places. However, a common belief is that being farther from the equator
means being colder, and that's only sort of true, since other factors
(notably land mass) play a very significant role. That was my point here.
It would be safe to say: All other factors being the same, the farther from
the equator, the colder it will be. But that's about all we can say without
risking getting outside of the facts.
2. Granted that the rainfall of "103,829 years ago" has no immediately
practical bearing on our present circumstances. However, it could be argued
that the rainfall of three years ago has no real practical bearing on our
present circumstances. And what any of us believe about the weather has no
bearing on the weather, and relatively little bearing on our present
circumstances.
One of the seismologists noted in a TV interview that humans need meaning
and patterns, and therefore attribute to seismology such unsupportable
beliefs as "earthquake weather". My point in my reference to human
experience was to point out that we tend to believe things about the weather
as we do about earthquakes that are unsupportable by empirical evidence.
My assertion was occasioned by the comment about this year's weather but
applies to any such statement. This year's weather may indeed be "weird" by
comparison with our recollection of previous years, but our recollection is
probably not a complete or accurate reflection of our actual experience and
certainly has only a slight connection to historic and prehistoric weather
patterns.
Therefore, a statement such as, "I don't remember it ever being this cold in
December," is a much more legitimate statement than, "Our weather is getting
totally weird."
[BTW, the LA area had about a week of hard freeze, including freezing of
exposed water pipes, in Dec of 1990. I don't remember a specific time of
high 80s in December, but I do remember that on my first Christmas in CA
(having moved from the Northeast), we had the air conditioning on.]
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kim Noyes" <kimnoyes@gmail.com>
To: <californiadisasters@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, December 13, 2010 9:59 AM
Subject: Re: [californiadisasters] Re: Record-High Temperatures Expected
> True statements all; the weather is indeed complicated and influenced by
> many factors simultaneously in a complex dance we are still trying to
figure
> out.
>
> Latitude nonetheless is influential; the mountains paralleling the coast
of
> Alaska are not getting the same weather as the mountains facing the ocean
in
> Southern California today nor are the mountains facing the ocean in
Central
> America.
>
> Using human lifespans in describing weather does have value in
articulating
> how infrequent a particular phenomenon is despite not being a scientific
> measure much like saying today was "hot as hell" does not tell us
precisely
> how hot it was but needless to say it articulates that it was
uncomfortably
> hot.
>
> That a particular location got more rainful 103,829 years ago this date is
> not particularly useful given the gradual (and sometimes not so gradual)
> shifts in climate due to a variety of factors. What is more meaningful now
> is what is typical now and thus comparing unusual weather events to what
is
> typical now gives us a frame of reference for how odd it is relative to
the
> norm.
>
> Kimmer
>
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 6:25 AM, newnethboy <kef413@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Weather is more influenced by land forms than by latitude. Consider that
> > Spain, with a climate not unlike SoCal, is at about the same latitude as
> > NY.
> > Also consider how the West Coast compares with the East Coast.
> >
> > As for CA, the coastal mountains and the Central Valley play a part in
our
> > weather in different areas of the state. However, SoCal is
differentiated
> > by
> > the coast line. The abrupt change at Point Conception causes our typical
> > weather flows to hit land north of PC but stay over water for a while
south
> > of PC. This makes PC the place where, weather-wise, we can best demark
> > SoCal
> > from NoCal, IMO.
> >
> > However, before we blame everything on these land forms, note also that
the
> > Mid-Pacific Stationary High has a major influence on the West Coast.
Storm
> > systems tend to be deflected to the north, so that many systems hit
north
> > of
> > CA, or at least NoCal and north, whereas the typical effect on SoCal is
to
> > get some clouds from the storm's extreme tail. (The seasonal shift of
> > position of this stationary high is the reason why SoCal only gets rain
in
> > the winter.)
> >
> > As for your "colder than I remember" experience, we need to avoid the
> > mistake of viewing geography/geology in terms of human lifespans, rather
> > than in terms of eons. Weather records have only been kept for less than
> > 150
> > years (systematically by the US guvmint, at least), and the science of
> > observation was very crude at the beginning. That would be kind of like
> > evaluating your life based on the last two seconds.
> >
> > I've never seen snow in the LA Basin, but it has happened. A couple of
> > years
> > ago, we thought we were going to see an all-time record rainfall as
> > measured
> > at Downtown LA (but we missed something like a half-inch). However,
> > "all-time" means "in the last 130 years"; certainly the location which
is
> > now Downtown LA has received more rain--who knows, maybe many inches'
more
> > rain--at some time over the eons.
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Joel Wilson" <joel1847@msn.com <joel1847%40msn.com>>
> > To:
<californiadisasters@yahoogroups.com<californiadisasters%40yahoogroups.com>
> > >
> > Sent: Monday, December 13, 2010 5:17 AM
> > Subject: [californiadisasters] Re: Record-High Temperatures Expected
> >
> > It's been above average precip-wise up in norcal. We're close to our
> > average rainfall for Dec already and we've got more rain coming this
week.
> > Overall, the temps here have been below normal, especially that hard
freeze
> > we had a couple weeks back. I can't remember the last time we had a hard
> > freeze like that at this time of the year. January, yes. Nov-Dec, nope.
I
> > wonder where the line is for the weather between norcal and socal. Sac?
> > Modesto maybe? I know we're far from 80 degrees up here and we're right
> > near the 40th parallel.
> >
> > Joel
> > norcal
> >
> > --- In
californiadisasters@yahoogroups.com<californiadisasters%40yahoogroups.com>,
> > Kim Noyes <kimnoyes@...> wrote:
> > >
> > > Weird in a general sense of what one expects this time of year at this
> > > latitude in this hemisphere but rather typical for this region during
a
> > > strong La Nina. Thus far the weather across the nation has stuck to
the
> > > script for a strong La Nina.
> > >
> > > Kimmer
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> Check out http://groups.yahoo.com/group/californiadisasters/
> Read our blog at http://eclecticarcania.blogspot.com/
> Visit me on Facebook at http://www.facebook.com/derkimster
> Visit my Myspace at http://www.myspace.com/kimusinteruptus
> We have an Ebay store at http://stores.ebay.com/K-K-Earthwerks
>
------------------------------------
Be sure to check out our Links Section at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/californiadisasters/links
Please join our Discussion Group at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/californiadisasters_discussion/ for topical but extended discussions started here or for less topical but nonetheless relevant messages.Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/californiadisasters/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/californiadisasters/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
californiadisasters-digest@yahoogroups.com
californiadisasters-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
californiadisasters-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
No comments:
Post a Comment