Hi Laura:

I enjoyed reading and watching Elliot's weather commentary this morning. Elliot was always good from some witty, sardonic humor on Penn State's WPSX Weather World when I grewup in nearby Lock Haven during the 1970's and regularly watched the show. I'm glad to see I can now get a good Elliot fix here at AccuWeather. Actually, all the meteorologists on Weather World were first rate. I learned alot from watching that show that was applicable to my careers in water quality and horticulture.

I found it very fitting that Elliot touched upon the importance of the urban heat island effect and its impact on average urban temperatures. Is the urban heat island effect really just a radiative consequence of building mass or coupled with increased urban relative humidities from people, trees, irrigation systems, reservoirs, electric power plants, building ventilation, air conditioning, automobiles, airplanes, and other machines regionally discharging significant quantities of water vapor into our atmosphere? Collectively, all should have a measurable impact on temperature and perhaps precipitation. It's also worth noting that while organismal metabolism results in the simultaneous pneumatic exhaust of carbon dioxide and water vapor into the atmosphere, many organisms, including humans, but especially terrestrial plants, substantially exhaust water and water vapor for additional physiological reasons, particularly evaporative cooling and osmotic regulation.

Fairly, climate scientists cannot ignore the fundamental importance of atmospheric water and water vapor to global temperatures and their radiative influence on other atmospheric radiative gases, such as carbon dioxide. With the exception of ammonia, which is rarely present in our atmosphere, water and water vapor have specific heat capacities significantly greater than carbon dioxide and other atmospheric gases. Undoubtedly, the attention will continue to be focused on atmospheric carbon dioxide and its radiative impact upon global tempertures. Frankly, I don't believe politicians will pursue the control of water vapor emissions as zealously as they have pursued those for carbon dioxide, a first order nutrient required by all living organisms. Indeed, governments have majorly funded water projects, especially water storage reservoirs and electric power stations that humidify our continental atmospheres.

Great article by Ellot. It's refreshing to read a calm, objective piece about this topic, rather than the politically-driven spewage given by the many right-wing commenters of this blog.

How is it that meteorologists trained to recognize and understand earth's cycles can entertain a patently linear attempt to explain "global warming?" With records that span but an eyewink in the weather history of the globe, how can scientists make the human-centric case that man is somehow able to control nature?

I looked for references in the IPCC report on the Urban Heat Island Effect, and found it here in box 2.1. Their conclusion is that although it does exist, the forcing from this effect is relatively very minor.

Of course the jetstream is a simple answer to what is going on with the unusual temperatures, just as persistent high pressure and the lack of clouds may be an immediate and simple answer to drought conditions somewhere. And of course, we expect many variations in weather day to day and year to year, regardles of any climate trends. The bigger question is whether this instance of warm weather is indicative of an upward, man-made climate trend, and if so, how that will impact us.

If the world population 6.2 billion people were each given a 3' x 3' area to stand on, we wouldn't fill the state of Delaware. I'm not convinced man is a cause of global warming. I see volcanoes, el nino, and wildfires as major forces of change. Then again, I don't know anything.