Weather Temp Records

[daepp]

I am no statistician, but every day we learn new temperature records are broken.

But if we add new days to the total number of days in the "population", won't we always be setting new records - both highs and lows?

IOW, don't our records only go back around one hundred years?

[Zeke]

While looking at record low temps for 7/4 I saw in the LATimes that the record low was 46 in 1900.

Thomas Jefferson took the temp twice a day and logged it.

[Joe Bob]

Official records, 1914....amateur records 1766-ish.

[daepp]

But still, we don't know the history of all the actual highs and lows for the earth, so we really don't know today if they're records or not.

[Zeke]

Originally Posted by DAEpperson

But still, we don't know the history of all the actual highs and lows for the earth, so we really don't know today if they're records or not.

So, what's the point? We don't know a lot about the ancient earth's day to day's conditions. If it happened in my lifetime, it's a personal record.

[sc_rufctr]

Apparently there are other ways of measuring temperatures from the past.
Things like different algae sizes frozen in glaciers. The bigger the algae the warmer the temperature.

Realistically these methods are inheriantly inaccurate compared to modern thermometers etc but climate sientists put a lot of effort into getting things right.
That doesn't mean they are though.

Locally it seems we've gone the other way. Remembering back to childhood...
Our winters seem longer/colder and our summers are brutal but brief.

Personally. I Think things are changing... How? I don't know but this is a very short time frame.

[daepp]

In my inarticulate way, I guess what I am trying to say is that record setting temps are insignificant because as we add additional days to the total population of days we will always have more records. No?

[widebody911]

Originally Posted by DAEpperson

In my inarticulate way, I guess what I am trying to say is that record setting temps are insignificant because as we add additional days to the total population of days we will always have more records. No?

Just like sports. If enough time passes, someone else will come along who can jump higher, run faster, eat more hot dogs, do more 'roids, etc.

[Zeke]

Just like the Olympics. I still don't get it.

Peter, yes we do know about periods. How do we know what the highs and lows were from year to year? Anomalies occur. Maybe it was over 130 (134 in 1913) in Death Valley once in awhile. Doesn't tell us much.

[Joe Bob]

Ice core samples can give an overall picture of temps but nothing local like say, BFE or Schenectady, NY.

[island911]

Ice cores.. People make assumptions like 'the earth has always rotated about the same axis' (it hasn't). ...or that a day is always 24hrs (it's not)

For example; Here is a cool picture showing the drift of the Tropic of Cancer. (earth tilt)



And then there's that shifting magnetic field....

[red-beard]

Originally Posted by Joe Bob

Ice core samples can give an overall picture of temps but nothing local like say, BFE or Schenectady, NY.

JB, What do you know of Schenectigrad?

[Joe Bob]

Beyond that it's in NY....Bubkis.

[motion]

Originally Posted by Zeke

So, what's the point? We don't know a lot about the ancient earth's day to day's conditions. If it happened in my lifetime, it's a personal record.

The point is that it gives the media & statisticians a data point to enter into a column. To say that yesterday was a record high or low is both ignorant and arrogant. At some point in history the temperature has been warmer or cooler than yesterday a bazillion times.

[motion]

And comparing this century's data with last century's, or 1,000 centuries ago is meaningless. The earth is constantly changing and evolving. Not too long ago, most of North America was buried under ice. The earth does not care that humans are here. Within the blink of an eye, we will be gone and the earth will continue along just fine.

[daepp]

Originally Posted by motion

The point is that it gives the media & statisticians a data point to enter into a column. To say that yesterday was a record high or low is both ignorant and arrogant. At some point in history the temperature has been warmer or cooler than yesterday a bazillion times.

Yes - thank you. You said it better with less words!

[jyl]

Originally Posted by DAEpperson

In my inarticulate way, I guess what I am trying to say is that record setting temps are insignificant because as we add additional days to the total population of days we will always have more records. No?

What you say makes no sense.

You don't add up the temperature on successive days, which sounds like what you're thinking about.

Look at it this way. You measure the temp of your refrigerator, set thermostat at 34F and you never open the door. Day 1, the temp ranges from 28F to 45F as the fridge settles down to a stable temp. On days 2 and future days, temp ranges from 30F to 36F. You can go on as long as you like, there will never be another high record or low record set. Even through you are adding extra days to the "population" in yourspeak.

[jyl]

Originally Posted by motion

And comparing this century's data with last century's, or 1,000 centuries ago is meaningless. The earth is constantly changing and evolving. Not too long ago, most of North America was buried under ice. The earth does not care that humans are here. Within the blink of an eye, we will be gone and the earth will continue along just fine.

This works if you are indifferent to your own existence and that of your children and their children and everyone else.

[motion]

Originally Posted by jyl

This works if you are indifferent to your own existence and that of your children and their children and everyone else.

Humans will always adapt. The fact that we are still here is the proof

[island911]

Originally Posted by jyl

This works if you are indifferent to your own existence and that of your children and their children and everyone else.

what he said is not indifference. ..it's acceptance. Sure, you can delude yourself into thinking that 'man' can control such things ...stop change.