It must have killed NOAA to publish this...

H/T Christopher for passing along this link…

In their “State of the Climate” report for October, 2009, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (full-fledged members of the Algore man-made “global warming” hoax in an effort to increase their funding) reports the following:

(Note particularly the first and last bullet points.)

Can you imagine the pain at NOAA as they report this data?  Schadenfreude lives…

National Overview: Temperature Highlights - October

  • The average October temperature of 50.8°F was 4.0°F below the 20th Century average and ranked as the 3rd coolest based on preliminary data.
  • For the nation as a whole, it was the third coolest October on record. The month was marked by an active weather pattern that reinforced unseasonably cold air behind a series of cold fronts. Temperatures were below normal in eight of the nation’s nine climate regions, and of the nine, five were much below normal. Only the Southeast climate region had near normal temperatures for October.
  • Statewide temperatures coincided with the regional values as all but six states had below normal temperatures. Oklahoma had its coolest October on record and ten other states had their top five coolest such months.
  • Florida was the only state to have an above normal temperature average in October. It was the sixth consecutive month that the Florida’s temperature was above normal, resulting in the third warmest such period (May-October).
  • The three-month period (August-October) was the coolest on record for three states: Nebraska, Kansas, and Oklahoma. Five other states had top five cool periods: Missouri (2nd), Iowa (3rd) , Arkansas (5th) , Illinois (5th) and South Dakota (5th) . Every climate division in Kansas (nine) and Nebraska (eight) recorded a record cool such period.
  • For the year-to-date (January - October) period, the contiguous U.S. temperature ranked 43rd warmest. No state had a top or bottom ten temperature value for this period.
  • Greg Staff
    Comment from: Greg Staff
    11/13/09 @ 05:38:32 am

    I'm surprised they didn't tout it as the warmest October in the past 11 months...

  • Mark Smither
    Comment from: Mark Smither
    11/18/09 @ 02:43:22 pm

    Since the issue is GLOBAL warming, shouldn't you address their NOAA's same report on GLOBAL weather?

    http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/?report=global&year=2009&month=10&submitted=Get+Report

  • Mark Smither
    Comment from: Mark Smither
    11/18/09 @ 02:45:08 pm

    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/18/opinion/18friedman.html?em

    I thought this was well stated, though I'm easily swayed.

  • Comment from: Rossputin
    11/18/09 @ 02:51:25 pm

    On what basis would Friedman have ANY credibility on this subject?

    Furthermore, where is the ANY evidence that the warming that occurred earlier this century had any important negative impacts? Why do you or Friedman assume that if the planet warmed, that must be a bad thing? What about the ability to grow much more food and feed those extra people that he's worried about?

  • Mark Smither
    Comment from: Mark Smither
    11/18/09 @ 04:29:46 pm

    I'm just saying that you cited continental US statistics to attempt to make your point regarding GLOBAL warming. And omitted the part of the report showing that it HAS been a warm year, GLOBALLY.

  • Comment from: Rossputin
    11/18/09 @ 06:35:18 pm

    Mark,

    It's a valid point, certainly.

    My only defense is that I was unaware of the page you sent me the link to.

    I am glad you sent it along.

    But man-made global warming remains a hoax.

    Best,
    Ross

Leave a comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Log in now!

If you have no account yet, you can register now... (It only takes a few seconds!)