Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

UNH Scientist - Biological Spring Now 1 Week Out Of Synch With Equinox

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU
 
hatrack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-28-06 01:42 PM
Original message
UNH Scientist - Biological Spring Now 1 Week Out Of Synch With Equinox
The sun will still cross the equator on March 20th marking the vernal equinox and the official start of spring, but Mother Nature is increasingly getting a jumpstart on the celestial movements. Over the last 150 years, scientific measurements show that events signifying the beginning of spring have all shifted.

These events now happen about a week earlier on average in the northeast United States, according to a new report, Evidence of Early Spring, from the group Clean Air-Cool Planet (CA-CP), which today announced the new, first day for "natural spring," March 13. The group, along with University of New Hampshire climate scientist Cameron Wake, Tim Flannery, author of the book The Weather Makers, and professor David Wolfe of Cornell University, conducted a call-in press conference today to discuss the issue and announce spring's new "arrival." "All of the major indicators of climate here in the Northeast, from temperature and length of growing season, to lake ice-out and lilac bloom and apple blossom time, are showing that spring is at least a week earlier now than it was in1850," said Adam Markham, executive director at CA-CP. "

"Of course, the sun will still cross the equator on the 20th, marking the vernal equinox, but biological spring has changed due to global warming and that's threatening to put ecosystems badly out of synch," Markham said. Evidence of Early Spring follows a comprehensive report issued collaboratively in March 2005 by CA-CP and Wake entitled Indicators of the Climate Change in the Northeast, which looked at 11 different physical and biological markers of the changing climate in the region.

Indicators of the Climate Change in the Northeast noted that the average Northeast winter temperature has increased 4.4 degrees Fahrenheit from 1970 to 2000. During that same period, the growing season increased by 15 days and days with snow on the ground decreased by 16. For the coastal parts of the region, sea surface temperatures and levels have also risen.

EDIT

http://www.terradaily.com/reports/UNH_Scientist_Announce_New_Beginning_of_Natural_Spring.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Warpy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-28-06 01:46 PM
Response to Original message
1. I've certanly noticed it here in central NM
The rows of flowering trees on a local road used to burst into blossom the third week of March when I first moved here 10 years ago.

This year, it was March 10.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dogmudgeon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-28-06 03:26 PM
Response to Original message
2. Effects on the East Coast have been complex
The autumn begins and finishes later; this past one, by four weeks.

It stays warm later.

We've had an early cold jetstream for most of the past ten years, leaving us with several ice and snowstorms on or about December 5th.

There is usually a period right after Christmas where a warm Pacific jetstream dominates weather for as long as 6 weeks; it was especially strong this year.

The weather turns wintry late in the season, as it did again this year; snow in the first week of April has been fairly common, compared to long-term trends.

Then, in mid-April, the temperature soars. One year (2002?), we had a light snow on April 2nd, and our first 90°F day on April 15th.

I suspect this strongly patterned behavior comes from some emerging, climate-dominating, Arctic weather system.

--p!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
One_Life_To_Give Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-28-06 05:13 PM
Response to Original message
3. Is 1850 a fair starting point?
As 1850 is about the end of the Little Ice Age. Referencing from then to today doesn't seem to provide a good basis for an argument. Wouldn't using 1870 to present make a stronger case. Particularly since the last quoted para implies the bulk of the change has taken place since 1970. Or perhaps compare the results from the Little Ice Age to 1970 Vs. 1970 to present?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon Apr 29th 2024, 12:15 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC