Heat wave strikes Northeast

More evidence of global warming and severe weather caused by man's C02 contribution.


" In Nashua, New Hampshire, the mercury peaked at 106 degrees Fahrenheit. Other high-temperature records were set all over New England during an 11-day period.

The area from Pennsylvania northeast to Maine was most affected by the stifling heat. New York City was particularly hard hit."

"New York had reported 211 people dead from the excessive heat. One man, apparently disoriented from heat exhaustion, overdosed on strychnine. In Philadelphia, 159 people died from the heat. The types of deaths ascribed to the heat could vary quite a bit , with some authorities including those who drowned while attempting to cool off by swimming in the count. Heat also sometimes bent rail lines, causing train derailments; deaths in any resulting accidents might also be attributed to the heat. Heat stroke, however, is the typical cause of heat-related deaths. Extremely hot or humid weather or vigorous activity in the sun can lead the body’s temperature-regulation mechanisms to fail, causing body heat to rise to dangerous levels. Symptoms of heat stroke include a headache, dizziness, confusion and hot, dry, flushed skin, as well as a rapid heartbeat and hallucinations."


Oh wait, this happened in 1911. Never mind.

https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/heat-wave-strikes-northeast

 

Boston's all time record high of 104F in 1911 still stands today.

 

33 dead in Quebec from the heat

 

Interesting that there's such a hot heat wave that far north.

It's been pretty mild in the Northwest.

Actually, on further reading, it doesn't seem like the temperatures are really getting all that hot in Quebec. 30C is only 86F.
I think it's probably those temperatures combined with high humidity, and also people in Quebec may not be used to those temperatures.

For someone living in Arizona or Las Vegas, or Brownsville, Texas, those temperatures are pretty normal.

The temperature in Montreal reached a peak of 93F yesterday.

The good news is that almost everyone who died was older than 65, so they probably didn't have much longer to go anyway, the heat just pushed them over the edge.

 

huhh....the UK is running out of CO2 so there can't be global warming....lack of CO2 is hitting crumpet production....that's much more serious

 

hahahha when we here in the NE had an unusually cold winter...lefties said thats weather...now we have 4 days in the 90s...that we used to call summer its global warming. Gosh if the leaves fall off the trees in the fall then we'll really know something is wrong.

 

Not that we expect you to grasp it but, variation extremes (heavier rains/snows/heatwaves...etc..) are the predicted and expected result or a warming planet as atmospheric and thermal adaptation takes place. The worrisome aspect would be predictions show this being merely the beginning and will be mild in comparison in the coming decades. What you and I think is irrelevant however because there is not a damn thing we can do about it anymore.

 

Oh as a scientist I'm not so much interested in the global warming science as I am in the contradiction of the pretend scientists who have explained right here on PF that when its extremely cold it called weather....but when its extremely hot...its arrrrgh global warming run!
Perhaps you could explain which of those stances is incorrect. They both cant be true to real scientists.

 

I find it unlikely that a "scientist" would make these comments, let alone take arbitrary opinion into consideration when evaluating any actual possibility. There will always be opinions expressed (especially on an internet forum designed for opinion expression) but these are usually dismissed in favor of data. Evaluation of data and indeed observations both real time and historic show a concerning shift in the vapor content and temperatures of our Atmosphere/Oceans and when combined with the Methane/CO2 situations are indicative of correlation.
But, as stated in no longer even matters what you or I THINK because what is happening will continue regardless and options have diminished to preparation for the inevitable as it is already here.

 

I agree...feel free to review my past comments. There is nothing to do except adapt or die. Such has been going on since the first lifeform appeared. We are no different.
Back to my question though. Which global warming stance was correct? Extreme cold is weather or extreme heat is GW? Im not studying GW, Im studying people and their contradictory stances. I find their refusal to acknowledge their hypocrisy fascinating. For example....in your post you never answered the question. I didnt make the GW and weather claims...leftist alarmists did. Im asking you which one you believe is scientifically incorrect. Do you have an opinion on which alarmist argument is incorrect or do you not want to answer that one. This is fascinating stuff really.

 

Very well..I will explain Climate Change:

The Atmosphere and Oceans (as well as their currents) work together with solar output/input in a complex combination to create what we call "Climate". As any or all of these variables change they effect all others in unpredictable ways based on terrain (mountains, plains, islands...etc...) creating localized additional complexity we call weather. Climate is the mother of weather and is the primary driver of it, when climate shifts weather will invariably follow suit but many variables combine to create weather. "Global Warming" is a rarely used term and usually only when discussing temperatures or in political realms which is why the focus has always been on changes taking place as our planet gets hotter in general.
Extremes in temperature (Hot or Cold) are both weather and climate driven which may be part of the confusion, but more likely it is political game playing meant to confuse and debase the science.

 

I live in the heat zone and we still haven’t hit the average above 90 degree days. The record was back in 56.

Mistaking weather for climate change. A noob mistake.

 

Evidently you don't grasp the OP. Nothing new about "extreme weather".

 

And apparently you do not have access to the data that leads to the conclusions stated or do not wish to accept them...which is fine and unimportant. Extreme weather is inherent in...well...weather, and always has been. The issue today is the frequency and intensity combined with the indicative and corelating changes in our atmosphere and the associated impacts this is having on frozen chemical release. It is irrelevant to the entire issue if someone or anyone on an internet forum spends th time required to comprehend what is taking place as no one can or will change this reality....as I have said, time to buckle up for the ride.

 

It's still just weather.

 

Frequency is the new buzz word but means nothing.. I could point out countless extreme weather events in history before the industrial revolution really ramped up and we have always had to buckle up for the ride on this ever changing volatile planet. Nothing new here.

 

Extremes in either direction on an individual basis is weather. It doesn't matter if it is a cold extreme or a warm extreme.

What will change as a result of AGW is the likelihood of such extremes occurring over long time periods. Right now record highs are about 2-10x as likely to occur as record lows.

 

It's definitely not new. The concepts of probability and frequency in atmospheric science have been around since the early 1900's.

At any rate, if the Earth was neither warming nor cooling it would be reasonable to expect the ratio of record highs vs record lows to be close to 1.0. If the Earth were cooling you might expect this ratio to be < 1.0 and if the Earth is warming it would be > 1.0. What is actually been happening since about 1960 is that this ratio is significantly greater > 1.0. The ratio is higher in the winter vs the summer as well which is was a prediction of AGW. Same with Tmin vs Tmax as well...the number of record high Tmin is greater than the number of record high Tmax...that's a manifestation of the diurnal prediction that nights will experience more warming than days.

 

Frequency of weather related events and impacts are certainly nothing "New" as the term has been used for many decades to compare time lines of everything. It is coming into more use right now concerning climate because events are becoming more frequent. What is "New" would be a species of animal being able to recognize these changes and its own contribution to them as well as the many variables that go into said climate. We can see and document this:

 

I understand the climate...Im asking which argument was wrong. Id like one person on the left to correct the other leftists when they say extreme cold is just weather and therefore isnt an indicator or global warming. I say global warming because thats what the left is claiming.

 

I suggest finding and discussing that with the individual who says that, I have no idea who that might be. For myself I have explained that neither and both can be accurate depending on what political position you decide to champion....it does not effect the realities.

 

Yet another "baffle them with bull ****" post from you. You throw out numbers like they are hard facts and expect ever to lap them up like well, Koolaid. Extreme weather and lots of it is the norm and not anything new. Ask the anasazi they'll tell you. Oh woops, none of them left is there. That nasty hundred years drought thing.

 

i think the left needs to circle the wagons and get their story straight. Hot is GW...cold is GW..tornados..gw...not tornados gw...el nino...gw....not el nino...gw...hurricanes...gw....no hurricanes. gw...on and on

 

That's the unprovable mantra of the cult. " More frequent".

 

Have A Nice Day