That's "were likely" to be the highest. Why "likely"? Well, how good do you think surface temperature observation was in 1880? Even up to before the advent of satellites?

"South Asia's worst monsoon flooding in recent memory", "Heavy rains...", "Mozambique suffered its worst floods in six years" - great way to gather data.

Wow, wet season in the UK and dry in Germany - and if you average them, you get...the average. Warm in Europe and cold in South America - average them together and you get...the average. Must be AGW.

"While most scientists believe..." - how many times must it be said that belief has nothing to do with science? If they have a theory, let them lay it out, along with the proof and some predictions we can test?

Sheesh.

Is weather actually getting more erratic and severe or are more people being affected by weather? The latter is certainly true. Since temperature records have been taken since 1880 the population has increased 7.5 times from 800 million to 6 billion.

Hardly anyone's house was blown down in the southeast due to hurricanes until Europeans showed up and couldn't figure out why the silly Indians didn't build on such prime real estate. Now taxpayers bail out Floridians and Chocolate City idiots who decided to live below sea level on the coast where hurricanes like to hang out.

Population seems to be the driver here not the wacky weather.

Also, if temperature records had been taken from the early 1600's would we be seeing average temperatures 4 degrees higher than normal? Who gets to decide normal?

I think that the definition of "extreme" needs to be revisited.

Here in Central Ohio, we have been under an excessive heat warning for the last day or so. I noted that the little red warning light was flashing on my accuweather pro homepage. I clicked it to see an advisory from the NWS alerting us to this event. I find it funny that it had the standard "URGENT" broadcast message on it. What exactly is urgent about that? Was the heat gonna sneak up on us? Frankly, the temps and humidity are not unusual for late July, early August around here. Why does it now warrant a new warning?

Winter is the same thing. It gets below 20 degrees, we get excessive cold warnings. Anyone notice that heavy snow is now about 6" where it used to be 8" or more? Winter storm warnings are now posted if the snow will be 2" to 4". In the old days, it was 4" to 6". It seems that re-definition of extreme is what is leading to increased numbers of events.

The point is that extreme weather is now defined as nearly anything that occurs in the environment that inconveniences the population for more than a period of several hours. Actually, this is the crux of the whole GW argument. Where variability was the hallmark of weather in the past, it is now seen as a sign of sinister change. To the followers of the Goreacle, change is bad, it clearly is the fault of "BIG" anything and society's industrial progress.

Yep another case of cherry picking at it's best. But I am sure the UN doesn't have an agenda here. I know I feel better with them being in charge. People need to wake up, all the agencies that are supporting GW are wacked out. Now that is a fact that can not be disputed.

There has been an extreme lack of hurricanes the last two years. Reply: In the Atlantic Basin that is, not neccessarily worldwide. Brett

land based temperatures for the world during January and April were the warmest since records began in 1880

Much of the west had a record cold January. Some places as much as 15 degrees below normal.
http://hprcc.unl.edu/products/maps/acis/Jan07TDeptUS.png

Reply: That is just one region, the WMO is talking about the world average or the big picture. Brett

The WMO conveniently mentioned January and forgot about February.
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/img/climate/research/2007/feb/01_02_2007_DvTempRank_pg.gif
First two months of the year were well below normal across almost the entire country.

Reply: Again you are looking at a much smaller piece of the whole pie Patrick. Brett.

How about April? Check out this link from the NOAA titled- "April Record-Setting Cold Wave"
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/2007/apr/apr07.html
April began with a record cold outbreak that stretched from the Plains to the Southeast, bringing widespread crop and forest damage

Reply, just another example of extremes, which supports the WMO ideas. Brett.

Then there was the NOAA story about June being the warmest on record (conveniently ignoring the southern hemisphere, much of which had record cold.)

The main extremes this year are the increasingly ridiculous and inane press releases from money hungry government agencies.

Thanks for posting this information. The facts remain inconveniently unpleasant: wild, weird and dangerous. It's easy use how recordkeeping has changed over the years as a distraction, but these facts often exceed scientific worst-case scenarios. This summer I've been comfortable (north of jet stream), but that doesn't erase what is happening in most of the rest of the US and elsewhere.

A few items from the last few weeks:

The Antarctic is melting not growing. Inhofe's campaign has made a lot of money on his position but assertions are not facts. Before you debunk the Stern or IPCC reports, try looking at them. They contain references in plenty, are not works of fiction, and are generally conservative. I agree that catastrophic scenarios like supervolcanoes can be a distraction and discourage real action by seeming insurmountable.

Re African dust comment (way below), there appears to be ongoing confusion between individual weather incidents and statistical trends. If you regularly check the hurricane report, you will have noticed that a lot of Atlantic trophical storms in the last 2 years have been prevented from developing by African dust (I think this is mentioned in a neighboring blog). Typhoons and cyclones (currently 6 tropical storms under development in Far East) have been breaking lots of records. Extreme heat and cold, drought and rain, concomitant famines and epidemics, killings over scarce resources, and sand migration are all signs of increasingly wild weather and consequences of global warming. The idea about increased African dust being another possible GW consequence is my theory but the rest is just the facts. I've always preferred the term climate change as being more descriptive, but have bowed to the majority on terminology.

Re science, I've tried to make my position clear in the previous item and will leave it at that for now. I am giving a try to braving the weird bias here instead of convening with like-minded individuals elsewhere (believe me, there are a lot of us and we're growing; Oprah, Newsweek - is Limbaugh less biased?).

Here's a new study about the sunspots affecting Africa's climate:

http://www.terradaily.com/reports/Sunspot_Abundance_Linked_To_Heavy_Rains_In_East_Africa_999.html

I wonder what other parts of the planet they'll find is similarly affected?

I realize that extremes one way or the other can be indicitive of warming or cooling. In other words, one days weather may not have much to do with overall climate change. However, when only warming type events are hyped and not cooling, then the agenda becomes obvious. Any real scientist would acknowledge this. The snows near Buenos Aires got some attention but very little. Did the alltime low of -0.1C in Brisbane Australia make the news? Well not that one interested in Al Goreology would notice! This is a third world assault on western society and an attempt to point blame at prosperity. You want pollution? Look at Beijing or Mumbai! Where is their responsibility? Paul

Brett,

I am always surprised when you jump into this, but good to at least see what your biases are.

If it is hot, it is due to global warming. If it is cold it is due to global warming. If the west has it's coldest January in 30 years, it is an example of "extreme weather." If we have a dearth of hurricanes in the Atlantic, it means they have wandered off somewhere else due to global warming. If we have a lot of Atlantic hurricanes, it means global warming. If the UK has it's coolest, wettest summer in 50 years, it is due to global warming. If the UK has a hot, dry summer it is due to global warming. If Australia and South America have a cold January or June. it is due to global warming.
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/work/gistemp/NMAPS/tmp_GHCN_GISS_250km_Anom01_2007_2007_1930_2007/GHCN_GISS_250km_Anom01_2007_2007_1930_2007.gif
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/work/gistemp/NMAPS/tmp_GHCN_GISS_250km_Anom01_2007_2007_1930_2007/GHCN_GISS_250km_Anom01_2007_2007_1930_2007_zonal.gif

I've been around this planet perhaps a bit longer than some others here, and can remember some very hot years and some very cold years. Lots of floods, hurricanes, droughts, tornadoes, heat waves and famines. I suggest reading Steinbeck - things were very hot and dry in the 1930s. This bizarre obsession of trying to rationalize every slightly unusual weather event as being due to something we can control, reminds me of the belief systems of primitive cultures. Perhaps we are not so sophisticated as we think?

And I'd like to see Barbara Boxer start a farm in Greenland like the Vikings did, now that it is "devastatingly" warm there.

Hey GiveBaloneyAChance,

I checked the five hurricane basins on the accuweather blog. Only one basin has a storm, and that one only has maximum sustained winds of 75 MPH. Scary stuff huh?
http://hurricane.accuweather.com/hurricane/basin.asp?partner=accuweather&traveler=0&basin=wpacific

Reply: Now Patrick you are just looking at one small period of time (a day). You know better than that. Brett.

Hope you can keep that dust out of your eyes. Famines, shortage of resources and killings? That is the story of mankind since day one. The population explosion we have seen over the last hundred years is due to the fact that mortality rates are much lower than ever before. Two thirds of children used to die from disease before they were ten years old. When I was a child, half of India and China were starving. Your unreferenced and anecdotal musings have nothing to do with science.

I am a regular reader of your article. And I am very impress with your blog upon Global Warming. Now I am also write a blog upon effects and causes of Global Warming. This blog is collection of news & reviews like the study found that global warming since 1985 has been caused neither by an increase in solar radiation nor by a decrease in the flux of galactic cosmic rays. Some researchers had also suggested that the latter might influence global warming because the rays trigger cloud formation.

Please don�t lump Florida in with New Orleans in the hurricane affected areas. South Florida does get it�s share of hurricanes but since Andrew showed us how bad it could get we now have tough and enforced building codes that makes homes expensive to build but when the storm comes through our buildings over all survive. We may loose a roof or two but you will never see our CBS buildings laying down like in New Orleans and the gulf who are building with frame construction and building codes that should be revised. We in Florida take our building codes seriously and with our porous soil and being above sea level we hope to be prepared. After Katrina hit New Orleans there are still people wanting help from the government. Two years after Andrew the land was cleared and new houses were going up. This was with minimum support of the Federal Government, as it should be. If you look back it was a full 3 days after the storm hit before any federal response was started. There is a different thought patterns in Florida, we will work things out ourselves. New Orleans has turned down sensible plans that would place all the new buildings above sea level. Now if we can get people to move back here with our housing slump there is no better place in America to live. Where else can you forget winter and if you notice our weather, we really are not hotter than the rest of the nation. So come on down, this is as close to paradise as it gets!

Reply: The main reason New Orleans was different than Florida was the flood waters, due to the levee failures, and many areas below sea level. Wind damage to structures, at least in New Orleans itself, was not nearly as bad as Andrew was south of Miami. Brett

GiveScienceAChance-

The Antartic is not melting -it's kind of difficult to melt inland ice with temps well below 32F. Most of the Antartic remains below 0 F most of the year. Coastal areas being the exception. All of the red you see on temp maps are isotherms of temp anamolies. That is, the Antartic averages about 1.5 to 2.0 deg C above the 1970-2001 global mean.

Concerning African Dust and tropical storms -that is still conjecture. Last year's low tropical storm anomoly was due to a weak, unforecasted ENSO event, which generated shearing winds aloft over the Atlantic Basin. This year, for most of the early summer, the North Atlantic Basin had SST temps about 1-2 Deg C cooler than last year. That is, there was a lack of fuel. Cooling SSTs in the Pacific also dampened tropical storms for May through June there. Overall, ocean temps fell about 1 deg C since 2004.

Reply: Yes, the central Atlantic Basin has been running below normal, but early season storms typically do not form that far out, and are more likely to form closer to the Caribbean and Gulf where water temps are actually running above normal. It appears that some African dust has played a role so far and there has also been a lot of sinking air moving through the Caribbean and Atlantic Basin recently. An upward motion impulse might move into the region by mid-month and we may start to see a rapid increase in activity.Brett

Also, cherry picking weather extremes seems to be the AGW proponents last ace card. However, if you were to check climate records and historical data weather extremes are a facet of a cooling planet. Heatwaves, droughts, floods can also and did also occur during the coldest periods of the Little Ice Age.

Arctic sea ice has been declining and is on track to disappear during the summer within the next 20 years. The arctic has not been ice free for well over a million years.

There have been plenty of climatic changes during that time, but we are witnessing the greatest climatic change that this planet has experienced for over the last million years. So, it should come as no surprise that extreme weather is going to be more and more extreme as the climate has never for had to react for millions of year to such high levels of greenhouse gases as there are now let alone where they are heading.

For the graphically challenged, a simple experiment is to extrapolate out with a ruler the decline of the summer sea ice minimum in the arctic. (i.e. connect the minimum points at the bottom of the sine wave)
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/current.area.jpg

Following a theoretical linear trend of the last thirty years, it would take over one hundred years before the minimum got to zero. Following the ten year trend, it would take much longer. Of course the actual trend is not linear, but rather cyclical, and at some point the sea ice minimum will start increasing again.

If you apply the same nonsensical linear analysis to the southern hemisphere, you could conclude that ice will cover the earth before too much longer.
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/current.anom.south.jpg

"Also, cherry picking weather extremes seems to be the AGW proponents last ace card."

You say this a lot, but when one look at the commenters on this blog, it's the deniers who are always posting about how it's raining in London, it snowed in Argentina, it's chilly in Pittsburgh, etc. The next time we see a "It snowed in Argentina" type of post, I'll be expecting you to jump in. Somehow, I think I'll be disappointed.

Patrick's posts have personified how he: 1) looks at only certain location(s) around the globe and 2) looks at very small time samples (usually only a day). I have to give credit where credit is due...Patrick is the best cherry picker I've ever seen.

JP,

"Concerning African Dust and tropical storms -that is still conjecture. Last year's low tropical storm anomoly was due to a weak, unforecasted ENSO event, which generated shearing winds aloft over the Atlantic Basin."

Contrary to this statement, the meteorologists at NOAA and NASA that I communicate with occasionally indeed attribute the quiet season last year to significant dry air in the mid-level atmosphere through the main development zone. The African dust was also a player, but difficult to quantify its direct effect. They all said the weak ENSO was a minimal factor, and they cite the very active 2004 season which had a comparable ENSO event throughout the season as evidence.

Accuweather's Joe Bastardi has also said the ENSO event was way overplayed.

Regards, Bill

Brett:

Thanks for chiming in. Always nice to hear from someone who has "inside" knowledge. I'm curious though, why the rash of responses on this topic versus not many on others?

Reply: I have followed these events this year (another part of my job) and the other reason is that I found some time to do it since I have had little extra time on my hands recently. I expect to have even more time by September when my schedule gets freed up more, so expect more comments when appropriate. Brett.

Andrew:

How do you really know that this is the greatest climatic change in one million years? This statement seems frought with conjecture and sensationalism. And no, I really do not care like others may that 1,000,001 years ago was more extreme. It does not matter in the least though it may have occurred. Nor does it matter to the planet that humans have defined the passage of time in "years" and that we change our definition of climate change to suit our present ideals.

Frankly put, there are no true means by which to decipher "extreme" weather events prior to the exsistence of accurate measuring methods by which to define them. A rational individual would also surmise that mankind's ability by which to define these events has radically changed during recorded history. Therefore, our standards by which to measure extremes are subjective not objective. The use of objective descripters to define subjective ideals is a problem with those who follow the faith of the Goreacle.

Andrew,

Are you following your IPCC bible again? Tell you what, let's put some money on the timeframe the Arctic ice will disappear, I could use to gain some cash. Nobody knows when or if the ice will disappear. Yes, the temperatures change and sometimes the Earth will warm slightly. That is nature. Mankind is selfish and egotistical enough to think we can change anything, including climate and the earth. Honestly, I find it a laugh to watch politicians and their flock of sheep follow this and hold hands around an ice cube singing "Kumbaya" while planning ways to save the world.

Keep on believing Andrew, but you are going to be one sad puppy when you realize how much of a farce AGW really is.

Excellent comments from everybody. I still haven't been able to see any real bias by Brett. He picks the articles. I also have a website that is designed to debunk the myth that the world is about over because of Global Warming.

http:globalwarminghysteria.blogspot.com Enjoy.

Patrick,

Now you dismiss Brett for encouraging you to look at the bigger picture. How can you, looking for respect and credibility, refuse to accept correction and constructive criticism, the very same thing of which you accuse those you disagree with? You frame the debate in such a way that there is no room for discussion or dissent. As you yourself have pointed out, this is not the way of a scientist.

Both the Eastern and Western Pacific had above normal numbers of major hurricanes last year; the eastern Pacific had five, and the western Pacific had ten. The Arabian Sea had its first ever Category 5 hurricane earlier this year...there had never even been a documented category 4 storm there before this year. Quite amazing what is happening outside the Atlantic Basin.

I'm sure you're familiar with elementary statistics: means and variances, for instance. With climate change, the mean temps are slowly increasing, but the variations from those mean are increasing. Hence, you can have a record-cold April in one part of the world, but it also means that somewhere else in the world it's a lot warmer than normal. And that's what we've been seeing by looking farther away than our own backyard. More flooding, more drought, more famines, more record crops. More heat waves, more snowstorms. And the temperature as a whole keeps going up. That is climate change,