Chicago Officials Warn Swimmers Lake Temps 'Dangerously Cold'...

Chicago Officials Warn Swimmers Lake Temps 'Dangerously Cold'...

Don’t Be Fooled By Warm Weather — Lake Temps Remain Dangerously Cold

June 6, 2014 5:04 PM
Share on email 108
View Comments

(CBS) – With beautiful weather on tap for the weekend, lots of people will be boating on Lake Michigan.
But after two deadly accidents on the water last weekend, the Chicago Fire Department is reminding people of the hazards of cold water.
CBS 2′s Mai Martinez reports.
“There’s still a lot of cold water in Lake Michigan,” warns Ron Dorneker, deputy district chief for the Chicago Fire Department’s Marine and Dive Operations.
How cold? In the middle, it’s just 38 degrees. Off Navy Pier, a quick check showed 60 degrees.
“Anything below 70 degrees, the medical community terms it as cold water,” Dorneker says.
And that can be dangerous.
“You lose body heat 25 times faster in water than you do in air temperature,” Dorneker says.
Even in warmer parts of the lake, like the popular play pen area, fire department divers found the water to be a chilly 64 degrees on Friday.
“The first minute is critical, so when somebody goes in the water that is below 70 degrees, you have a gasping reflex, and if you’re submerged underwater when you have that gasping reflex, you’re going to inhale water, and that’s going to cause a drowning,” Dorneker says.
It’s best to stay out of the water, and if you end up in it, don’t panic, he says.
“If you fall in, fall onto your back, don’t let your head submerge under the water, try and get control of your breathing. Try to get out of the water as soon as possible,” he says.
If you do find yourself in trouble on a boat, the Fire Department says it’s important to be able to call for help, but you can’t always count on your cell phone.
A better backup plan is a simple ship-to-shore radio.
The Fire Department says boaters should also have a backup ship-to-shore radio in case the boat loses power and they need to call for help.
They also say it’s important that more than one person knows how to operate the boat in case there’s an emergency.

http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2014/06/...gerously-cold/

NOAA shows ‘the pause’ in the U.S. surface temperature record over nearly a decade

Posted on June 7, 2014 by Anthony Watts
http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpre...ng?w=150&h=120After years of waiting, NOAA has finally made a monthly dataset on the U.S. Climate Reference Network available in a user friendly way via their recent web page upgrades. This data is from state-of-the-art ultra-reliable triple redundant weather stations placed on pristine environments. As a result, these temperature data need none of the adjustments that plague the older surface temperature networks, such as USHCN and GHCN, which have been heavily adjusted to attempt corrections for a wide variety of biases. Using NOAA’s own USCRN data, which eliminates all of the squabbles over the accuracy of and the adjustment of temperature data, we can get a clear plot of pristine surface data. It could be argued that a decade is too short and that the data is way too volatile for a reasonable trend analysis, but let’s see if the new state-of-the-art USCRN data shows warming.
A series of graphs from NOAA follow, plotting Average, Maximum, and Minimum surface temperature follow, along with trend analysis and original source data to allow interested parties to replicate it.
First, some background on this new temperature monitoring network, from the network home page:

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/crn/img/theme/site-image.jpg

The U.S. Climate Reference Network (USCRN)consists of 114 stations developed, deployed, managed, and maintained by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) in the continental United States for the express purpose of detecting the national signal of climate change. The vision of the USCRN program is to maintain a sustainable high-quality climate observation network that 50 years from now can with the highest degree of confidence answer the question: How has the climate of the nation changed over the past 50 years? These stations were designed with climate science in mind.Three independent measurements of temperature and precipitation are made at each station, insuring continuity of record and maintenance of well-calibrated and highly accurate observations. The stations are placed in pristine environments expected to be free of development for many decades. Stations are monitored and maintained to high standards, and are calibrated on an annual basis.

Source: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/crn/
As you can see from the map below, the USCRN is well distributed, with good spatial resolution, providing an excellent representivity of the CONUS, Alaska, and Hawaii.
http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpre..._map.jpg?w=640
From the Site Description page of the USCRN:
================================================== ========

Every USCRN observing site is equipped with a standard set of sensors, a data logger and a satellite communications transmitter, and at least one weighing rain gauge encircled by a wind shield. Off-the-shelf commercial equipment and sensors are selected based on performance, durability, and cost.
Highly accurate measurements and reliable reporting are critical. Deployment includes calibrating the installed sensors and maintenance will include routine replacement of aging sensors. The performance of the network is monitored on a daily basis and problems are addressed as quickly as possible, usually within days.
…
Many criteria are considered when selecting a location and establishing a USCRN site:

• Regional and spatial representation: Major nodes of regional climate variability are captured while taking into account large-scale regional topographic factors.

• Sensitivity to the measurement of climate variability and trends: Locations should be representative of the climate of the region, and not heavily influenced by unique local topographic features and mesoscale or microscale factors.

• Long term site stability: Consideration is given to whether the area surrounding the site is likely to experience major change within 50 to 100 years. The risk of man made encroachments over time and the chance the site will close due to the sale of the land or other factors are evaluated. Federal, state, and local government land and granted or deeded land with use restrictions (such as that found at colleges) often provide a high stability factor. Population growth patterns are also considered.

• Naturally occurring risks and variability:
  
  • Flood plains and locations in the vicinity of orographically induced winds like the Santa Ana and the Chinook are avoided.
  • Locations with above average tornado frequency or having persistent periods of extreme snow depths are avoided.
  • Enclosed locations that may trap air and create unusually high incidents of fog or cold air drainage are avoided.
  • Complex meteorological zones, such as those adjacent to an ocean or to other large bodies of water are avoided.
  
  

• Proximity:
  
  • Locations near existing or former observing sites with long records of daily precipitation and maximum and minimum temperature are desirable.
  • Locations near similar observing systems operated and maintained by personnel with an understanding of the purpose of climate observing systems are desirable.
  • Endangered species habitats and sensitive historical locations are avoided.
  • A nearby source of power is required. AC power is desirable, but, in some cases, solar panels may be an alternative.
  
  
• Access: Relatively easy year round access by vehicle for installation and periodic maintenance is desirable.

Source: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/crn/sitedescription.html
================================================== ========
As you can see, every issue and contingency has been thought out and dealt with. Essentially, the U.S. Climate Reference Network is the best climate monitoring network in the world, and without peer. Besides being in pristine environments away from man-made influences such as urbanization and resultant UHI issues, it is also routinely calibrated and maintained, something that cannot be said for the U.S. Historical Climate Network (USHCN), which is a mishmash of varying equipment (alcohol thermometers in wooden boxes, electronic thermometers on posts, airport ASOS stations placed for aviation), compromised locations, and a near complete lack of regular thermometer testing and calibration.
Having established its equipment homogenity, state of the art triple redundant instrumentation, lack of environmental bias, long term accuracy, calibration, and lack of need for any adjustments, let us examine the data produced for the last decade by the U.S. Climate Reference Network.
First, from NOAA’s own plotter at the National Climatic Data Center in Asheville, NC, this plot they make available to the public showing average temperature for the Contiguous United States by month:
http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpre...ng?w=640&h=375
Source: NCDC National Temperature Index time series plotter
To eliminate any claims of “cherry picking” the time period, I selected the range to be from 2004 through 2014, and as you can see, no data exists prior to January 2005. NOAA/NCDC does not make any data from the USCRN available prior to 2005, because there were not enough stations in place yet to be representative of the Contiguous United States. What you see is the USCRN data record in its entirety, with no adjustments, no start and end date selections, and no truncation. The only thing that has been done to the monthly average data is gridding the USCRN stations, so that the plot is representative of the Contiguous United States.
Helpfully, the data for that plot is also made available on the same web page. Here is a comma separated value (CSV) Excel workbook file for that plot above from NOAA:
USCRN_Avg_Temp_time-series (Excel Data File)
Because NOAA/NCDC offers no trend line generation in their user interface, from that NOAA provided data file, I have plotted the data, and provided a linear trend line using a least-squares curve fitting procedure which is a function in the DPlot program that I use.
Not only is there a pause in the posited temperature rise from man-made global warming, but a clearly evident slight cooling trend in the U.S. Average Temperature over nearly the last decade:
http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpre...ng?w=640&h=513
We’ve had a couple of heat waves and we’ve had some cool spells too. In other words, weather.
The NCDC National Temperature Index time series plotter also makes maximum and minimum temperature data plots available. I have downloaded their plots and data, supplemented with my own plots to show the trend line. Read on.

NOAA/NCDC plot of maximum temperature:
http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpre...ng?w=640&h=375Source of the plot here.
Data from the plot: USCRN_Max_Temp_time-series (Excel Data File)*
My plot with trend line:
http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpre...ng?w=640&h=513
As seen by the trend line, there is a slight cooling in maximum temperatures in the Contiguous United States, suggesting that heat wave events (seen in 2006 and 2012) were isolated weather incidents, and not part of the near decadal trend.

NOAA/NCDC plot of minimum temperature:
http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpre...ng?w=640&h=372
Source of the plot here.
USCRN_Min_Temp_time-series (Excel Data File)*
The cold winter of 2013 and 2014 is clearly evident in the plot above, with Feb 2013 being -3.04°F nationally.
My plot with trend line:
http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpre...ng?w=640&h=513
*I should note that NOAA/NCDC’s links to XML, CSV, and JSON files on their plotter page only provide the average temperature data set, and not the maximum and minimum temperature data sets, which may be a web page bug. However, the correct data appears in the HTML table on display below the plot, and I imported that into Excel and saved it as a data file in workbook format.

The trend line illustrates a cooling trend in the minimum temperatures across the Contiguous United States for nearly a decade. There is some endpoint sensitivity in the plots going on, which is to be expected and can’t be helped, but the fact that all three temperature sets, average, max, and min show a cooling trend is notable.
It is clear there has been no rise in U.S. surface air temperature in the past decade. In fact, a slight cooling is demonstrated, though given the short time frame for the dataset, about all we can do is note it, and watch it to see if it persists.
Likewise, there does not seem to have been any statistically significant warming in the contiguous U.S. since start of the new USCRN data, using the average, maximum or minimum temperature data.
I asked three people who are well versed in data plotting and analysis to review this post before I published it, one, Willis Eschenbach, added his own graph as part of the review feedback, a trend analysis with error bars, shown below.
http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpre...pg?w=640&h=586
While we can’t say there has been a statistically significant cooling trend, even though the slope of the trend is downward, we also can’t say there’s been a statistically significant warming trend either.
What we can say, is that this is just one more dataset that indicates a pause in the posited rise of temperature in the Contiguous United States for nearly a decade, as measured by the best surface temperature monitoring network in the world. It is unfortunate that we don’t have similar systems distributed worldwide.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/06/0...arly-a-decade/

https://scontent-b-mia.xx.fbcdn.net/...97770189_n.png


https://fbcdn-profile-a.akamaihd.net...42420566_n.jpg CFACT

The average U.S. temperature has declined slightly during President Obama's time in office.

Share the facts from meteorologist Anthony Watts: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/06/0...arly-a-decade/

What will win out, climate propaganda or climate facts?

Objective data shows no warming, no matter what Obama and EPA tell us is "settled," or Barbara Boxer claims she can see out her "window."

https://scontent-a-mia.xx.fbcdn.net/...01077030_n.jpg

https://fbcdn-profile-a.akamaihd.net...42420566_n.jpg CFACT

The USPS rolled out a new global warming stamp on April 22nd.

Share the facts at CFACT.org: http://wp.me/p39tSj-5H2

Satellite and thermometer data shows no global temperature increase since before the President was elected. The USPS solved this inconvenient problem by substituting a computer model of ocean temperatures for actual (not very interesting) ocean temperatures.

Is it legitimate for the party that controls the White House to inscribe its political talking points onto U.S. postage stamps?

https://scontent-b-mia.xx.fbcdn.net/...36996497_n.jpg
https://fbcdn-profile-a.akamaihd.net...42420566_n.jpg CFACT

Bypass Congress? EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy warned us before she was confirmed. Now she's imposing cap and trade on the states by regulatory fiat. Should we have listened?

Share the facts at CFACT.org: http://www.cfact.org/?s=%22Gina+McCarthy%22

Are American freedoms still protected by constitutional separations of powers?

“I, Gina McCarthy, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.”

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

Has Gina McCarthy upheld her oath of office? Has the President?

https://fbcdn-sphotos-b-a.akamaihd.n...85434507_n.jpg


https://fbcdn-profile-a.akamaihd.net...42420566_n.jpg CFACT

Can you hurt water's feelings? Gwyneth Paltrow believes you can. Enough to publish it!

Share the facts from Marc Morano: http://www.climatedepot.com/

"I am fascinated by the growing science behind the energy of consciousness and its effects on matter. I have long had Dr. Emoto's coffee table book on how negativity changes the structure of water, how the molecules behave differently depending on the words or music being expressed around it."

"During his studies, Emoto separated water into one hundred petri dishes and assigned each dish a fate: good or bad. The good water was blessed or praised for being so wonderful (“Oh look at you wonderful little water droplets! One day you shall be a water slide!” I imagine him saying). The bad water was scolded (“May you become that gross grey sludge that builds up under a Zamboni,” he maybe said)."

Next came the freezer where the happy water froze beautifully, while the rejected water froze unattractively.

When Hollywood's beautiful people embrace emotional pseudoscience, must we follow?

hahahahahahahahahahahaha .... Simpletons Abound in this country

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a-a.akamaihd.n...82357115_n.jpg


https://fbcdn-profile-a.akamaihd.net...42420566_n.jpg CFACT

Weather Channel founder John Coleman takes on Obama's war on energy.

Will your power plant be forced to close?

Share the facts from Marc Morano at CFACT's Climate Depot: http://www.climatedepot.com/

Coleman: 'Carbon Dioxide is not a significant greenhouse gas. It does result in slight warming of the atmosphere, but because it is only a trace gas, the impact is totally insignificant. The theory that CO2 is a super greenhouse gas that triggers radiative forcing through interaction with water vapor to cause highly significant warming has totally failed to verify and has been totally debunked by many well qualified scientists.'