As noted in a blog response to another posting, that Indianapolis record-dry August of 0.37 inch--truly a puny amount--was the driest ever for August, with the previous record set 113 years ago, back in 1897. Also, colleague Joel Burgio points out that the Des Moines 29.61 inches for the June-July-August period was the 2nd largest total on record---second only to the great flood year 1993 but by just .06 inch.

Sure wish you guys out west would quick hoggen all the rain and send some to northeastern Indiana very soon, all most to late for us, Thanks

Yes, the only thing I can think of is that some rain would help soybeans. Quite a few of them are still very green.

2.75" south of Wells, MN this afternoon. This came after only 1.1" for all of August to date. This was preceded by a combined June-July rain of 13.2". No doubt this is the finisher to insure a probable very good crop. Soybeans, especially, look to have excellent yield prospects.l

Indianapolis Airport broke a 113 yr. record by receiving only 0.37 in. of rain in August. Should receive rain tonight in most of IN. Will help some of soybeans. Not much help for corn which is rapidly approaching harvest moisture.

We have a review of Midwest growing season rainfall in a separate blog post.

Why oh why would the IPCC ever have to regain credibility?? That's right, because they lie and falsify data and the members have financial interest in the results of global warming studies. Please Bryce, resign in disgrace, you are one of the reasons I'm not renewing my DTN when it expires.

Well, I'm sorry if you feel that way, but there has always been validity in the research that's been done. Climate scientists' work was taken severely to task during the past year and has been verified in every case--although, as was noted in this article, there are errors in the presentation. But that is different than the basic research itself. And regarding money---there is also plenty of money spent in behalf of attacking the climate science research, so that part of this debate has by no means been a one-way street.

No one mentions sunspots as a cause but likely a contributor to global warming. Look at temps vs sunspots for the last 400 years and the visual correlation is amazing. The hotest summers I lived through were in the 50's corresponding to high levels of sunspots not CO2. If you start at spaceweather.com you can find links that will illustrate the strong link between sunspots and global temperature starting in the 1600s. The Sahara Desert was a lake 10000 years ago. It is unlikely that CO2 was the cause of the lake drying up. A small shift in earths axis is the culprit as I recall. This is a recurring global cycle or 24000 years. A small change in the monsoons causes great changes to large area. The dust bowl in the thirties did not correlate to CO2 either but rather a shift in moisture flow which eventually corrected itself. This year is an example of how patterns locked in and caused significant damage to crops and people. It is possible that the changes that are occurring are part of long term cycles that man cannot control.

An entry on the Skeptical Science web site has a strong counter-statement to the "It's the sunspots" idea. Here's part of that discussion: "Until about 1960, measurements by scientists showed that the brightness and warmth of the sun, as seen from the Earth, was increasing. Over the same period temperature measurements of the air and sea showed that the Earth was gradually warming. It was not surprising therefore for most scientists to put two and two together and assume that it was the warming sun that was increasing the temperature of our planet. However, between the 1960s and the present day the same solar measurements have shown that the energy from the sun is now decreasing. At the same time temperature measurements of the air and sea have shown that the Earth has continued to become warmer and warmer. This proves that it cannot be the sun; something else must be causing the Earth's temperature to rise. " A graphic illustrating the difference described is located at this URL: http://www.skepticalscience.com/solar-activity-sunspots-global-warming.htm

dont spose there is any lag time on the suns output and temps on this big rock? dave wiebke me personally i am sticking with wattsupwiththat.com

Bryce, its amazing how fast things have dried out around here, theres plenty of subsoil moisture but the topsoil could use as shot of rain. Alot of road repair needs to be done before winter sets in, the dryness should help that out. Will this weather pattern continue into fall for fall harvest, or could we see a change to a wet fall again?

Thanks for the comment. We are looking for fall to be no more than normal on precip. Harvest conditions look definitely better this year than last.

Who says the model will be accurate. Afterall meteorlogists choose between the Euro and Us moels for short term forecasting.

The old model was junk so these idiots at the U.N. IPCC will get a new one to try to get the results so so desperateley want. They then will be able to start blaming the U.S. for using to much fuel. Our congress will start telling us we need to raise fuel taxes and do what they have planned for us because they are sooo much smarter than we are. BY THE WAY I DO BELIEVE THEY ARE THE ONES THAY US IN THIS MESS IN THE FIRST PLACE.

Oops, Hey smitty, the global alarmists are in panick mode. they have 20 yrs invested and people are seeing thru their lies and deceptions. Obama is thier man, if anyone can ram down our throats, he can. It's a new tax, plain and simple. It forces the working man into supporting a whole bunch more socialists.

A personal attack comment has been removed. I hope everyone read the article and especially checked out the last paragraph--but if you didn't here it is: "Such knowledge, Hurrell says, can eventually lead to forecasts spanning several years of potential weather impacts, such as a particular region facing a high probability of drought, or another region likely facing several years of cold and wet conditions." Seems to me that this is potential information that would be useful in production agriculture.

bryce, new software with nifty graphics. ho hum. with this new package and if the forecast it gave was for the mother of all droughts would hit the midwest in 2012, what would we as farmers do with this information? cut back on acreage? fert? population per acre? not plant at all? go long the board? and then what if it rains a couple of times. and did ippc's current version catch the drought the russians had or the floods in pakistan or china? or was it droughts and floods will occur but we dont know where. i can do the same thing with markets, i predict the price of corn will be between 2.00 and 6.00. given probabilities i will be right. all models begin with assumptions, and we all know what happens when you assume. you start nailing the 11 to 15 and then we can talk about the future. not you personally bryce, but the warming crowd. dave wiebke

Nice that they got new more powerful tec toys to play with. Sounds like a lot of ordinary guys I know. But my understanding of the climate change scientist issue wasn't the computer but the iffy data they feed into the thing. Will the new computer be able to sort out real data from "fixed" data?

Jonathan, the breadth of the extent of temperature data gathering was covered in a blog posted July 29, titled "Hottest Decade On Record". You can check it out by going to the calendar in the upper right hand portion of the blog screen, then toggle back to July, and go to July 29, then click to see that blog item. Dave, for what it's worth, we have seen the U.S. forecast model perform very well this summer regarding the pattern for the medium range time period. It's not perfect, but its performance has been a lot better than it was just a few years ago. Regarding climate analysis, there are many features of our recent patterns which the IPCC report of 2007 got right. Was it a weather forecast? No, but the major trends that the 2007 report discussed have in many cases panned out.

The "Tea Party" does not believe science and other socialist activities so no fear of global warming. What they fear is that fuel consumption will be taxed and that means less oil imported from the Mid East and cutting terrorist activity,,,, if that happens,,, THEY WIN! 84 million barrels per day isn't enough, we need to "drill baby drill" so "BUBBA" stays in his massive pick up truck, SUVs, 4 wheelers, tractor pulls and other "Americana",,, I am convinced that only when the Mid West has an cataclysmic event like in Pakistan that the Tea Baggers will at least take note,,, remember to them the rest of the world doesn't matter! The saving grace to this insanity will be found in climate changes evil twin,,,, Peak Oil, that even Sarah Palin cannot legislate out!!!!!

Jay, let Sarah go...

Climate change is occuring, and mans activity may be able to be linked to some of the data collected in a manner that would indicate an omenous pattern, but what can we really do with any of this. It is like a weather forecast of heavy rains and possible tornados, you can't stop it. That would be like thinking that mankind could have stopped the ice age(s) of eons ago. It can not be done. These cylces of extremes will continue even after mankind no longer inhabits the earth.

CLIMATE CHANGE LIES ARE EXPOSED http://www.dailyexpress.co.uk/posts/view/196602 Bryce, I thought you might appreciate this link. I'm surprised that you haven't posted it by now...

Smitty, thanks for your interest as always. Unfortunately, your link did not work when I went to it.

try this link http://www.dailyexpress.co.uk/posts/view/196642

Ok folks, let's leave these postings of articles that don't belong to this blog subject alone. Your comments are about the recent critique of the IPCC climate change report. I will have a separate blog posting on that shortly (Tuesday a.m.). So unless you want to comment further on the beefed-up computer power for climate change analysis subject, let's call it a day on this item.

1. So when the hurricane season of 2010 actually is a relatively benign event, how with the global warming crowd spin it.... 2. If the world has heated 1.1 degree Celcius because of mankind over the last 30 years, how can the pacific ocean heat up 2 degrees celcius above "normal" in 2009 and cool down 1 degree below "normal" just 10 months later?

I'll look into that Paul. I'm going to have a reply to another question raised last week later today.

bryce, how does the snow event in beunos aries argentina and cattle dying in brazil from cold temps factor in with this. still not convinced and even if i was it appears that any proposed action will be worse than doing nothing and adapting. this old speck of space dust has been warming and cooling longer than even god can remember. dave wiebke

There may be scientific evidence that mankind is influencing the worlds weather, but even if we are it is unlikely that we are the cause of anything that can be stopped or changed. That is like believing that man could have stopped the ice age(s). The cycles will continue even after man no longer inhabits the earth.