Sun Responsible for Global Warming
As Reported on NewsMax

Two new reports cast doubt on the manmade global warming theory and
instead point to another cause for the recent warming of Earth to
changes in the sun.

One report from National Geographic News asserts, "Simultaneous
warming on Earth and Mars suggests that our planet’s recent climate
changes have a natural and not a human-induced cause, according to one
scientist’s controversial theory.

Data from NASA’s Mars Global Surveyor and Odyssey mission in 2005
disclosed that the carbon dioxide "ice caps near Mars’ south pole had
been shrinking for three consecutive summers.

Habibullo Abdussamatov, head of the Pulkovo Astronomical Observatory
in Russia, says the shrinking provides evidence that the current
warming on Earth is being caused by changes in the sun, according to
the National Geographic article.

"The long-term increase in solar irradiance is heating both Earth
and Mars, he said. "Manmade greenhouse warming has made a small
contribution to the warming seen on Earth in recent years but it
cannot compete with the increase in solar irradiance.

The other report offers a mechanism behind the changes in the sun
variations in its magnetic field.

Compiled by scientists at the Danish National Space Center, it
maintains that the Earth’s climate is strongly influenced by cosmic
rays from exploded stars.

The cosmic rays help make ordinary clouds, and high levels of rays and
cloudiness cool the planet, while lower levels of radiation lead to
milder temperatures, according to the Danish report, which is cited by
Marc Morano, communications director for the U.S. Senate Committee on
Environment & Public Works, on the committee’s Web site.

"Cosmic ray intensities and therefore cloudiness keep changing because
the sun’s magnetic field varies in its ability to repel cosmic rays
coming from the galaxy before they reach the Earth, the Danish report
by Henrik Svensmark, head of the Space Center, explains.

Whenever the sun’s magnetic field was weak, cosmic ray intensities
were high and the climate cooled, most recently in the little ice age
that climaxed 300 years ago.

Several scientists cited in the report believe that changes in the
Earth’s climate are linked to "the journey of the sun and the Earth
through the Milky Way Galaxy. They blame the icehouse episodes on
encounters with bright spiral arms, where cosmic rays are most
intense.

Steve wrote:
Sun Responsible for Global Warming
As Reported on NewsMax
Several scientists cited in the report believe that changes in the
Earth’s climate are linked to "the journey of the sun and the Earth
through the Milky Way Galaxy. They blame the icehouse episodes on
encounters with bright spiral arms, where cosmic rays are most
intense.

bull****. As a retired rocket scientist, I know that the problem
resides in the blogosphere.
gak,
jo4hn

jo4hn wrote:

Steve wrote:

Sun Responsible for Global Warming
As Reported on NewsMax Several scientists cited in the report believe
that changes in the Earth’s climate are linked to "the journey of the sun and the Earth
through the Milky Way Galaxy.


As a retired rocket scientist, I know that the problem
resides in the blogosphere.

You're all wrong. Global warming is caused by all the hot air Al Gore
emits.

Steve wrote:
Sun Responsible for Global Warming
As Reported on NewsMax

Two new reports cast doubt on the manmade global warming theory and
instead point to another cause for the recent warming of Earth to
changes in the sun.

One report from National Geographic News asserts, "Simultaneous
warming on Earth and Mars suggests that our planet’s recent climate
changes have a natural and not a human-induced cause, according to one
scientist’s controversial theory.

Data from NASA’s Mars Global Surveyor and Odyssey mission in 2005
disclosed that the carbon dioxide "ice caps near Mars’ south pole had
been shrinking for three consecutive summers.

Habibullo Abdussamatov, head of the Pulkovo Astronomical Observatory
in Russia, says the shrinking provides evidence that the current
warming on Earth is being caused by changes in the sun, according to
the National Geographic article.

"The long-term increase in solar irradiance is heating both Earth
and Mars, he said. "Manmade greenhouse warming has made a small
contribution to the warming seen on Earth in recent years but it
cannot compete with the increase in solar irradiance.

The other report offers a mechanism behind the changes in the sun
variations in its magnetic field.

Compiled by scientists at the Danish National Space Center, it
maintains that the Earth’s climate is strongly influenced by cosmic
rays from exploded stars.

The cosmic rays help make ordinary clouds, and high levels of rays and
cloudiness cool the planet, while lower levels of radiation lead to
milder temperatures, according to the Danish report, which is cited by
Marc Morano, communications director for the U.S. Senate Committee on
Environment & Public Works, on the committee’s Web site.

"Cosmic ray intensities and therefore cloudiness keep changing because
the sun’s magnetic field varies in its ability to repel cosmic rays
coming from the galaxy before they reach the Earth, the Danish report
by Henrik Svensmark, head of the Space Center, explains.

Whenever the sun’s magnetic field was weak, cosmic ray intensities
were high and the climate cooled, most recently in the little ice age
that climaxed 300 years ago.

Several scientists cited in the report believe that changes in the
Earth’s climate are linked to "the journey of the sun and the Earth
through the Milky Way Galaxy. They blame the icehouse episodes on
encounters with bright spiral arms, where cosmic rays are most
intense.

"... according to one scientist’s controversial theory."
One out of how many?

On Mar 5, 1:13 pm, Bob Schmall wrote:
Steve wrote:
Sun Responsible for Global Warming
As Reported on NewsMax

Two new reports cast doubt on the manmade global warming theory and
instead point to another cause for the recent warming of Earth to
changes in the sun.

One report from National Geographic News asserts, "Simultaneous
warming on Earth and Mars suggests that our planet's recent climate
changes have a natural and not a human-induced cause, according to one
scientist's controversial theory.

Data from NASA's Mars Global Surveyor and Odyssey mission in 2005
disclosed that the carbon dioxide "ice caps near Mars' south pole had
been shrinking for three consecutive summers.

Habibullo Abdussamatov, head of the Pulkovo Astronomical Observatory
in Russia, says the shrinking provides evidence that the current
warming on Earth is being caused by changes in the sun, according to
the National Geographic article.

"The long-term increase in solar irradiance is heating both Earth
and Mars, he said. "Manmade greenhouse warming has made a small
contribution to the warming seen on Earth in recent years but it
cannot compete with the increase in solar irradiance.

The other report offers a mechanism behind the changes in the sun
variations in its magnetic field.

Compiled by scientists at the Danish National Space Center, it
maintains that the Earth's climate is strongly influenced by cosmic
rays from exploded stars.

The cosmic rays help make ordinary clouds, and high levels of rays and
cloudiness cool the planet, while lower levels of radiation lead to
milder temperatures, according to the Danish report, which is cited by
Marc Morano, communications director for the U.S. Senate Committee on
Environment & Public Works, on the committee's Web site.

"Cosmic ray intensities and therefore cloudiness keep changing because
the sun's magnetic field varies in its ability to repel cosmic rays
coming from the galaxy before they reach the Earth, the Danish report
by Henrik Svensmark, head of the Space Center, explains.

Whenever the sun's magnetic field was weak, cosmic ray intensities
were high and the climate cooled, most recently in the little ice age
that climaxed 300 years ago.

Several scientists cited in the report believe that changes in the
Earth's climate are linked to "the journey of the sun and the Earth
through the Milky Way Galaxy. They blame the icehouse episodes on
encounters with bright spiral arms, where cosmic rays are most
intense.

"... according to one scientist's controversial theory."
One out of how many?

Please continue your thought. One scientist cannot be right
because....

wrote:

"... according to one scientist's controversial theory."
One out of how many?

Please continue your thought. One scientist cannot be right
because....



Because ... in Global Warming Orthodoxy, scientists find out the truth
of things by voting on them. It is consensus, not data, that drives
this bunch.

On Mar 5, 5:15 pm, Tim Daneliuk wrote:
wrote:
"... according to one scientist's controversial theory."
One out of how many?

Please continue your thought. One scientist cannot be right
because....

Because ... in Global Warming Orthodoxy, scientists find out the truth
of things by voting on them. It is consensus, not data, that drives
this bunch.

Yet when asked, you can produce no evidence to support that
absurd claim.

Now you will probably reply, saying you have already provided
that evidence, but won't tell us what it is or where to find it.

Or you'll just rant.

--

FF

Tim Daneliuk wrote:
wrote:

"... according to one scientist's controversial theory."
One out of how many?
Please continue your thought. One scientist cannot be right
because....



Because ... in Global Warming Orthodoxy, scientists find out the truth
of things by voting on them. It is consensus, not data, that drives
this bunch.

Pure bull****. You have absolutely no proof for that ridiculous statement.
Scientists agree because the evidence leads them to a conclusion. that's
why they are scientists and not politicians. Case in point: continental
drift. Forty years ago it was not understood and most scientists in the
earth sciences disagreed with it. Now we have overwhelming evidence and
there is a concensus.

In article , Bob Schmall wrote:
Tim Daneliuk wrote:
wrote:

"... according to one scientist's controversial theory."
One out of how many?
Please continue your thought. One scientist cannot be right
because....



Because ... in Global Warming Orthodoxy, scientists find out the truth
of things by voting on them. It is consensus, not data, that drives
this bunch.

Pure bull****. You have absolutely no proof for that ridiculous statement.
Scientists agree because the evidence leads them to a conclusion. that's
why they are scientists and not politicians. Case in point: continental
drift. Forty years ago it was not understood and most scientists in the
earth sciences disagreed with it. Now we have overwhelming evidence and
there is a concensus.

Yes, but the consensus on plate tectonics is the direct result of the
overwhelming evidence. In global warming, consensus is used as a *substitute*
for, and mistaken by many *as*, the overwhelming evidence.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

Bob Schmall wrote:
Tim Daneliuk wrote:
wrote:

"... according to one scientist's controversial theory."
One out of how many?
Please continue your thought. One scientist cannot be right
because....



Because ... in Global Warming Orthodoxy, scientists find out the truth
of things by voting on them. It is consensus, not data, that drives
this bunch.

Pure bull****. You have absolutely no proof for that ridiculous statement.
Scientists agree because the evidence leads them to a conclusion. that's
why they are scientists and not politicians. Case in point: continental
drift. Forty years ago it was not understood and most scientists in the
earth sciences disagreed with it. Now we have overwhelming evidence and
there is a concensus.

Sigh. My, my, how sensitive we are when mere mortals question dare to question
the High Priests. For the record, I was not referring to *scientists*. I was
referring to the popular expositors like Gore who take science - incomplete
science in this case - and imbue it with breathtaking certainty by means
of the "consensus" argument. I do not now, nor have I ever believed that
scientists use voting in the practice of their profession. You and Freddy
need to lighten up...

wrote:
On Mar 5, 1:13 pm, Bob Schmall wrote:
Steve wrote:
Sun Responsible for Global Warming
As Reported on NewsMax
Two new reports cast doubt on the manmade global warming theory and
instead point to another cause for the recent warming of Earth to
changes in the sun.
One report from National Geographic News asserts, "Simultaneous
warming on Earth and Mars suggests that our planet's recent climate
changes have a natural and not a human-induced cause, according to one
scientist's controversial theory.
Data from NASA's Mars Global Surveyor and Odyssey mission in 2005
disclosed that the carbon dioxide "ice caps near Mars' south pole had
been shrinking for three consecutive summers.
Habibullo Abdussamatov, head of the Pulkovo Astronomical Observatory
in Russia, says the shrinking provides evidence that the current
warming on Earth is being caused by changes in the sun, according to
the National Geographic article.
"The long-term increase in solar irradiance is heating both Earth
and Mars, he said. "Manmade greenhouse warming has made a small
contribution to the warming seen on Earth in recent years but it
cannot compete with the increase in solar irradiance.
The other report offers a mechanism behind the changes in the sun
variations in its magnetic field.
Compiled by scientists at the Danish National Space Center, it
maintains that the Earth's climate is strongly influenced by cosmic
rays from exploded stars.
The cosmic rays help make ordinary clouds, and high levels of rays and
cloudiness cool the planet, while lower levels of radiation lead to
milder temperatures, according to the Danish report, which is cited by
Marc Morano, communications director for the U.S. Senate Committee on
Environment & Public Works, on the committee's Web site.
"Cosmic ray intensities and therefore cloudiness keep changing because
the sun's magnetic field varies in its ability to repel cosmic rays
coming from the galaxy before they reach the Earth, the Danish report
by Henrik Svensmark, head of the Space Center, explains.
Whenever the sun's magnetic field was weak, cosmic ray intensities
were high and the climate cooled, most recently in the little ice age
that climaxed 300 years ago.
Several scientists cited in the report believe that changes in the
Earth's climate are linked to "the journey of the sun and the Earth
through the Milky Way Galaxy. They blame the icehouse episodes on
encounters with bright spiral arms, where cosmic rays are most
intense.
"... according to one scientist's controversial theory."
One out of how many?

Please continue your thought. One scientist cannot be right
because....

thousands of his peers are right. Does it make sense to agree with one
scientist just because he fits comfortably into our personal political
ideology?
In fact, this morning's news reported that China's current explosive
growth may soon make it the world's leader in CO2 emissions. Does this
mean that we can now blame the Commies?
Yes, there may be a valid case for non-human causation, but that does
not create a dichotomy--either one or the other. Maybe there is more
than one cause for global warming and human causation is understood much
better than non-human, that's all I'm saying.
Let's get real and admit our part in the whole thing; the enormous
weight of scientific evidence points to human beings as one cause of
global warming. All we can control is ourselves, all we can correct is
what we've caused.

Bob

In article , Bob Schmall wrote:
wrote:
Please continue your thought. One scientist cannot be right
because....

thousands of his peers are right. Does it make sense to agree with one
scientist just because he fits comfortably into our personal political
ideology?

No more sense than supposing that scientific truth can be decided by majority
vote.

In fact, this morning's news reported that China's current explosive
growth may soon make it the world's leader in CO2 emissions. Does this
mean that we can now blame the Commies?

Well, yes. Obviously.

Yes, there may be a valid case for non-human causation, but that does
not create a dichotomy--either one or the other. Maybe there is more
than one cause for global warming

Probably so.

and human causation is understood much
better than non-human, that's all I'm saying.

Probably not.

Let's get real and admit our part in the whole thing; the enormous
weight of scientific evidence points to human beings as one cause of
global warming. All we can control is ourselves, all we can correct is
what we've caused.

One cause, perhaps... but not the only cause, nor even necessarily a
significant cause. One major volcanic eruption puts more stuff in the
atmosphere in one day than we humans can put there in ten years.


--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

Doug Miller wrote:

In article , Bob Schmall wrote:


Let's get real and admit our part in the whole thing; the enormous
weight of scientific evidence points to human beings as one cause of
global warming. All we can control is ourselves, all we can correct is
what we've caused.


One cause, perhaps... but not the only cause, nor even necessarily a
significant cause. One major volcanic eruption puts more stuff in the
atmosphere in one day than we humans can put there in ten years.


I'd like someone to answer me this. If CO2 emissions from human
technoligical activity is a cause of global warming, and if humans were
to, not merely reduce but complete eliminate all CO2 emissions from
technological activity, what would be the net global effect on humanity?

On Mar 6, 9:53 am, (Doug Miller) wrote:

..

One cause, perhaps... but not the only cause, nor even necessarily a
significant cause. One major volcanic eruption puts more stuff in the
atmosphere in one day than we humans can put there in ten years.


Cite?

Preferably one that breaks the numbers down according to
type of 'stuff'.

--

FF

On Mar 6, 9:53 am, (Doug Miller) wrote:

...

and human causation is understood much
better than non-human, that's all I'm saying.

Probably not.


How do you figure that?

Don't you think that we have a pretty good handle on how much
fossil fuel is produced worldwide, and nearly as good a handle
on how much cement is produced?

Where do the uncertainties in human production of CO2 lie?

As far as the natural world is concerned, we can be a lot
less confident that nature doesn't have something hidden
from us. Consider the recent discoveries of a an undersea
CO2 lake, and arctic methane clathrates.

--

FF

On Mar 5, 5:04 pm, wrote:
On Mar 5, 1:13 pm, Bob Schmall wrote:



Steve wrote:
Sun Responsible for Global Warming
As Reported on NewsMax

Two new reports cast doubt on the manmade global warming theory and
instead point to another cause for the recent warming of Earth to
changes in the sun.

One report from National Geographic News asserts, "Simultaneous
warming on Earth and Mars suggests that our planet's recent climate
changes have a natural and not a human-induced cause, according to one
scientist's controversial theory.

Data from NASA's Mars Global Surveyor and Odyssey mission in 2005
disclosed that the carbon dioxide "ice caps near Mars' south pole had
been shrinking for three consecutive summers.

Habibullo Abdussamatov, head of the Pulkovo Astronomical Observatory
in Russia, says the shrinking provides evidence that the current
warming on Earth is being caused by changes in the sun, according to
the National Geographic article.

"The long-term increase in solar irradiance is heating both Earth
and Mars, he said. "Manmade greenhouse warming has made a small
contribution to the warming seen on Earth in recent years but it
cannot compete with the increase in solar irradiance.

The other report offers a mechanism behind the changes in the sun
variations in its magnetic field.

Compiled by scientists at the Danish National Space Center, it
maintains that the Earth's climate is strongly influenced by cosmic
rays from exploded stars.

The cosmic rays help make ordinary clouds, and high levels of rays and
cloudiness cool the planet, while lower levels of radiation lead to
milder temperatures, according to the Danish report, which is cited by
Marc Morano, communications director for the U.S. Senate Committee on
Environment & Public Works, on the committee's Web site.

"Cosmic ray intensities and therefore cloudiness keep changing because
the sun's magnetic field varies in its ability to repel cosmic rays
coming from the galaxy before they reach the Earth, the Danish report
by Henrik Svensmark, head of the Space Center, explains.

Whenever the sun's magnetic field was weak, cosmic ray intensities
were high and the climate cooled, most recently in the little ice age
that climaxed 300 years ago.

Several scientists cited in the report believe that changes in the
Earth's climate are linked to "the journey of the sun and the Earth
through the Milky Way Galaxy. They blame the icehouse episodes on
encounters with bright spiral arms, where cosmic rays are most
intense.

"... according to one scientist's controversial theory."
One out of how many?

Please continue your thought. One scientist cannot be right
because....

One scientist *can* be right but if that scientist's opinion is
anathema to the general consensus of the related field - in this case
climatology - then it would probably not be a good idea to formulate
public policy around the lone figure.

For the record: I don't think climatologists have an adequate model
around which to construct policy. Global warming - although *very*
popular in this group - still requires a great deal of work before we
can adequately assess the situation. Are we dealing with a minor
annoyance or a catastrophe? I'll agree to higher costs in order to
avoid the latter. The former? Not so much.

On Mar 5, 1:37 pm, Steve wrote:
Sun Responsible for Global Warming
As Reported on NewsMax

You missplet "misreported".


Two new reports cast doubt on the manmade global warming theory and
instead point to another cause for the recent warming of Earth to
changes in the sun.

One report from National Geographic News asserts, "Simultaneous
warming on Earth and Mars suggests that our planet's recent climate
changes have a natural and not a human-induced cause, according to one
scientist's controversial theory.

Data from NASA's Mars Global Surveyor and Odyssey mission in 2005
disclosed that the carbon dioxide "ice caps near Mars' south pole had
been shrinking for three consecutive summers.

And during the same period of time, solar irradiance has been
decreasing:

http://www.sec.noaa.gov/SolarCycle/
http://www.pmodwrc.ch/pmod.php?topic.../SolarConstant

JPL and NASA have their own web pages on the subject:

http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/mgs/newsroom/20050920a.html
http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/mgs/msss/ca...rel/index.html

See also:

http://www.terradaily.com/reports/Ch...rming_999.html

--

FF

On Mar 5, 1:37 pm, Steve wrote:
[snipperectofied]

BUNK!

ORRRRRR, as they say in Quebec-- BUNQUE!

*I* did work on the Iriqois[sic] engine heat exchanger... yea, yea.. I
know I'm an EE, it was part of my easy credits--- fluid dynamics.

The AVRO Arrow was better than anything my friends in the US had in
their day.... it was killed by Diefenbaker because it ruffled too many
feathers with the WE ARE THE BEST engineers in the US.

Assholes.

r

Mon, Mar 5, 2007, 11:37am (EST-2) (Steve) who doth
burble a batch of BS that was snipped.

You cold have at least had the courtesy to label this off-topic.
And this is hardly the proper newsgroup, don'tcha think?

I figure the global warming is cause by all thethane generated
from all the bull **** posts about global warming. Ya little troll.




JOAT
It was too early in the morning for it to be early in the morning. That
was the only thing that he currently knew for sure.
- Clodpool

On Mar 5, 4:32 pm, (J T) wrote:
Mon, Mar 5, 2007, 11:37am (EST-2) (Steve) who doth
burble a batch of BS that was snipped.

You cold have at least had the courtesy to label this off-topic.
And this is hardly the proper newsgroup, don'tcha think?

I figure the global warming is cause by all thethane generated
from all the bull **** posts about global warming. Ya little troll.


Well, did you really think that an article with the subject:
"The REAL Cause of Glpbal Warming"
was going to be on topic?

--

FF

GEORGE W BUSH IS THE SOURCE OF ALL AMERICAS TROUBLES AND GLOBAL WARMING!!!
THIS NEEDED TO POSTEDE ON A WOOD WORKING GROUP!!!

In article ,
says...
GEORGE W BUSH IS THE SOURCE OF ALL AMERICAS TROUBLES AND GLOBAL WARMING!!!
THIS NEEDED TO POSTEDE ON A WOOD WORKING GROUP!!!

In much the same way that the AIDS epidemic in Africa is a direct
result of Ron & Nancy Reagans' misguided belief that abstinence can
prevent the spread of STDs.

What is this Glpbal thing you mention? ;~)



Anyway, for those that believe "man" is responsible for Global warming,
"Man" has influenced Mars with probes, rovers, and other stuff that has
crash landed there. Therefore man is causing global warming on Mars also.

On Mar 5, 1:37 pm, Steve wrote:
Sun Responsible for Global Warming
As Reported on NewsMax

Two new reports cast doubt on the manmade global warming theory and
instead point to another cause for the recent warming of Earth to
changes in the sun.

One report from National Geographic News asserts, "Simultaneous
warming on Earth and Mars suggests that our planet's recent climate
changes have a natural and not a human-induced cause, according to one
scientist's controversial theory.

Data from NASA's Mars Global Surveyor and Odyssey mission in 2005
disclosed that the carbon dioxide "ice caps near Mars' south pole had
been shrinking for three consecutive summers.

Habibullo Abdussamatov, head of the Pulkovo Astronomical Observatory
in Russia, says the shrinking provides evidence that the current
warming on Earth is being caused by changes in the sun, according to
the National Geographic article.

"The long-term increase in solar irradiance is heating both Earth
and Mars, he said. "Manmade greenhouse warming has made a small
contribution to the warming seen on Earth in recent years but it
cannot compete with the increase in solar irradiance.

The other report offers a mechanism behind the changes in the sun
variations in its magnetic field.

Compiled by scientists at the Danish National Space Center, it
maintains that the Earth's climate is strongly influenced by cosmic
rays from exploded stars.

The cosmic rays help make ordinary clouds, and high levels of rays and
cloudiness cool the planet, while lower levels of radiation lead to
milder temperatures, according to the Danish report, which is cited by
Marc Morano, communications director for the U.S. Senate Committee on
Environment & Public Works, on the committee's Web site.

"Cosmic ray intensities and therefore cloudiness keep changing because
the sun's magnetic field varies in its ability to repel cosmic rays
coming from the galaxy before they reach the Earth, the Danish report
by Henrik Svensmark, head of the Space Center, explains.

Whenever the sun's magnetic field was weak, cosmic ray intensities
were high and the climate cooled, most recently in the little ice age
that climaxed 300 years ago.

Several scientists cited in the report believe that changes in the
Earth's climate are linked to "the journey of the sun and the Earth
through the Milky Way Galaxy. They blame the icehouse episodes on
encounters with bright spiral arms, where cosmic rays are most
intense.

NOAA is wonderful. It seems every month NOAA puts out a report saying
the latest month is one of the warmest on record. Every month.

http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2007/s2838.htm

MARCH TEMPERATURES SECOND WARMEST ON RECORD FOR U.S.;
GLOBAL MARCH TEMPERATURE FIFTH WARMEST ON RECORD

April 16, 2007 - March 2007 was more than five degrees Fahrenheit
warmer than average throughout the contiguous U.S., making it the
second warmest March on record, according to scientists at the NOAA
National Climatic Data Center in Asheville, N.C. Precipitation was
above average in much of the center of the nation, while the Southeast
and much of the West were drier than average. The global average March
temperature was fifth warmest on record. (Click NOAA image for larger
view of March 2007 statewide temperature rankings. Please credit
"NOAA.")

U.S. Temperature Highlights
For the contiguous U.S., last month's average temperature of 48.1
degrees F made it the second warmest March on record (based on
preliminary data). It was 5.6 degrees F (3.1 degrees C) warmer than
the 20th century mean of 42.5 degrees F (5.8 degrees C). Only March
1910 was warmer in the 113-year national record.

Statewide temperatures were much warmer than average from parts of the
Midwest and Deep South to the Northern Plains and West Coast. Most
Northeast states and Florida were near average, while no contiguous
U.S. state was cooler than average for the month. The month tied for
the warmest on record for Oklahoma.

More than 2,500 daily record-high temperatures were set from the East
to the West Coast during the month. On March 13 alone, more than 250
daily high temperature records were set. The earliest high of 90
degrees F (32 degrees C) occurred in Las Vegas that day. For March,
more than 200 daily record highs of 90 degrees F or greater were
registered in California, Arizona, Texas, Oklahoma and areas of the
Southeast.

The warmer-than-average March temperatures helped reduce residential
energy needs for the nation. Using the Residential Energy Demand
Temperature Index (REDTI-an index developed at NOAA to relate energy
usage to climate), the nation's residential energy demand was
approximately 11 percent lower than what would have occurred under
average climate conditions for the month.

Alaska had its third coldest March on record, with a temperature 12.5
degrees F (6.9 degrees C) cooler than average. Also, 40 new daily
record-low temperatures were tied, or broken, during March throughout
the state.

U.S. Precipitation Highlights
Precipitation was above average from parts of the Northeast to the
upper Midwest and from the northern Plains to Texas and New Mexico.
Much needed rain helped end drought in large parts of Texas. For
Texas, it was the wettest March on record. (Click NOAA image for
larger view of March 2007 statewide precipitation rankings. Please
credit "NOAA.")

Across the Deep South and Southeast, drier-than-average conditions
prevailed for a second straight month, worsening drought conditions.
Six states were much drier than average from Louisiana and Arkansas to
Florida. It was the second driest March on record for Mississippi and
the third driest for Alabama.

At the end of March, severe drought stretched from southeastern
Mississippi to northwest Georgia and Tennessee and also affected
southern Florida.

The combination of unusual warmth and below-average snowfall during
much of the month led to a continued deterioration of mountain
snowpack conditions in California, Arizona, Nevada and Utah.

At the end of March, mountain snowpack was less than 50 percent of
average in parts of every state in the West and less than 25 percent
of average in several states.

In Los Angeles, the lack of rainfall led to the driest water-year to
date for the city since records began in 1877. From July 1, 2006,
through the end of March, downtown Los Angeles had received only 2.47
inches of rain, almost one foot below the normal amount of rainfall
for the period.

In the West, where mountain snowpack is relied upon to supply water
needs throughout the region, below-average rain and snowfall have
become increasingly common. In only two of the past nine years has
snowpack on April 1 been at or above the long-term average in at least
half the region.

Near the end of March, approximately 33 percent of the contiguous U.S.
was in moderate to exceptional drought, according to the federal U.S.
Drought Monitor. The most severe conditions were in northern Alabama,
southern California, western Arizona, parts of the western High Plains
and extreme northern Minnesota.

Global Highlights
The combined global land and ocean surface temperature for March was
the fifth warmest on record (1.10 degrees F/0.61 degrees C above the
20th century mean). For the January-March year-to-date period, the
global surface temperature was second warmest on record. This was
slightly cooler than the same three-month period in 2002. The El Niño
episode that began in September 2006 rapidly weakened in February and
neutral conditions were present in March.

Separately, the global March land-surface temperature was the fourth
warmest on record, while the ocean-surface temperature tied for sixth
warmest in the 128-year period of record, approximately 0.2 degrees F
(0.1 degrees C) cooler than the record established during the very
strong El Niño episode of 1997-1998.

During the past century, global surface temperatures have increased at
a rate near 0.11 degrees F (0.06 degrees C) per decade, but the rate
of increase has been three times larger since 1976, or 0.32 degrees F
(0.18 degrees C) per decade, with some of the largest temperature
increases occurring in the high latitudes of the Northern Hemisphere.

NOAA, an agency of the U.S. Commerce Department, is celebrating 200
years of science and service to the nation. From the establishment of
the Survey of the Coast in 1807 by Thomas Jefferson to the formation
of the Weather Bureau and the Commission of Fish and Fisheries in the
1870s, much of America's scientific heritage is rooted in NOAA. NOAA
is dedicated to enhancing economic security and national safety
through the prediction and research of weather and climate-related
events and information service delivery for transportation, and by
providing environmental stewardship of the nation's coastal and marine
resources. Through the emerging Global Earth Observation System of
Systems (GEOSS), NOAA is working with its federal partners, more than
60 countries and the European Commission to develop a global
monitoring network that is as integrated as the planet it observes,
predicts and protects.

Relevant Web Sites
Climate of 2007: March in Historical Perspective

NOAA Drought Information Center

The real cause of so-called global warming is that their is too much bull
**** being spewed about it.