donsutherland1

Cooler weather has now overspread the region. This cooler weather will likely last into early next week. In western North America, much above normal temperatures could develop in the Pacific Northwest and western Canada during the middle and latter part of next week. Across the Atlantic Ocean, this weekend will see the start of an extended period of above to much above normal temperatures in Europe. Record temperatures will likely be challenged and broken in many locations. This latest round of heat could last through the upcoming week. Anchorage is nearing the end of its warmest summer on record. Based on sensitivity analysis applied to the latest guidance, Anchorage will finish summer 2019 with a mean temperature near 62.6°. The summer record is 60.8°, which was set in 2016. In addition, Anchorage will likely set a new August record high mean temperature. The implied probability for its warmest August on record is 70%. That would be the third consecutive monthly record set this year. No single year holds three consecutive monthly records (cold or warm), much less during the same season, in Anchorage. The ENSO Region 1+2 anomaly was -0.7°C and the Region 3.4 anomaly was +0.1°C for the week centered around August 14. For the past six weeks, the ENSO Region 1+2 anomaly has averaged -0.42°C and the ENSO Region 3.4 anomaly has averaged +0.33°C. Neutral-warm ENSO conditions are in place in Region 3.4 with neutral-cool conditions in place in Region 1+2. There is considerable uncertainty about the ENSO evolution later this summer into the fall. Some of the guidance continues to show the development of neutral-cool ENSO conditions. The SOI was 4.19 today. Today, the preliminary Arctic Oscillation (AO) figure was -0.526. A general tendency for blocking could persist through the remainder of August with perhaps some fluctuations to positive values. The AO has averaged -1.062 for August. Since 1950, there have been five prior cases when the AO averaged -0.500 or below in both July and August: 1950, 1958, 1960, 1968, and 2015. The average temperature for September was 69.1° (69.8° after adjusting for ongoing warming) and 58.9° (59.6° adjusted) for September through November in New York City. The 1981-2010 baseline normal figures are 68.0° and 57.5° respectively. The majority of cases saw a warmer than normal September and all cases featured a warmer than normal fall. Therefore, a warmer than normal September and fall appear likely. The potential for autumn 2019 to rank among the 30 warmest cases on record is on the table. The MJO's recent high-amplitude passage through Phase 4 during the August 5-15 period has been followed by a range of solutions in the September 1-15 period during past cases. The coolest was 2001 with a mean temperature of 70.7° in New York City. The warmest was 1983 with a mean temperature of 77.2° in New York City. The 1981-2010 base normal for the September 1-15 period is 71.8°. Right now, with 1993 remaining the baseline case, a plausible outcome could see a few cooler than normal to near normal days during the first week of September followed by warming that would result in a warmer than normal September 1-15 average temperature. On August 22, the MJO was in Phase 2 at an amplitude of 1.123 (RMM). The August 21-adjusted amplitude was 1.106. Finally, New York City has an implied 61% probability of having a warmer than normal August. The implied probabilities for New York City's receiving 50.00" or more precipitation this year are 70% (historical 1869-2018 period) and 80% (1971-2018 period). The least precipitation from August 24-December 31 occurred in 1931 when just 7.65" was recorded. The most was 32.57" in 1983.

With 0.53" rain through 9:59 pm, New York City's total rainfall for August reached 3.05". In addition, New York City's year-to-date precipitation reached 36.24", which surpassed the 36.22" that fell in 1949 for 137th place on the annual precipitation list.

Earlier today, Islip set a daily record high temperature of 91° (old record: 89°, 1976 and 2005); Boston tied its daily record high temperature of 93°, which was set in 1955 and tied in 2003; and, New York City-LGA tied its daily record of 93°, which was set in 2003. After some overnight showers and possibly a thunderstorm, several cooler than normal days lie ahead for the Middle Atlantic and southern New England regions from tomorrow into early next week. With the arrival of cooler air imminent, the following are 90° days to date for select cities: Allentown: 20 Baltimore: 48 Boston: 14 Charleston, SC: 61 Harrisburg: 29 Hartford: 26 Islip: 8 New York City-JFK: 6 New York City-LGA: 23 New York City-NYC: 14 Newark: 23 Norfolk: 45 Philadelphia: 31 Providence:12 Raleigh: 59 Richmond: 54 Savannah: 83 Sterling: 45 Washington, DC: 51 Across western North America, much above normal temperatures could develop in the Pacific Northwest and western Canada during the middle and latter part of next week. Anchorage is poised to experience its warmest summer on record. Based on sensitivity analysis applied to the latest guidance, Anchorage will finish summer 2019 with a mean temperature near 62.5°. The summer record is 60.8°, which was set in 2016. The probability of a record warm August has increased. There is an implied 63% probability that 2019 could set a new August record. If so, that would be the third consecutive monthly record set this year. No single year holds three consecutive monthly records (cold or warm) in Anchorage. The ENSO Region 1+2 anomaly was -0.7°C and the Region 3.4 anomaly was +0.1°C for the week centered around August 14. For the past six weeks, the ENSO Region 1+2 anomaly has averaged -0.42°C and the ENSO Region 3.4 anomaly has averaged +0.33°C. Neutral-warm ENSO conditions are in place in Region 3.4 with neutral-cool conditions in place in Region 1+2. There is considerable uncertainty about the ENSO evolution later this summer into the fall. Some of the guidance continues to show the development of neutral-cool ENSO conditions. The SOI was 3.16 today. Today, the preliminary Arctic Oscillation (AO) figure was -0.916. A general tendency for blocking could persist through the remainder of August with perhaps some fluctuations to positive values. The AO has averaged -1.062 for August. Since 1950, there have been five prior cases when the AO averaged -0.500 or below in both July and August: 1950, 1958, 1960, 1968, and 2015. The average temperature for September was 69.1° (69.8° after adjusting for ongoing warming) and 58.9° (59.6° adjusted) for September through November in New York City. The 1981-2010 baseline normal figures are 68.0° and 57.5° respectively. The majority of cases saw a warmer than normal September and all cases featured a warmer than normal fall. Therefore, a warmer than normal September and fall appear likely. The potential for autumn 2019 to rank among the 30 warmest cases on record is on the table. The MJO's recent high-amplitude passage through Phase 4 during the August 5-15 period has been followed by a range of solutions in the September 1-15 period during past cases. The coolest was 2001 with a mean temperature of 70.7° in New York City. The warmest was 1983 with a mean temperature of 77.2° in New York City. The 1981-2010 base normal for the September 1-15 period is 71.8°. Right now, with 1993 remaining the baseline case, a plausible outcome could see a few cooler than normal to near normal days during the first week of September followed by warming that would result in a warmer than normal September 1-15 average temperature. On August 21, the MJO was in Phase 2 at an amplitude of 1.114 (RMM). The August 20-adjusted amplitude was 1.102. Finally, New York City has an implied 67% probability of having a warmer than normal August.

I am not sure why you are confusing a term that describes a dynamic process with a notion that the past ‘causes’ today’s weather (or that 'weather statistics cause today's weather'). That’s not how scientists define climate change or the context in which events are discussed with respect to climate change. Statistics are measurement tools. Statistics are used in fields far beyond climate. Rates of change describe phenomena far beyond climate, too. One sees them in fields ranging from economics to engineering. No one in any of those fields is suggesting that statistics (used to measure change) drive the events that are being measured. Climate change is defined as “any change in climate over time, whether due to natural variability or as a result of human activity.” https://unfccc.int/files/press/backgrounders/application/pdf/press_factsh_science.pdf The detailed definition of climate change is: Climate change refers to a change in the state of the climate that can be identified (e.g., by using statistical tests) by changes in the mean and/or the variability of its properties and that persists for an extended period, typically decades or longer. Climate change may be due to natural internal processes or external forcings such as modulations of the solar cycles, volcanic eruptions and persistent anthropogenic changes in the composition of the atmosphere or in land use. Note that the Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), in its Article 1, defines climate change as: ‘a change of climate which is attributed directly or indirectly to human activity that alters the composition of the global atmosphere and which is in addition to natural climate variability observed over comparable time periods.’ The UNFCCC thus makes a distinction between climate change attributable to human activities altering the atmospheric composition and climate variability attributable to natural causes. See also Climate variability, Global warming, Ocean acidification (OA) and Detection and attribution. https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/chapter/glossary/ For a simple illustration, let's assume a case where the statistics reveal that the average temperature at a given location is rising 0.5°C per decade. Everything else in this simple illustration remains unchanged. On account of the warming, the statistical probability of a given threshold of heat has increased by a given percentage (assuming simple statistics and a Gaussian distribution). In the real world, let's assume that the frequency of cases meeting that threshold of heat has increased consistent with the statistical probabilities noted above. That increased frequency does not mean that the statistics by which temperature trend and probability of such cases were measured actually caused the increase in such cases. The underlying factors resulting in the warming are responsible. The same holds true with respect to events attributed to climate change. Statistics don't cause events. They measure things, some of which can cause or contribute to events. Finally, no one is disputing the reality that climate is dynamic. The issue at the forefront of contemporary discussions of climate change concerns the role of anthropogenic forcing as the predominant factor driving the contemporary warming. That anthropogenic role is "unusual" for different, as shifts to climate epochs during the past were driven by external forcing e.g., changes in solar irradiance. The current temperature trend cannot be explained by any of the known natural forcings or factors. It has diverged from what would be expected from those factors. It is strongly explained by the rising atmospheric concentration of greenhouse gases.

Redundancy doesn't have to cover the whole system. Only a sufficient share of excess power capacity from alternative approaches needs to be available during the transition to cover issues that may arise. Complete failure of the entire system is not a likely scenario. Partial failure is. China is aggressively pursuing solar power and making rapid progress in terms of production cost effectiveness. Nuclear power is another alternative.

There’s actually growing evidence that climate change has an impact on tropical cyclones. Three examples: https://you.stonybrook.edu/kareed/2018/09/12/estimating-the-potential-impact-of-climate-change-on-hurricane-florence/ https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10584-016-1750-x https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/2017GL075888

The term "climate change" is used to refer to a dynamic situation, in this case the present ongoing observed warming. The increasing greenhouse gas forcing resulting from the rising atmospheric concentration of greenhouse gases is primarily responsible for that warming. Internal variability (ENSO, etc.) occurs within the context of this increasing external forcing. Both have effects at synoptic and climatic timeframes with real societal and human impacts.

At 2 pm, Islip had a temperature of 91°. That broke the daily record of 89°, which was set in 1976 and tied in 2005.

At 1 pm, Islip had a temperature of 89°. That tied the daily record set in 1976 and tied in 2005.

Abstract: One of the most destructive natural hazards, tropical cyclone (TC)–induced coastal flooding, will worsen under climate change. Here we conduct climatology–hydrodynamic modeling to quantify the effects of sea level rise (SLR) and TC climatology change (under RCP 8.5) on late 21st century flood hazards at the county level along the US Atlantic and Gulf Coasts. We find that, under the compound effects of SLR and TC climatology change, the historical 100-year flood level would occur annually in New England and mid-Atlantic regions and every 1–30 years in southeast Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico regions in the late 21st century. The relative effect of TC climatology change increases continuously from New England, mid-Atlantic, southeast Atlantic, to the Gulf of Mexico, and the effect of TC climatology change is likely to be larger than the effect of SLR for over 40% of coastal counties in the Gulf of Mexico. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-019-11755-z

I agree. I suspect that such technology isn’t too far in the future (probably a decade or less away).

Multiple steps are required. Bringing about cost parity and later cost superiority (lower costs) is one part of the larger problem. Expansion of the application, including but not limited to issues related to storage is another. Redundancy will still be needed for the foreseeable future, even if solar power ultimately becomes the primary source of electricity.

Parts of the region experienced thunderstorms this evening. With the 0.26" rain that was recorded in Newark, that city's year-to-date precipitation now stands at 40.31" (9.94" above normal). Following tomorrow, several cooler than normal days lie ahead for the Middle Atlantic and southern New England regions. Across North America, much above normal temperatures could develop in the Pacific Northwest and western Canada during the middle and latter part of next week. Anchorage is poised to experience its warmest summer on record. Based on sensitivity analysis applied to the latest guidance, Anchorage will finish summer 2019 with a mean temperature near 62.5°. The summer record is 60.8°, which was set in 2016. There is also an implied 56% probability that 2019 could set a new August record for highest mean temperature on record. If so, that would be the third consecutive monthly record set this year. No single year holds three consecutive monthly records in Anchorage. The ENSO Region 1+2 anomaly was -0.7°C and the Region 3.4 anomaly was +0.1°C for the week centered around August 14. For the past six weeks, the ENSO Region 1+2 anomaly has averaged -0.42°C and the ENSO Region 3.4 anomaly has averaged +0.33°C. Neutral-warm ENSO conditions are in place in Region 3.4 with neutral-cool conditions in place in Region 1+2. There is considerable uncertainty about the ENSO evolution later this summer into the fall. Some of the guidance continues to show the development of neutral-cool ENSO conditions. The SOI was -10.74 today. Today, the preliminary Arctic Oscillation (AO) figure was -1.409. A general tendency for blocking could persist through the remainder of August with perhaps some fluctuations to positive values. The AO has averaged -1.062 for August. Since 1950, there have been five prior cases when the AO averaged -0.500 or below in both July and August: 1950, 1958, 1960, 1968, and 2015. The average temperature for September was 69.1° (69.8° after adjusting for ongoing warming) and 58.9° (59.6° adjusted) for September through November in New York City. The 1981-2010 baseline normal figures are 68.0° and 57.5° respectively. The majority of cases saw a warmer than normal September and all cases featured a warmer than normal fall. The potential for autumn 2019 to rank among the 30 warmest cases on record is on the table. The MJO's recent high-amplitude passage through Phase 4 during the August 5-15 period has been followed by a range of solutions in the September 1-15 period during past cases. The coolest was 2001 with a mean temperature of 70.7° in New York City. The warmest was 1983 with a mean temperature of 77.2° in New York City. The 1981-2010 base normal for the September 1-15 period is 71.8°. Right now, with 1993 remaining the baseline case, a plausible outcome could see a few cooler than normal to near normal days during the first week of September followed by warming that would result in a warmer than normal September 1-15 average temperature. That kind of evolution was shown on the August 19 EPS weeklies. The latest CFSv2 weekly figures are particularly aggressive with warming during the latter part of the second half of the September 1-15 period. On August 20, the MJO was in Phase 1 at an amplitude of 1.101 (RMM). The August 19-adjusted amplitude was 1.201. Finally, based on sensitivity analysis applied to the latest guidance, New York City has an implied 65% probability of having a warmer than normal August.

On August 20, Arctic sea ice extent was 4,507,767 square kilometers on JAXA. Only 2007 (4,877,731 square kilometers), 2012 (4,143,648 square kilometers) and 2016 (4,922,931 square kilometers) had figures below 5 million square kilometers by August 20. Based on sensitivity analysis, the following are implied probabilities for various minimum extent figures: 4.50 million square kilometers or below: 99.9% 4.25 million square kilometers or below: 98% 4.00 million square kilometers or below: 86% 3.75 million square kilometers or below: 55% 3.50 million square kilometers or below: 20% 75th percentile: 3.895 million square kilometers 25th percentile: 3.543 million square kilometers Minimum extent figures based on historic 2010-2018 data: Mean decline: 3.719 million square kilometers Median decline: 3.711 million square kilometers Minimum decline: 3.922 million square kilometers Maximum decline: 3.542 million square kilometers Summary: Through August 21, Arctic sea ice extent remains firmly on a path that will very likely result in the second lowest minimum extent figure on record and the second such figure below 4.0 million square kilometers.

I suspect that such summers will gradually become more common within a decade or two.

New research has revealed that solar power has reached grid parity in China’s cities. Such an outcome in which new technologies become cost effective with scale and experience has been the norm with major technologies that move from the introductory to the growth phase. The abstract is below: We reveal that all of these cities can achieve—without subsidies—solar PV electricity prices lower than grid-supplied prices, and around 22% of the cities’ solar generation electricity prices can compete with desulfurized coal benchmark electricity prices. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41560-019-0441-z

There is growing model support for the possible development of much above normal warmth in the Pacific Northwest and western Canada during the middle and latter part of next week. The implied probability that Anchorage will record its warmest summer on record is near 100%. At present, based on the sensitivity analysis, Anchorage will finish summer 2019 with a mean temperature near 62.4°. The summer record is 60.8°, which was set in 2016. There is also an implied 53% probability that 2019 could set a new August record for highest mean temperature on record. If so, that would be the third consecutive monthly record set this year. Anchorage has had 5 previous summers with mean temperatures of 60.0° or above. Four (80%) occurred 2000 or later and 3 (60%) occurred 2010 or later. Those summers were: 1977: 60.2° 2004: 60.2° 2013: 60.1° 2015: 60.2° 2016: 60.8° The ENSO Region 1+2 anomaly was -0.7°C and the Region 3.4 anomaly was +0.1°C for the week centered around August 14. For the past six weeks, the ENSO Region 1+2 anomaly has averaged -0.42°C and the ENSO Region 3.4 anomaly has averaged +0.33°C. Neutral-warm ENSO conditions are in place in Region 3.4 with neutral-cool conditions in place in Region 1+2. There is considerable uncertainty about the ENSO evolution later this summer into the fall. Some of the guidance continues to show the development of neutral-cool ENSO conditions. The SOI was -13.90 today. Today, the preliminary Arctic Oscillation (AO) figure was -1.300. A general tendency for blocking could persist into the last week of August. By that time, the AO could move toward neutral to positive values. This evolution of blocking will promote a generally warm or perhaps very warm remainder of summer. Since 1950, there have been four prior cases when the AO averaged -0.500 or below in both June and July: 1957, 1958, 1993, and 2009. In three (75%) of those cases, August wound up warmer than normal. August 1993 was the warmest case. The mean anomaly from those cases suggests that the Middle Atlantic and southern New England areas could be approximately 0.5° to 1.5° above normal overall during August. The latest guidance is in line with August's anomaly falling within that range. However, some uncertainty has increased concerning the start of September. The MJO's recent high-amplitude passage through Phase 4 during the August 5-15 period has been followed by a range of solutions in the September 1-15 period during past cases. The coolest was 2001 with a mean temperature of 70.7° in New York City. The warmest was 1983 with a mean temperature of 77.2° in New York City. The 1981-2010 base normal for the September 1-15 period is 71.8°. Right now, with 1993 remaining the baseline case, a plausible outcome could see a few cooler than normal to near normal days during the first week of September followed by warming that would result in a warmer than normal September 1-15 average temperature. That kind of evolution was shown on the August 19 EPS weeklies. On August 19, the MJO was in Phase 1 at an amplitude of 1.204 (RMM). The August 18-adjusted amplitude was 1.120. Finally, based on sensitivity analysis applied to the latest guidance, New York City has an implied 64% probability of having a warmer than normal August.

Sorry about the delay. July 2019 was Boston's warmest month on record. The mean temperature was 78.7°. The previous July and monthly record was 78.0°, which was set in 1983.

It's not an "attack" on person. It's an attack on deeply flawed article that has little to do with science. Noting that Watts does not have a background in climate science and is not an expert in the area of glaciers are both facts. Indeed, if one wants further details, there's question as to whether he, in fact, completed his college studies. http://sourcewatch.org/images/4/4d/Anthony_Watts.pdf That wasn't the point. Thus, the issue about his not possessing expertise in climate science and glaciers was noted. Nothing was mentioned about the above controversy. The major focus was on the flawed article he had written. Iceland is a volcanically active region, but not every volcano is active. The OK Volcano last erupted during the Pleistocene Epoch and may well be extinct. If it is extinct, there's no heat. Watts also posted the NSIDC quote. Nowhere does the quote issue any ranking concerning temperature, much less the claim of "temperature coming in last" as factors related to the retreat of glaciers. Were the Watts framework accepted, OK's retreat would be a relatively rare case due to unique circumstances (location atop a volcano, setting aside that the volcano is dormant and possibly extinct). Instead, as the paper to which I provided a hyperlink (which is one from among numerous studies related to global glacier trends), OK's retreat is part of a broader global trend where glaciers across the world are generally in retreat, even as many of those glaciers are not located atop volcanoes. Why is this the case? If not volcanoes, what factor do they have in common? The global data make the common factor unmistakably clear: temperatures are rising. Multiple high-quality datasets (HadCrut, GISS, NCDC, Berkeley, Copernicus) all show this trend. Further, 98% of the globe has experienced the warmest 50 years on record (Common Era). https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-019-1401-2.epdf Instead, Watts discounted the importance of temperature (something NSIDC had not done). At the same time, he omitted any mention of the Arctic temperature record. That's a material omission. Further, Iceland is expected to continue its ongoing robust warming trend, which has contributed to OK's retreat. https://en.vedur.is/media/vedurstofan-utgafa-2017/VI_2017_009.pdf

The Greenland Ice Sheet holds 7.2 m of sea level equivalent and in recent decades, rising temperatures have led to accelerated mass loss. Current ice margin recession is led by the retreat of outlet glaciers, large rivers of ice ending in narrow fjords that drain the interior. We pair an outlet glacier–resolving ice sheet model with a comprehensive uncertainty quantification to estimate Greenland’s contribution to sea level over the next millennium. We find that Greenland could contribute 5 to 33 cm to sea level by 2100, with discharge from outlet glaciers contributing 8 to 45% of total mass loss. Our analysis shows that uncertainties in projecting mass loss are dominated by uncertainties in climate scenarios and surface processes, whereas uncertainties in calving and frontal melt play a minor role. We project that Greenland will very likely become ice free within a millennium without substantial reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/5/6/eaav9396

It should be noted that UAH 5.6, which was discontinued in 2017, had a better fit with the other climate datasets than 6.0. Indeed, running a regression analysis to estimate the value for 5.6 (in relation to GISS), one would have had a July 2019 value of +0.47. That would have surpassed the July 2016 record of +0.45 on that version. That outcome would be consistent with the findings from the GISS, NCDC, Berkeley, and Copernicus datasets. UAH 6.0 has consistently been a cold outlier. UAH 6.0 is a flawed product. https://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/full/10.1175/JTECH-D-16-0121.1

The following is an example of the kind of scientific illiteracy and efforts at disinformation that climate scientists must combat in order to ensure that the public has accurate information concerning climate change. Excerpts from an article by Anthony Watts: The media are abuzz over the first icy “casualty” of climate change: a small glacier in Iceland named Okjökull, also known as “OK.” The claim, made in a press release from Rice University, is that OK became the first glacier in Iceland to lose its glacial status because of global warming... As the U.S. Geological Survey noted, OK is actually an icecap on top of a volcano — located on a volcanically active Iceland. Yes, OK is slowly disappearing, but it is completely disingenuous to say climate change is without any doubt the main reason for OK’s demise. Even if we assume there’s no heat from the volcano, what else could be causing OK’s ice loss? To answer that question, you need to understand how glaciers work. According to the National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC): "A glacier forms when snow accumulates over time, turns to ice, and begins to flow outwards and downwards under the pressure of its own weight[.] … Glacier retreat, melt, and ablation result from increasing temperature, evaporation, and wind scouring. Ablation is a natural and seasonal part of glacier life. As long as snow accumulation equals or is greater than melt and ablation, a glacier will remain in balance or even grow. Once winter snowfall decreases, or summer melt increases, the glacier will begin to retreat." If snow is not added, glaciers don’t grow, and they naturally lose ice due to sublimation, ablation, and melt. I don’t think these people pushing OK’s death fully understand glaciers. The process of ice loss in a high-latitude glacier is mainly due to three things, with temperature coming in last. http://blog.heartland.org/2019/08/the-reports-of-icelands-glacial-death-have-been-greatly-exaggerated/ Now the facts: First, there is no credible evidence to implicate the volcano. Indeed, Mr. Watts claims the volcano may or may not be responsible. The volcano is, in fact, dormant and perhaps extinct. The OK volcano isn't even listed in the modern eruption record, as no known eruptions have occurred for millennia or longer. https://volcano.si.edu/database/search_volcano_results.cfm Second, the NSIDC language Watts quotes notes the role of temperature (underlined), "Glacier retreat, melt, and ablation result from increasing temperature, evaporation, and wind scouring..." Notice the NSIDC language never ranks the role of temperature, even as temperature is the first factor cited. Mr. Watts subjectively injects personal opinion into his piece. Temperature has played a large role. The Arctic has experienced unprecedented warmth during the instrument record and rapid warming over the past 50 years. The data can be found at: https://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata_v4/ZonAnn.Ts+dSST.txt (64N-90N) Third, the dramatic retreat of the OK glacier is not an isolated event. Worldwide, glaciers have largely been retreating. That broad retreat has been documented in numerous scientific papers. One such paper: https://www.nature.com/articles/ngeo2863 Further, most of those glaciers don't sit atop volcanoes. In sum, Mr. Watts ranked the role of temperature based on a read of the NSIDC's language on glaciers that is inconsistent with the intellectual integrity of that language. He engaged in speculation about a volcano's possible role without looking into the facts about that volcano. In the end, Mr. Watts, who has no background in climate science, much less the study of glaciers, reached an unsupported conclusion that has no foundation in the scientific literature. It is pure opinion spiced with baseless speculation. Its purpose is not to inform, but to mislead.

Parts of the Middle Atlantic and southern New England areas experienced record warmth today. Highlights included: Baltimore: 99° (old record: 97°, 1914); Boston: 95° (old record: 92°, 1906, 1966, and 1983); Norfolk: 96° (tied record set in 1912 and tied in 1954); Richmond: 99° (old record: 98°, 1914 and 2002); Sterling, VA: 95° (tied record set in 2002); and, Washington, DC: 98° (tied record set in 2002). Anchorage, which came off its warmest month on record, remains on track to record its warmest summer on record. At present, based on the sensitivity analysis, Anchorage will finish summer 2019 with a mean temperature near 62.0°. The summer record is 60.8°, which was set in 2016. There is also a chance that 2019 could set a new August record for highest mean temperature on record. If so, that would be the third consecutive monthly record set this year. The ENSO Region 1+2 anomaly was -0.7°C and the Region 3.4 anomaly was +0.1°C for the week centered around August 14. For the past six weeks, the ENSO Region 1+2 anomaly has averaged -0.42°C and the ENSO Region 3.4 anomaly has averaged +0.33°C. Neutral-warm ENSO conditions are in place in Region 3.4 with neutral-cool conditions in place in Region 1+2. There is considerable uncertainty about the ENSO evolution later this summer into the fall. Some of the guidance continues to show the development of neutral-cool ENSO conditions. The SOI was +10.86 today. Today, the preliminary Arctic Oscillation (AO) figure was --1.006. A general tendency for blocking could persist into the last week of August. By that time, the AO could move toward neutral to positive values. This evolution of blocking will promote a generally warm or perhaps very warm remainder of summer. Since 1950, there was only a single year that saw the AO average -1.000 or below in May and -0.500 or below in June (the preliminary June 2019 average was -0.665): 1993. 1993 featured much above normal readings in the East during the late summer (August 15-September 15 period) and predominantly cooler than normal readings across the western third of the nation during much of the summer. In addition, since 1950, there have been four prior cases when the AO averaged -0.500 or below in both June and July: 1957, 1958, 1993, and 2009. In three (75%) of those cases, August wound up warmer than normal. August 1993 was the warmest case. The mean anomaly from those cases suggests that the Middle Atlantic and southern New England areas could be approximately 0.5° to 1.5° above normal overall during August. On August 18, the MJO was in Phase 1 at an amplitude of 1.128 (RMM). The August 17-adjusted amplitude was 0.751. Finally, based on sensitivity analysis applied to the latest guidance, New York City has an implied 61% probability of having a warmer than normal August. In terms of receiving 50" or more precipitation, New York City's implied probabilities are 65% (1869-2018 historical period) and 77% (1971-2018 period).

Near dime-sized hail fell in Mamaroneck, NY during the now departing thunderstorm.

Since the time I posted about the article, I have seen her piece. As I was traveling in China and just got back, I could not access it until my return to the United States. Based upon some of the criticism, Dr. Curry's included, my view is that the general ideas likely hold up, especially when it comes to "new media" coverage. In areas where the differences were small e.g., certain major media outlets, the conclusions may not hold up e.g., (the small advantage in coverage for contrarians may, in fact, be a modest advantage for the climate scientists). It would be interesting to see what the numbers look like if things are re-run to take into consideration some of the criticism e.g., one climate scientist who debated the contrarians at the Heartland Institute was grouped as a contrarian (the general category for all Heartland participants).