Spring weather the warmest since 1910, NOAA says
June 7th, 2012
02:26 PM ET

Spring weather the warmest since 1910, NOAA says

Many of us went through a winter that seemed nonexistent. There were no major blizzards or numbing arctic outbreaks. And it looks as if spring continued much of the same weather pattern throughout the United States.

After reviewing the past several months, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration said that May 2012 will end as the second warmest on record in the United States. It also said that the spring period of March through May will go down as the warmest on record since record keeping began in 1895.

Read full NOAA report

The average temperature in May over the contiguous United States was 64.3 degrees, or 3.3 degrees above normal. For spring, the average was 57.1 degrees, 5.2 degree above normal. The previous record for warmest spring was set in 1910; this spring beat that year by 2 degrees.

If you look back over the last 12 months from June 2011 to May 2012, it is the warmest 12-month period of any 12 months on record, according to NOAA.

The warm temperatures were not tied to any one particular part of the country. In the contiguous United States, only Oregon and Washington had spring temperatures near normal.

Data starting on January 1 through the end of May show many cities are off to their warmest start since record keeping began at the location:

Chicago – Warmest in 54 years

New York City (Central Park) – Warmest in 137 years

New York City (JFK) – Warmest in 55 years

Philadelphia – Warmest in 72 years

Washington (Dulles) – Warmest in 50 years

Post by:
Filed under: Heat • Weather
soundoff (222 Responses)
  1. Doug

    Wait, I'm confused – the title of the article says it's the warmest spring since 1910, but then in the article it reads, "....the spring period of March through May will go down as the warmest on record since record keeping began in 1895."

    So, which is it? 1910 or since record keeping began in 1895?

    June 7, 2012 at 5:29 pm | Report abuse |
  2. Bianca

    Ocean acidity has risen 30 percent over the last 250 years, so expected to more than double by 2100. This lowers the levels of carbonate in shellfish and corals, so they become more fragile, slow to develop and if high enough will dissolve the corals. Here in Florida diving is big business and our state fish and wildlife scientists are very worried. Carbon dioxide, ocean acidification and global warming are related. To save the oceans we must reduce carbon dioxide emissions.

    June 7, 2012 at 5:35 pm | Report abuse |
  3. Pan-evap rates

    There's no need to guess how much pollution there was back then. For well over 100 yrs, scientists the world over have been measuring exactly how long it takes water to evaporate. Ea. year since the industrial revolution began, it has been taking water longer and longer to evaporate. (due to shade from the sun provided by pollution)
    Evaporating ocean water is the engine that drives the earths weather, hence the real reason our weather is going crazy.
    We know from science that at one time the earth was green, with no polar ice caps. The earth is naturally getting warmer, returning to a 'paradise' like state it once was in.
    Our pollution isn't the cause of the earth getting warmer. Our pollution is just turning what would have been a slow and gentle process into one with violent extremes.

    June 7, 2012 at 5:35 pm | Report abuse |
    • willko

      You took everything into consideration except CO2. Sure, there's been plenty of warm/cold, wet/dry cycles in the past but every time CO2 levels neared 700-1000ppm we had an extinction event. We're at 400 now, it's rising non-linear and will continue to rise in the near future. Humans haven't been in this territory before; it's a whole new ball-game.

      June 7, 2012 at 6:15 pm | Report abuse |
    • Tom


      An extinction event? Which one are you referring to, exactly?

      June 8, 2012 at 11:21 am | Report abuse |
  4. Tom C

    I'm continually bemused on these comment threads by the confusion between "weather" and "climate". Climate is a long term average, whereas weather is the actual condition at any given point in time. It's possible to have a snowy climate overall with occasional periods of warm–or even hot–weather, while it's also possible to have a hot climate with occasional periods of cold weather. There's nothing contradictory here–one system describes a specific data point, while the other is the overall trend. Saying "It's cool over here in June" doesn't say a thing about the overall climate.

    June 7, 2012 at 5:41 pm | Report abuse |
    • Allen

      Bemus-ed Tom? Untrust-ing? Unknow-ing? Unlove.....ed? Ever wonder why they publish stuff that says "ooooh it's been a little warm lately" hmmm?? Because their ice hugger theories produce NO useful near term climate predicitons. The ONLY person producing somewhat accurate climate prediction is Piers Corbin at 70-80 percent because he bases it on THE BIG YELLOW THING IN THE SKY!! CO2 FOLLOWS warm periods and doesn't cause them because of blooms in plant life.

      June 7, 2012 at 7:40 pm | Report abuse |
  5. Pan-evap rates

    Pan-evap rates effect weather and climate. Even static actual atmospheric pressure. (less moisture in the air, the less air weighs. The less air weighs vs. what air naturally weighs equals a slightly less pressure being excerted on the earths surface...allowing it to expand ever so slightly. Hence, the increase in EQs can even be explained by our pollution.

    June 7, 2012 at 5:49 pm | Report abuse |
  6. Pan-evap rates

    @Kellee...by then people the world over will have been scared into uniting under a One World Government, so your point is moot to the informed.

    June 7, 2012 at 5:52 pm | Report abuse |
    • The Tin Foil Brigade Is Here

      ROTFLMFAO!!!! I just love vapid conspiracy crappola, and what does this have to do with climate change????

      June 7, 2012 at 6:54 pm | Report abuse |
    • Allen

      No no tinfoil, it's global warming, globally, in the globe, the warming. That's what this article is about. What is this "klymat chainj" of which you speak? Like the medieval warm period 600 years ago that was even warmer?

      June 7, 2012 at 7:35 pm | Report abuse |
  7. BobH

    Someone at CNN needs a lesson in logic. The headline should read "Spring 2012 warmest ever recorded." The spring of 1910, the previous record-holder, was two degrees cooler. So this was not "the warmest since 1910." CNN has done this a few times recently.

    Since this spring was the warmest on record, but a large, 2-degree margin, all these other comments about 1910 are moot.

    June 7, 2012 at 5:56 pm | Report abuse |
  8. Pan-evap rates

    Our pollution has made it harder for water to evaporate since the industrial revolution. Man did this. Man did make the weather extremes we see now possible.
    The earth is warming naturally. Our pollution is just making a natural change in climate into a change with violent weather extremes. And our pollution made the statistic 'increased EQ activity for past 100 yrs since the industrial revolution' possible to record.
    Puny little man can't alter the big picture. All he can do is throw fits from inside his little snapshot.
    Paradise earth will prevail. Those ruining this earth will be ruined, not this good earth.

    June 7, 2012 at 6:06 pm | Report abuse |
  9. Pan-evap rates

    Your cheezburger 4 lunch just made you in the top 17% biggest carbon footprints on earth. Your avg. American is 6000 units carbon footprint...avg African 1700. (per day) Your cheezburger is 1700. We use more oil to make red meat, dairy, and processed foods than we do for gasoline in our cars...way more water too. Only 5% of oil goes for gasoline, so a smaller waisteline contributes more to the environment than higher fuel economy standards.

    June 7, 2012 at 6:12 pm | Report abuse |
  10. truth ttp

    We must reduce carbon emissions – and protect our economy. That means more nuclear energy and more natural gas for electricity and vehicles. Plain and simple.

    And, don't let anyone tell you so-called "renewables" are the answer. They are expensive, inefficient, intermittent, and – yes – harmful to the environment (need backup sources of power, rare minerals, huge land requirements).

    June 7, 2012 at 6:53 pm | Report abuse |
  11. cyg

    When we lose a few more billion to weather related events, GOP, don't say that you didn't have your chance to change your ways – you did. Now instead of losing billions – it will just be you we lose...I can't wait until a Tornado whisks you all away.

    June 7, 2012 at 6:59 pm | Report abuse |
    • Walter

      Oh please, what exactly have your fellow libs done about it – nothing. Quit trying to make it seem like your party walks on water while the rest of us don't. Whisked away by a hurricane – typical crass comment from the left. No wonder your party continues to lose and will, thankfully, continue to lose in November.

      June 7, 2012 at 7:22 pm | Report abuse |
  12. Kenny Rogers

    Troll elsewhere! You're a poor imitation. The real banasy would not post such tripe!!

    June 7, 2012 at 6:59 pm | Report abuse |
  13. Walter

    So let's just ban fossil fuels. The wealthy will be able to afford the expensive alternatives, and the rest of us will move into caves and use foot-powered Flintstone vehicles.

    June 7, 2012 at 7:19 pm | Report abuse |
  14. dud

    Every year there is a report on something being hotter than ever, but nothing ever seems to change; some droughts, some floods, some storms, some silence, some water levels are higher, some lower.

    A story on rising sea levels and how that is putting some coastal cities under water? That would get someone's attention. Can't deny that. But until then, it's all conjecture.

    June 7, 2012 at 7:27 pm | Report abuse |
  15. Santex

    Who says the current climate is what is best for the earth? Perhaps life will adapt to changes and a better circumstance will develop. Rather than cling to what was dare to explore what might be.

    June 7, 2012 at 7:29 pm | Report abuse |
    • Mike D

      Except what "might be" is a planet with an increasingly hostile climate for human civilization. That's the issue here. Earth will be OK...it's us we need to worry about.

      June 8, 2012 at 8:50 am | Report abuse |
    • xanax

      Where is the evidence to support this hostile environment? Is it in the manufactured and corrupt evidence that some "climate experts" have given us? Is it so hot that the sea's are boiling? What a joke.

      June 8, 2012 at 9:16 am | Report abuse |
    • Matt

      Xanax, a warmer planet means a higher sea level. Do you realize how many people live in the areas that will be effected by sea-level rise. A warmer planet means a disruption of the current weather patterns. The world's entire farm system is currently optimized for out CURRENT weather. A disruption of weather patterns means famine. Sure, life will go on on Planet Earth if it warms, but probably with WAY fewer humans.

      June 8, 2012 at 9:36 am | Report abuse |
    • Tom

      You do realize the earth would warm with or without our help, right?

      It has done so in the past... and will do so again. And, it's not like the seas are going to suddenly rise and engulf all the cities along the coast. It will happen over decades, and coastal communities will adapt... as they have for millenia.

      June 8, 2012 at 11:19 am | Report abuse |
    • Bob

      Xanax, you must be from North Carolina. It past a law making climate change illegal. Seriously. By outlawing climate change science, the North Carolina reduced the predicted sea level rise from more than 3 feet to just 8 inches. The people with beach property will be so pleased that the North Carolina police are going to keep the see from rising when it breaks the law.

      June 8, 2012 at 10:10 am | Report abuse |
    • Melodykari78

      That is the most insane thing. The really made it illegal?

      June 8, 2012 at 11:10 am | Report abuse |
    • Imjustsaying

      Bob, please go back to school. I get a headache from just reading your poor logic and grammatical errors. Nothing you said is true and we are all dumber for having read that comment. Tom on the other hand is stating facts. The planet earth would warm with or without us. The planet has warmed in the past and will continue to warm and cool in its cyclical pattern. There will be no immediate rise in the seas to cause any kind of actual threat. This is and always will be this way. We should be contemplating how we expect the global weather patterns to shift over time (causing warming and cooler weather in different areas of the globe) since that will have a larger impact on life on this planet.

      June 8, 2012 at 12:33 pm | Report abuse |
    • rosie

      Yeah I read that one too. It seems that the state Repubs do not want to scare away any new developers nor lose out on the beach homes they own and wish dearly they could sell. The planet will do whatever it wants and we are mere passengers along for the ride.

      June 8, 2012 at 12:55 pm | Report abuse |
    • fritz

      Well said! Short! Sweet and right on the money! It's about time someone posted something totally rational. I admire your common sense. Here here and a big thumbs up to you, Sir!

      June 8, 2012 at 1:55 pm | Report abuse |
    • Chris

      It takes a long, long time for most life forms to adapt. Climate change is occurring to rapidly for the majority of life forms to evolve the adaptations needed to survive in a new environment. Hopefully human technology will be able to keep up with the changes.

      June 8, 2012 at 10:52 am | Report abuse |
    • joethejuggler

      The issue isn't whether or not life will continue. It's whether or not things will get very difficult for us humans.

      June 8, 2012 at 11:15 am | Report abuse |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8