Coldest May on record for Darwin AU.

[lostinblue 1,989]

Coldest May on record for Darwin Ellen Wescott-Dawson

May 31, 2011

Darwin and other parts of Northern Australia have just had their coldest May on record.

According to weatherzone.com.au, Darwin's average temperatures were more than two degrees colder than average by night and more than a degree colder than average by day, with overnight minimum's averaging 19.9 degrees, and daytime maximums just under 31 degrees.

It turned out to be the coldest May on record, equal with May 1960, averaging just 25.3 degrees, almost two degrees colder than the long-term norm.

"The cold has affected every district in the Northern Territory”, Weatherzone meteorologist Brett Dutschke told The Age.

“This is due to persistent south-easterly winds which have been very dry, a result of three major cold fronts across south-eastern Australia in the last three weeks," Mr Dutschke said.

Katherine also had its coldest May in more than 20 years, with average overnight minimums at just 14 degrees, about two-and-a-half degrees colder than the long-term average.

Katherine's daytime maximums averaged just under 30 degrees, more than two degrees colder than the long-term average.

Alyangula on Groote Eylandt, Wollogorang and Tennant Creek all had record cold May nights. Alice Springs also had a cold May, with combined daytime and overnight temperatures the lowest in 11 years.

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/national/coldest-may-on-record-for-darwin-20110531-1fe1x.html#ixzz1TiSJFktb

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

More evidence that Global Warming was fixed by Al Gore. Give him another Nobel Prize and call it done.

[luckytxn 2,264]

Global Warming can be a beotch.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

The article doesn't mention global warming.

[Ste 6]

The article doesn't mention global warming.

True, but global warming can actually cause colder temperatures in certain regions. It's the reason why people today generally refer to it as climate change.

http://www.ehow.com/info_8594701_global-jet-stream-during-winter.html

The Jet Stream Function

The jet stream blows around the Earth, moving from the west to the east. If you were to sit the world on the South Pole, this stream would run from Japan to the U.S. in a curvy fashion for part of its path. The effect of the jet stream works as a barrier fence, keeping the Arctic cold air contained closer to the North Pole.

Effect of Global Warming

Global warming changes the temperature of the planet, including the polar caps. One result of this change has caused ice shelves to melt and become part of the ocean, adding to the water mass. Another effect warms what should be much colder arctic air. That in turn shakes up the jet stream, allowing colder air to travel south instead of staying closer to the North Pole.

Loss of a Strong Jet Stream

During the winter, when the planet tilts slightly away from the sun and creates a colder climate in the northern hemisphere, the cold air pushes south, bringing what we know as winter. With a destabilized jet stream failing as an air mass fence, more cold air gets to places that should be warmer in winter. As a result, severe cold in places such as Florida and stronger winters in the mid-U.S. or Europe become more common.

May in Australia is getting close to Winter, since it's in the southern hemisphere. And the article mentions the north pole, but it applies to the south pole equally.

[Zero Sum 305]

Oh boy... denialism of geography too? Will Plate Tectonics be next?

[rsn 135]

Ah, now I understand. Evidence of "climate change" is whatever the "scientists" point to after the fact to justify their theories. And, if their predictions don't hold up, they can simply change their theories (and the name). This way, they are never wrong. And, of course, how dare the peons question these great infallible "scientists", for they are all pure as the driven snow. Oh, wait...

Edited August 6, 2011 by rsn

[Zero Sum 305]

Ah, now I understand. Evidence of "climate change" is whatever the "scientists" point to after the fact to justify their theories. And, if their predictions don't hold up, they can simply change their theories (and the name). This way, they are never wrong. And, of course, how dare the peons question these great infallible "scientists", for they are all pure as the driven snow. Oh, wait...

You understand that its winter in the Southern Hemisphere right?

For quite some time, the global warming debate has made conclusions that weather patterns would intensify in extremity. Its not the time to claim ignorance of these conclusions as something convenient to state based on what is observable or not at this point.

But as for your problem with revisionism in scientific philosophy... that is perhaps best left to a class in understanding how scientific theory is revised pending newer observations. It seems you make a case for the science itself being biased to a result from the beginning, which is far from scientific reality and mostly observable to people dead-set on being denialists from the beginning.

Edited August 8, 2011 by Zero Sum