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. Allen

    Well that's nice, coolest dampest spring in a long time where I'm at, I imagine we'll have another cool summer like last year where I'm at. If this is global warming bring it on. Watch for it folks, their "projections" are based on ice hugger theories, it will be WRONG in the end. The only person with a high prediction rate of climactic trends is Piers Corbin at around 70-80+ percent because it's based on the BIG YELLOW THING IN THE SKY!! Remember the record setting freezing in England? Piers got that right three years running against the ice hugger MET office predicting balmy winters.

    June 7, 2012 at 7:31 pm | Report abuse |
  2. Chris

    NOAA observation data is freely available to all. Plot the curves and satisfy yourself. Try plotting a 5 or 10 year running average and see what happens. Check it for precipitation too, and storm intensity.

    NASA, the USGS, and others have done decades of work to rule out other causes for what you are seeing.

    June 7, 2012 at 7:47 pm | Report abuse |
  3. Victor Matheson

    Can the headline wriiters at CNN read their own articles? Headline says hottest spring since 1910. Article says this spring broke the 1910 record by 2 full degrees. Come on now. Climate science is hard, headline writing shouldn't be.

    June 7, 2012 at 7:48 pm | Report abuse |
  4. EdL

    I think this may prove the scientists who warned us about global cooling had it all wrong.

    June 7, 2012 at 8:00 pm | Report abuse |
  5. albert

    It has shifted, as here in the NW the last two years have been colder and wetter

    June 7, 2012 at 8:03 pm | Report abuse |
  6. HIDE BEHIND

    From denials of changing climatic conditions to one of well yes there are changes but not man made and what's a few degrees we've seen it before and are still here all bs.
    We humans have not seen it before as it will be like by 2050, and the geo political implications to an estimated 9 billion population by year 2025 have no means to be accurately predicted.
    At present we are seeing the lsrgest die off of individual species in human history, and yes it is man caused.
    At the same time we are tipping the earths resources apatt at a rate never approached in our history and those resources are all being foight over by evonomic,political, and militsry forces.
    Will we change our ways?
    Doubtfull, as himans are not like migratory primates of past that had huge expaces of land mass to find sustanence for body needs but do have the means to destroy competition, and will most adduredly do so
    There are far thinkers looking to the future but they envisipn one of 2/3rds less people, ebut those left will be strictly supervized.
    Forget democracy, it is afailure for the mass of people are both not intelligent enough or educated to rule themselves

    June 7, 2012 at 8:06 pm | Report abuse |
  7. Electroguy

    You mean it was Warmer in 1910?!?! Why didnt they tell us THEN about global warming? Ahhh... its called 'a lie'...

    June 7, 2012 at 8:16 pm | Report abuse |
    • Andrew

      No 1910 was when they started keeping national Weather statistics. But your right...the scientific consciences is wrong...

      June 7, 2012 at 8:50 pm | Report abuse |
    • Matt

      Well, electroguy, if you had actually read the whole article, you may have come across this line:

      "The previous record for warmest spring was set in 1910; this spring beat that year by 2 degrees."

      So, no, it was not warmer in the spring of 1910. And even if it had been, it still would not change the fact that the earth is warming. You think you can throw out every single other data point because in a three month period in a small part of the planet nearly 100 years ago it was uncharacteristically warm?

      June 7, 2012 at 8:51 pm | Report abuse |
    • Electroguy

      Well Matt, you seem to think that you can do it. Statistically speaking, there are warm springs and there are cold springs, but for some reason you think when it fluctuates, its a sign of impending doom. Its ok.. you just keep thinking your happy thoughts and Tinkerbell will come to life...

      June 7, 2012 at 9:23 pm | Report abuse |
    • Jeff S

      @Electroguy

      Oh right. Because this spring was warmer on average that the spring of 1910 the earth couldn't possibly have been warming on average. You think it's a lie because you haven't bothered to put your reading comprehension skills to work on the science. Nor have you taken to understand the difference between "global" warming and an article talking about a small portion of that global area. Good job.

      June 7, 2012 at 9:35 pm | Report abuse |
    • guest

      Either it's a lie or greenhouse gases cause warming. When 98% of the scientific community agrees on this, you are foolish to be a denier.

      June 7, 2012 at 10:07 pm | Report abuse |
  8. HIDE BEHIND

    We humans are, while not facing extinction, there are a heck of a lot of frogs saying, " C'mon in the waters fine", while all around us many sprcies are becoming extinct
    No matter how highly humans think that their brains, or someone elses, will save them they are still just an animal, and wjo is to say that you as an individual are worthy in thewir eyes to be saved.

    June 7, 2012 at 8:20 pm | Report abuse |
    • DoNotWorry

      We are on track for extinction, or a major population reduction at best. For a species that prides itself on brains... we aren't showing many. I have the USDA gardening zones from the 1950s, and my property has increased two zones in the last 60 years. No matter what nonsense Bush was saying... the USDA just keeps moving the zones northward. There are mass migrations of species as well, like armadillos. Even armadillos know it is warming.

      June 7, 2012 at 10:05 pm | Report abuse |
  9. ADiff

    So? Even if it turns out to be true, BFD.

    June 7, 2012 at 8:26 pm | Report abuse |
  10. Cindy

    It has been the warmest here since they started keeping records. But the big problem is about to start. Disease and insects will be rampant this year. Ticks are in abundance and they are expecting record numbers of "rocky mountain spotted fever." A lot of disease will not respond to medications. Be careful in the outdoors this year, cover-up.

    June 7, 2012 at 8:52 pm | Report abuse |
    • zzBottom

      they've been saying that "IT" is about to start since the 60's.

      June 7, 2012 at 9:10 pm | Report abuse |
    • Jeff S

      @zzbottom

      When you are talking about the lifecycle of a plant, the 60s was just a couple of seconds ago...

      June 7, 2012 at 9:37 pm | Report abuse |
  11. flip

    A banana tree grows in Brooklyn.

    June 7, 2012 at 8:54 pm | Report abuse |
  12. Mark in Atlanta

    This just in from Glen Beck: God says climate change is a hoax. He also wants us all to wear our underwear outside our clothes. Get going, Beck fans. You have your orders.

    June 7, 2012 at 9:06 pm | Report abuse |
  13. helloman

    CO2 is not cyanide, plants, corals, blue green algae need it. Instead of focussing on CO2, why not focus equally on solar cycles. What caused the end of the last ice age or any ice age? CO2 ???? when there were 1,000,000X less people and no industry ?? Don't you think it's good scientific method to investigate all possible sources without bias?

    Don't you think that burning coal with no catalytic converters or re-burners might also have something to do with it?

    June 7, 2012 at 9:09 pm | Report abuse |
    • Matt

      You think total solar output isn't studied? It has been studied in great detail in the past 50 years, and there has been NO increase in total solar output during that time.

      June 7, 2012 at 10:18 pm | Report abuse |
  14. zzBottom

    so much for liberals droning on about record warming. 1910 was a long time ago!

    June 7, 2012 at 9:09 pm | Report abuse |
    • Jeff S

      In the lifecycle of the planet....the 1910 wasn't long ago. Heck if you condensed the time the Earth has existed to just one hour on the clock...the hands of the clock wouldn't have even moved when going from 1910 to know.

      June 7, 2012 at 9:39 pm | Report abuse |
    • DoNotWorry

      So much for Republicans' reading comprehension. It said it was two degrees warmer than the warmest recorded year... 1910.

      June 7, 2012 at 10:08 pm | Report abuse |
  15. Rich

    So let me get this straight, we are supposed to be alarmed because the temperatures are the highest they have been in 117 years but yet we supposedly live in a world that is billions of years old if you believe that that radiocarbon dating methods are accurate and the underlying assumptions about the decay of carbon, etc. But even if we live on an earth that is 10,000 years old, what does a extremely warm year out of 117 years of record keeping meant or matter? Absolutely Zilch, Nada, nothing!

    June 7, 2012 at 9:39 pm | Report abuse |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8