Yeah, but don’t worry about global warming… look, over there! Liquids on a plane!
U.S. Temperature Highlights
The average July 2006 temperature for the contiguous United States (based on preliminary data) was 77.2 degrees F (25.1 C). More than 90 records for the highest night-time temperatures for July were broken. The average January – July 2006 temperature was 55.3 degrees F (12.9 C), which beat the previous record set in 1934.
The Residential Energy Demand Temperature Index (REDTI), which provides information related to climate sensitive residential energy demand, ranked as the fourth highest July index in the 112-year record. Using this index, NOAA scientists determined that the nation’s residential energy demand was approximately 22 percent higher than that which would have occurred under average climate conditions for the month.
The average July temperature (based on the statistical mean from 1901 – 2000) is 74.3 degrees F. The July 1936 record temperature was 77.5 degrees F. The July 1934 average temperature (third highest on record) was 77.1 degrees F. The previous January – July cumulative record temperature was 54.8 degrees F (set in 1934).
NOAA scientists add that no single episode of extreme heat can be blamed exclusively on human-induced global warming, but instead heat waves will become more likely and progressively more intense over the course of decades.
U.S. Precipitation Highlights
The average precipitation for July 2006 across the continental United States was 0.18 inch (4.6 mm) below the 20th century average, contributing to a January-July period that was 22nd driest on record.
In July, 51 percent of the United States, mostly in the Plains states and Southeast, was in moderate-to-extreme drought (based on the Palmer Drought Index), an increase of five percent from June. This percentage ranks with the biggest droughts of the last 50 years. The most extensive drought occurred in July 1934 when 80 percent of the country was affected by moderate-to-extreme drought. In addition, 28 percent of the country, mainly in the Plains states, was in severe-to-extreme drought in July, up from 27 percent in June.
3 Responses
By your comment, “Look, over there! Liquids on a plane!”, I take it that you you think the government is purposely misleading the American people in order to distract us from what’s really important, which is global warming.
But I wonder, are you under the impression that there’s really no threat from terrorists on commerical aircraft? Do you believe that there is zero probability that terrorists are actively trying to bring down these aircraft with the use of liquid explosives?
Is it all a smokescreen put forth by George Bush?
Just wondering.
I think a lot of issues are being ignored by this administration. Including the actual war on terror, which can only be “won” by changing the conditions that lead these people to want to commit such actions. And, considering the threat of liquid explosives has been known about since 1995, and nothing was done about it previously, yes, it’s a political distraction.
Considering how much we let these kind of threats disrupt our transportation system and our lives, the terrorists are already winning, just from the threat of a possible attack. They don’t even have to actually do anything. But the over-reaction to a possible attack provides no real secuity. It is just a smokescreen, while airplane cargo remains unchecked, and there are no real screenings that can actually detect liquid explosives. Therefore, this is just a sham.
Interesting. What do you propose as a solution?