temperature records should start from 1910.

Record temperatures are one-off temperature events, and deviate from average far more than the global warming since then. Wake me up when the increase in global average temperature matches the difference between the records and the averages.

Philip H

Try Weird Al's hat.



1930 was not hottest over the world.

whatsupwiththat is a conservative bs blog dat distorts the truth and you're to dum to know it

You seem to know absolutely nothing about the dust bowl.You also don't seem to be aware of the definition of 'global'.

The US is not the world.

elnino and lamina play a role in records too

The U.S. seems to have a halo around it when it comes to RECORD HIGH TEMPERATURES. There are 26 RECORD HIGH TEMPERATURES from 26 different States that are still held. All of these 26 RECORDS are from the 30s. 0 from the most recent years. If this doesn't give everyone "PAUSE" as to a bias in global average temperatures, then there has to be an explanation from climate science.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/07/14/newly-found-weather-records-show-1930s-as-being-far-worse-than-the-present-for-extreme-weather/

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0001416.html

global warming is a myth