Eastern cities warmest on record, I think not

[Seabee]

The topic of global warming has been very noticeable on DV. A little while ago after watching London Has Fallen I decided to check my Weather Channel app as I haven't checked the weather lately. It was reported in their news section that many cities up and down the East cost had the warmest Summer temperatures on record from June through August.

i find all this conjecture a bunch of BS again. It is common knowledge that these cities will tend to be warmer than the surrounding country side. New York City could have an average mean temperature of 79.5 degrees while just 20 miles outside the city in the country side there could be an average temperature of 78 degrees. The reason it is hotter in your cities, is due to a phenomenon effect called a heat island effect.  Because of the blacktop from the road and parking lots, plus glass buildings, the heat from the sun reflects back into the air and hangs over the city in something called a temperature inversion.

The reason the cities appear to be getting  hotter is because as the cities grow more blacktop is laid down as roads and more parking lots are are also laid out.Also, buildings with large roof areas are using new technology to reflect the heat as well. It stands to reason as our cities grow so does the  heat island effect. The weather service wants us to all believe tat the worst is coming. Why don,t they place their weather sensors in the country side outside these same cities and come up with an average. They might find that the average temperature is more near normal. 

To be fair, there is still the weather patterns that appear to be warmer that cause temperatures in these cities to be hotter. To the National Weather Service you need to do a complete job to find out what the average temperatures are around the country. Report the temps in the cities and outside just a few miles and we all might be surprised.

Dave AKA: Seabee

Edited September 6, 2016 by Seabee

[Shabibilicious]

I think your assessment has some real merit Seabee....at least it seems logical to me.  That said, I have over the years asked a particular question to deniers of global warming/climate change and nobody ever ventures a guess.  I thought maybe you might give it a whirl.  Perhaps the heat island effect has some relevance to this quandary.  Here goes:  Why did the founding fathers of some of the largest cities on this planet choose to build those cities in the smoggiest places?  

GO RV, then BV

[nstoolman1]

Were they smoggy when they built there or did they get smoggy after the industry and auto showed up?   

[Seabee]

Well, well, well, Shabibilicious.

i came up with the only logical answer possible about the location of the cities from 180 to 300 years ago. I'm sure that when New York City was first settled the settlers did not take into account what might be in store for it 200 or more years later. 

In most cases from what I remember from my history class in high school these cities were located in certain areas for the following reasons.

IN the case of NYC Boston, they had deep water harbors for the shipping and receiving of goods. Also, NYC had the Hudon River to ship goods inland. The land that NYC  Boston are located on is relitivly flat. Most settlers chose other locations for the same reasons. There was the fact that good growing land was not far away and close to the market of the small cities of that time. The one thing these settlers failed to consider was building on flood plains of near by rivers and the proximity to the coastal shores..

i'm sure that you must be smart enough to realize the same thing I wrote. The industrial revolution was in it infancy  back then. The industrialist caused their owne pollution which caused the modern day people to take note and realize that what took place not good for the planet. The technology was not there to reverse the effects of the so called pollution. They did not realize the damage at the time their revolution would cause. 

When you talk about the founding father's , I assume you are talking about the people that settled along the east coast during the 1700's. The fact is, is that 8 out the 10 most polluted cities in this country is in California. LA is the most polluted by virtue of the automobile. This had nothing to do with the settlers that settled there. I was stationed just north of LA  in Ventura County during the 1970's when the air pollution seemed to be at its worst. I can remember driving up into the Hollywood Hill and looking down on LA many times and the visibility was lousy. When you have hundreds of thousands of cars  with no pollution control devices clogging the freeways your going to get eye irritating smog. This has nothing to do with the people that settled in the LA Basin 150 years or more ago. What causes LA to become a polluted place is the mountains that surround the basin. When you have car s spewing their exhaust the particulates hang close to the Earths surface not being able to flow to the east over the mountains some of which reach up 10,000 feet. It is virtually impossible for low level smog to blow over the mountains to the east when there is no on shore wind off the Pacific.

When  I was stationed in Port Hueneme north of LA County, it was the just the opposite. The air was always clear even though the mountains surrounded the Oxnard Plain. There was No where's near as many cars driving the highways in the county next door.

Now, let's try to get to my real answer about this pollution thing and the cause. In my opinion pollution is an economic thing.Some might ask me "what the Hell do you mean by that?" Our modern countries.Are nothing but economic engines which put people to work, because they need a job to provide a living for their families. The average person is bombarded with ads everyday from manufacturers in which they pitch their products making us think we need to buy more and more. Then when a manufacture can not sell anymore they they take and change that product and push harder for the consumer to buy it. Before long we have a home full of junk we no longer need or want. 

The more junk a manufacturer pushes on us, the more they have to make to feed the demand of a growing population. Thy use up natural resources, like oil, iron ore and the like and most of all this can cause more air pollution. Look at the growing economy in China, they build almost all the products sold around the planet for consumers to use and throw away, more land fill problems. How many of you remember the God awful pollution that plagued the city Of Beijing before their Summer Olympics. 

If your looking for the real cause of smog and pollution around the planet you have look at the comsumtion of goods  and an ever growing population of people to consume these goods. How many of us remember when we were kids that we had virtually nothing compare to the youth these days. So again consumption of good is one culprit of pollution along with millions of cars running the planet. 

Let me point out one more thing. I live in upstate central New York which we know is in the Eastern United States. As it stands now the east is the least smoggiest place of the U.S. Where I live in Upstate New York, the Summers aren't that more different than when I was a kid. The weather this summer is warmer than other Summers but not attributed to global warming. The whole east coast has been under a high pressure system that is stationary and high up in the atmosphere. The pressure from the high pushes the warm air near the surfaces back to the ground causing it to be warmer than usual. This is a normal weather phenomenon that happens from time to time and they blame this on global warming. The jet stream is the only thing that can get the weather systems moving and in this case the jet stream is way up in Canada instead of a ribbon pushing weather across the U.S.

The above is the reason why the heavy rains hung around Louisiana just a few weeks back because there was nothing to push it along. This is another reason why tropical storms have stayed off shore of the East Coast the last few weeks.

So the founding fathers had no clues as to what would happen with smog and or pollution 200 years down the road. If they did they should have passed their knowledge on to others. 

Global warming as far as I am concerned is still all conjecture.

I hope this helps answer your question even though I am no expert. I just like studying the weather pattern.

Dave AKA:Seabee

[Shabibilicious]

8 hours ago, Seabee said:

Global warming as far as I am concerned is still all conjecture.

I hope this helps answer your question even though I am no expert. I just like studying the weather pattern.

Dave AKA:Seabee

I appreciate your well thought through response, Dave.  I agree with everything you stated.  Of course you knew my original question was a loaded one and yet you still had the courage to answer it, and again, I appreciate it.  My point to your original post was not so much to point out that global warming is an absolute, but more of a possibility.  If man has been negatively affecting the environment and air quality since the industrial revolution and the population has continued to grow, even with today's emission standards, it just seems logical to me that humans could indeed be affecting the earth's atmosphere by more than merely smog in less than perfect topographies.  As always, just my opinion.

GO RV, then BV