Archive for Wednesday, January 14, 2009

Thermometers to get workout measuring swings in temperatures

Tuesday’s cold temperatures didn’t bother Kansas University students such as Meredith Bowhay, 20, a junior from Hoyt. Tuesday on campus, she walked past the KU Facilities Operations building, which was giving off steam as was Bowhay. Temperatures will bottom out on Thursday, but should be on the rise again by the time the weekend arrives.

Tuesday’s cold temperatures didn’t bother Kansas University students such as Meredith Bowhay, 20, a junior from Hoyt. Tuesday on campus, she walked past the KU Facilities Operations building, which was giving off steam as was Bowhay. Temperatures will bottom out on Thursday, but should be on the rise again by the time the weekend arrives.

January 14, 2009

Advertisement

If you thought it was cold Tuesday, just wait until Thursday.

“The daytime high on Thursday will be in the mid-teens, and that could be a stretch,” said Matt Elwell, 6News chief meteorologist. “That may be on the high side. It could be colder than that.”

A mass of Arctic air has stationed itself over northeastern Kansas, and the blustery winds today will drop the wind chill to between zero and 10 degrees.

The wind is not expected to blow as hard on Thursday, but it’s supposed to be brutally cold with a high near 18 and wind chill values as low as minus 11 degrees.

But the cold weather that has rudely welcomed Kansas University students back for Thursday classes will be on its way out by the weekend.

“That’s all relative. The daytime high Saturday will be about 38 degrees,” Elwell said.

Temperatures could reach the 40s by Sunday and Monday.

The temperature swing might seem dramatic during the miserable cold today or Thursday.

But Elwell said the weekend temperatures will be in the normal range for this time of year. It also could be worse because no significant precipitation is expected to fall in the area, which means roads and sidewalks likely won’t be slick or icy.

“Luckily for us, this is only three days,” Elwell said. “This isn’t something that’s going to sit here and linger for several days. We’ll see the temperatures bounce back closer to our average.”

Comments

KansasPerson 6 years, 5 months ago

Hey folks, it's just after 7 a.m. and I just got back from some early-morning errands. It was about 40 when I left the house and still around 38 or so when I got back half an hour later.If you have outside stuff to do, take my advice and get out there and do it this morning, if you can! I'm not trying to be Katie Horner here -- the sky isn't falling -- you're just going to be a lot more comfortable filling your car with gas or walking across the Dillons parking lot NOW than you will later today.Or... shudder.... tomorrow.

gr 6 years, 5 months ago

'We expect this from global warming''Nothing, absolutely nothing will indicate global warming is not happening.'

KansasPerson 6 years, 5 months ago

Global warming. GLOBAL.Not LOCAL.Sheesh. Here, have a science degree.

gr 6 years, 5 months ago

Local person, Read the news outside of Kansas.

trinity 6 years, 5 months ago

good, my thermometer really does need a workout, especially right after the holidays. it is beginning to look a bit flabby. i like it nice&fit, with its mercury rising! :)

Flap Doodle 6 years, 5 months ago

How warm is it in Al Gore's living room?

Chris Golledge 6 years, 5 months ago

gr (Anonymous) says…'We expect this from global warming''Nothing, absolutely nothing will indicate global warming is not happening.'Well yes, if the global temperature averages were to return to the range they were within for a few thousand years prior to man altering the chemical composition of the atmosphere, which began about 1850, and stay there for a few decades, that would indicate that anthropogenic climate change was all a big mistake. That hasn't happened yet.

Trobs 6 years, 5 months ago

So what you are saying Cg22 is that if global temps drop and stay down for decades, then AGW is wrong. But if temps drop for a few years and go back up, then it's right?Climate change does happen. I however am of the belief we can't do anything about it. I'm pretty sure if we screw up big enough, the planet can take care of itself.

mistygreen 6 years, 5 months ago

I agree this global warming is just a bunch of bull stanky. Ummm...lemme see, there was this period of time called the ice age and everything was frozen. But...on no...all the ice melted. Could it of been global warming??? I know, it was the methane gas from all the dinosour poo.

gr 6 years, 5 months ago

cg22, could you explain how man caused global warming right after the ice age?"and stay there for a few decades"Why do you think a few decades is enough to establish a trend, given earth's billions and billions of years?

Chris Golledge 6 years, 5 months ago

gr,What makes you think that there can be only one cause of climate change?Regarding: "Why do you think a few decades is enough to establish a trend, given earth's billions and billions of years?"Well, we are talking about a rapid rise in temperature over the last 100-150 years that is faster and greater than any other in thousands of years. So, within that scope, a few decades of countering trend would be enough to say that the 10-15 decade trend we are experiencing is not a long term effect as predicted by CO2 being a greenhouse gas.What makes you think CO2 is not a greenhouse gas?

mistygreen 6 years, 5 months ago

"Well, we are talking about a rapid rise in temperature over the last 100-150 years that is faster and greater than any other in thousands of years."To cg22165: Please explain the rapid rise in tempature you are talking about? What kind of standards were used? What constitutes rise/change in tempature 25%, 50% more? Thanks!

Trobs 6 years, 5 months ago

CG22 - Explain the Medieval warming period and the Little Ice Age prior to the warming started in the 1850s. That was not AGW. There was little CO2 producing industry at any of those times.

Chris Golledge 6 years, 5 months ago

mistygreen (Anonymous) says…“Well, we are talking about a rapid rise in temperature over the last 100-150 years that is faster and greater than any other in thousands of years.”To cg22165: Please explain the rapid rise in tempature you are talking about? What kind of standards were used? What constitutes rise/change in tempature 25%, 50% more?Thanks!Here is a picturehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Instrumental_Temperature_Record.pngor twohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Vostok-ice-core-petit.pngIn absolute temperature, Kelvin, the difference between now and a deep ice age is 8/~300 = ~2.7%.I think it is safe to say that some difference smaller than that would have an impact on mankind.The difference between the CO2 ppm now and before industry is about 30%Does that answer you question? Trobs (Anonymous) says…CG22 - Explain the Medieval warming period and the Little Ice Age prior to the warming started in the 1850s.Again, what makes you think that there is only one way to trigger or one cause of climate change?Others, again, what makes you think CO2 is not a greenhouse gas?

mistygreen 6 years, 5 months ago

CG22165: thanks for taking the time to reply, and I appreciate you opinion, but I respectfully disagree with you. I do believe that we should all be concientious of how we take care of our environment, but I am just not convinced about global warming. There have been to many instances of where major changes in the climate have occured prior to being influenced by man. Guess what...here we are debating global warming. Some how the earth survived though it all.

Chris Golledge 6 years, 5 months ago

Misty, Same. However, there is an association in the geologic record between mass extinction and climate change events, CO2 has a close relationship with climate, and humans (and most of the plants and animals we eat) did not exist the last time there this much CO2 in the atmosphere. So, just because the earth recovered from events in the past, and will again, does not mean that a change in climate will not be bad for our species.

Chris Golledge 6 years, 5 months ago

XD40,So, are you saying that the species that evolved under one climate will do just fine when only given a few generations to adapt to something else?

mistygreen 6 years, 5 months ago

Thanks XD40, I found that link interesting!

gr 6 years, 5 months ago

What makes you think that there can be only one cause of climate change?An excellent point, cg. A most excellent point!"what makes you think CO2 is not a greenhouse gas?"What makes you think water vapor is not a greenhouse gas that overwhelms any CO2?"In absolute temperature, Kelvin, the difference between now and a deep ice age is 8/~300 = ~2.7%.I think it is safe to say that some difference smaller than that would have an impact on mankind."Yes, having glaciers over Lawrence versus not having glaciers over Lawrence would indeed have an impact on mankind - at least Lawrence's mankind."The difference between the CO2 ppm now and before industry is about 30%Does that answer you question?"No.Especially when it really is 0.003%.In your thousand of years ago link, it looks to me that about 325 thousand years ago, both the temperature change and CO2 was higher than now. How do you see it?

Commenting has been disabled for this item.