Talk:Climate/Archive 1

Archive 1

Köppen classification

It seems to me that it is overkill to include the whole Köppen classification scheme in this article. Especially since it is said to one of several schemes. Is the Köppen scheme, "one of the most popular", "the most popular" or "de-facto standard". If it is not "de-facto standard", I think it should be moved to Köppen climate classification scheme, and then maybe a small summary could be left. --Dittaeva 14:51, 18 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Yes, I agree and vote for moving. I think that the main climate page should only contain (besides the definition, of course) a brief explanation of the common "types" of climate, like the polar, temperate, subtropical and tropical climate as well as a note on (and links to) classification schemes, like the Koppen's or Thornthwaite's. Also, other info should IMHO be added, such as, what the "normal timeline" is, the climatic system and its components, a link to climate change and modelling, etc... Matt Borak 13:41, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Weather/climate boundary

What is the boundary between climate and weather? I attended a talk on climate dynamics recently, and from what was said there, anything longer than a couple weeks is considered climate rather than weather. This article appears to deal only with the longest timescales and the differences in climate patterns between regions. Questions like "is this going to be an unusually dry summer in Pakistan?" also fall under the heading of climate. They certainly are not weather.

Also, there should be some mention of El Niño and La Niña as they are the best-understood climate phenomena.

I don't have time to fix this now (and I'm not sure I have the knowledge to do it properly) but I may return at some point to try. If not, let this note stand as an notice to those who run across it that this article is quite incomplete. Isomorphic 10:48, 20 Feb 2004 (UTC)

El Niño and La Niña would belong in the climate change article (since no one seemed to even discuss it until very recently), to which a link is provided as the bottom of the climate page. And so far as the Köppen scheme goes, as you can see it's not a simple matter, as under it there are nearly 100 possible designations a given place can have. --12:33, 21 Feb 2004 . . TOttenville8

But would you oppose moving the Köppen scheme? --Dittaeva 12:46, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)

(William M. Connolley 12:18, 2004 Mar 4 (UTC)) The weather/climate boundary is seomwhat blurred. "climate" is usually defined as 30-y averages, when its defined. "anything longer than a couple weeks" is definitely the wrong boundary. Climate is something like the statistics of weather, over a period long enough for those stats to be stable. Individual El Ninos/Ninas are closer to weather than climate (ocean weather perhaps). The frequency of El Ninos would be climate.

Though I see your point, I'd rather disagree. There is nothing like 'stable statistics' and the period of time you use to average weather is completely arbitrary. There are e.g. attempts for seasonal predictions, trying to answer things like "what the next winter will be like (in terms of average - say monthly or seasonal - values of temprerature, precipit., etc.)?". I don't think this is weather. This is what I found at the IPCC glossary:

Climate in a narrow sense is usually defined as the “average weather”, or more rigorously, as the statistical description in terms of the mean and variability of relevant quantities over a period of time ranging from months to thousands or millions of years. The classical period is 30 years, as defined by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO). These quantities are most often surface variables such as temperature, precipitation, and wind. Climate in a wider sense is the state, including a statistical description, of the climate system.

However, I agree that the boundary could and should be specified in somewhat less confusing way. -- Matt Borak 18:19, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)

(William M. Connolley 22:14, 2004 Mar 4 (UTC)) I too see your point, but also disagree... you quote the IPCC, who say much what I said: the classic version is 30 years, but other periods are possible. As to climate being months upwards... I wouldn't go accept that, in a strict sense.

There *are* things like stable statistics.

I say that seasonal prediction is closer to weather than climate. It only works on a statistical basis (when I last looked season-ahead forecasting was poor... do you think its got better recently?).

All right, a step back. I perfectly agree on the 30 years period as the classic time-frame to study (and define) climate (aka "climate is what you expect, weather is what you get"). And, that variability of the atmosphere (and other components of the system) on shorter time-scales depends on the POV. To me (to give another loose division), weather are fluctuations that come from the internal atmospheric instabilities with the ocean (e.g.) serving as a relatively stable boundary condition (and I mean 'stable' in the given short time-frame), whereas climate involves interactions (one- or both-way) between the atmosphere and other components of the climatic system, influencing some or all of them. From such a POV, an individual ENSO event is rather a climatic phenomenon, though it may not touch the long-term averages. However, I agree that such an event does have weather-like characteristics. I just wanted to stress that climate is not only long-term averages but variability (even on shorter timescales) too. -- Matt Borak 10:59, 5 Mar 2004 (UTC)

(William M. Connolley 11:36, 2004 Mar 5 (UTC)) Skipping the indenting... I agree with much of what you say, though I have a different definition of climate: weather is individual events; climate is the statistics of such events. Of course, that makes climate more than just averages, and anyway includes the average variability: the frequency of ENSOs as about 4-5 years is a climate statstic. Whether an individual ENSO is climate; or is a climate event... this is more debatable.

I think we now agree well enough that the text I've just added to the page is reasonable. You'll let me know if not, I'm sure...

Yeap, you bet I will :), even if I agree. The text seems much better than before and all right to me now. Thanks. I've made only tiny changes to it. Eventually, I would like to make a small addition, saying something like "climate can also be viewed as the state of the climatic system" linking to the article when it's made (by me, I presume...). -- Matt Borak 12:37, 5 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Strong seasonality in Polar climate?

The article says polar climate shows strong seasonality, but is this correct? In the ice cap climate, every month of the year is below freezing, and precipitaition is very, very small all year. I believe the continental subarctic climate (Köppen: Dfc or Dfd) shows the strongest seasonality in terms of temperature, and often in precipitation as well (often very dry in winter). Orcaborealis 16:14, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Charts

Could you add a more refined graph for tempertures in the last 20 years, I have a source here is you need it

http://www.drroyspencer.com/latest-global-temperatures/ http://vortex.nsstc.uah.edu/data/msu/t2lt/uahncdc.lt —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.16.131.13 (talk) 19:39, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Sorry - but the graph is from a non-WP:RS on things that haven't been published (which the graph isn't). Its also (incidentally) wrong, you can't expect a polynominal fitting to be reliable at the end-points. (which Spencer btw. acknowledges in his last sentence). --Kim D. Petersen (talk) 21:53, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi! Does somebody know if there's a standard on the en:wiki for climate diagrams? Couldn't find any information. We just started (over) 8) on the de:wiki to set a standard, how a diagram has to look like. Would be nice to get an answer (asap) 8-)))))) Thanks!! --Hedwig in Washington ^(TALK) 06:26, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm not exactly sure what you mean by "climate diagram". Do you mean a map of global climates? A chart comparing different climates? Something else entirely? -Runningonbrains 06:36, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

I mean a chart for a city. Where you have precipitation, maxx-min&average temperature and maybe hours of sunshine. Something like this:

--Hedwig in Washington ^(TALK) 08:19, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Ahh I see. Unfortunately climatology/meteorology is not quite a strong subject in english wikipedia (yet, we're trying to change that), so there are only a few climate articles out there (see Category:Climate by city, Category:Climate of the United Kingdom, and Category:Climate of India). I did a commons search, and there seem to be several different typed of climate diagrams floating around. It doesn't seem that there's a standard set up, but there are some formats you can use there. I would suggest contacting WikiProject Climate to be sure, but it doesn't look like that project is very active, you might not get a quick answer. -Runningonbrains 14:18, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

8) Same in the german wikipedia, no answer for nearly 4 weeks. And if you write someone from the project on his/her talkpage it will be ignored. 8(( That's why I'm trying to find some information to set a standard for those diagrams. Ok, I'll post my question on the project page! Thank you for your time! --Hedwig in Washington ^(TALK) 00:05, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Close to GA?

I'm thinking this article is approaching GA status. I'm looking for feedback concerning improvements before I send it along to GAC. Thegreatdr 21:22, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

This [1] is just a bit dubious. Firstly the lead doesn't make sense where it is - is it referring to something else where it was copied from? Second... is a whole pile of previous states the climate? Only sort of William M. Connolley 21:33, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

I don't see anything wrong with copying a portion of the main article where it is needed in another article. It maintains consistency between articles tackling portions of the same topic. Will look into adding references and reworking the lead. A plea went out to climatologists a while back to help out with this article, but it wasn't heeded. The article would be in better shape if it was in the good hands of a climatologist during the past year. Thegreatdr 14:28, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Personally I don't believe this article is quite ready for GA. To me there seem to be too many one-paragraph sections; not nearly enough citations, and no coverage of climates other than the Earth's. The topic of climate change needs a summary-style coverage. What about a history of climate understanding? Computer modeling of climates? — RJH (talk) 17:39, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

That has been done, and the article and lead have been reorganized to accomodate the new information. Much more information has been added to the climate indices section. Thank you for the specific, useful suggestions RJH. Thegreatdr 21:52, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Not ready for GA yet. Organization and writing could stand improvement, and over the past few days I've been fixing errors here and there. With further polishing it could be ready for a try at GA within a few weeks. Certainly, "climate" is an important enough topic that Wikipedia ought to have a GA-quality entry on it. Raymond Arritt 16:23, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

I agree. This article is considered one of the most important within the meteorology (and certainly climatology) project, and has numerous pages linked to it, so we should be making every effort to improve this article to GA, and ultimately FA. Thegreatdr 16:31, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

I've added information regarding the climate zones this month due to a request farther down the talk page. Once more references are found, we might be safe for submitting this for GA. What do you all think? Thegreatdr (talk) 19:07, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

There is a mistake in the map for the humid continental (dfb) climate, as the Oslo region of Norway is left out. Not a big deal, perhaps, but still a mistake. Orcaborealis (talk) 20:17, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Use in weather forecasting section

Should it remain within this article, or be moved to climatology? I think it should be moved...but am not certain. Thegreatdr 16:02, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

I'd say move. It's a technique that uses climate info, rather than part of the description of "climate" per se. Raymond Arritt 16:20, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Done. Thegreatdr 16:31, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Concert

• [2]

-- 88.72.13.253 11:35, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Global Temp?

Why does global temperature redirect here? Doesn't the concept warrant its own article? --Theblog 03:49, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Possibly. The meaning of "global temperature" depends very much on the context (e.g., temperature of the air? temperature of the surface?) so maybe it's best for it to be defined in the articles where it's used. Raymond Arritt 03:54, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Global Cooling

Should the Climate Change section also include a link to Global Cooling? Alec92 (talk) 23:58, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Of course.Even if global cooling has not occured recently,it still does occur,and should be given similar attention as Global WarmingTheNobleSith (talk) 03:51, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Climate Zones

Shouldn't the different climate zones each have a brief summary on this page,with a link to a more in-depth article on each?TheNobleSith (talk) 03:53, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

On second thought, I don't know. Maybe. I'd like to hear some feedback from the others who have watched the editing of this article over the years. Thegreatdr (talk) 22:26, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Since there's been no feedback, I'm adding in small sections concerning the Koppen climate zones. Thegreatdr (talk) 19:14, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Survey

WP:Good article usage is a survey of the language and style of Wikipedia editors in articles being reviewed for Good article nomination. It will help make the experience of writing Good Articles as non-threatening and satisfying as possible if all the participating editors would take a moment to answer a few questions for us, in this section please. The survey will end on April 30.

• Would you like any additional feedback on the writing style in this article?

• If you write a lot outside of Wikipedia, what kind of writing do you do?

• Is your writing style influenced by any particular WikiProject or other group on Wikipedia?

At any point during this review, let us know if we recommend any edits, including markup, punctuation and language, that you feel don't fit with your writing style. Thanks for your time. - Dan Dank55 (talk)(mistakes) 04:17, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

GA

We really need to get this up to GA status, if not FA. I'll be working on it off and on for a while. Give a shout if you catch me doing something dumb. Raymond Arritt (talk) 04:44, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Raymond. Thegreatdr (talk) 16:46, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Intro is too short.

Per WP:LEAD, I'm re-adding the template. I found no discussion on this talk page and whatever edits may have occurred still leave the intro too short for this article. In particular, it must summarize all major points or headings made in the article. ~ UBeR (talk) 17:52, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Article structure

In its present form most of the article is devoted to surveying the Koeppen climate types. I propose restructuring the article in summary style, with sections on paleo, climate modeling, classification methods, applied climatology, etc. that summarize those aspects of climatology and include pointers to other articles. This would be a major rewrite, so I'd like to ask others for opinions before bashing ahead. Raymond Arritt (talk) 18:03, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm good with restructuring. The only reason it went into Koeppen detail is because of a suggestion on the climate talk page. Sometimes when an article gets proposed for GA or FA, restructuring is necessary. I went ahead and summarized the Koeppen section. Thegreatdr (talk) 05:41, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm going to have to disagree on applied climatology. That would better lie within the climatology article, no? Thegreatdr (talk) 21:09, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

GA Failure

Per these last two sections, I'm failing it for now. The too-short intro tag is still there, and as Raymond points out far too much of the article is devoted to reiterating the Köppen system, which already has an article of its own. Otherwise, it's nicely illustrated and referenced and would probably make an excellent GA once those issues are addressed. Daniel Case (talk) 18:21, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Have significantly shortened the Koeppen classification section, and summarized it per the suggestions made previously. Thegreatdr (talk) 05:43, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Good work on that. Having trimmed it down a bit, we can now add mentions of other approaches to climate classification such as Thornthwaite's classification and air mass classifications. Raymond Arritt (talk) 05:48, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

I've made a first stab at Thornthwaite, which I was previously completely unfamiliar with when you left your talk page message. Thegreatdr (talk) 06:52, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Air mass types

I'm not sure what to do about air mass types. Do we just want to mention origins of the different types? I'm having a hard time thinking about how to discuss how they affect regional climates without heavy discussion of the weather features associated with their movement. Jason Patton (talk) 19:10, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm guessing that's what Raymond meant...brief discussions on characteristics cP, mT, etcetera airmasses. Thegreatdr (talk) 21:31, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

That's part of it, but for the purposes of this article people sometimes define climate zones or the climatology of a place by the relative prevalence of different air masses. Some examples: [3] (see esp. the extended abstract), [4] (see e.g., figs 5 and 6 in the full PDF), [5] (a nice application in the context of climate change; see esp figs 4-6). Raymond Arritt (talk) 22:39, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

I've added the air mass types. This section would be just as much at home in weather fronts as this article. It's a very subjective (perhaps the most subjective) classification; I'm surprised people are trying to use it to define climate zones. Thegreatdr (talk) 04:25, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, synoptic classifications are inherently subjective. (When we did this for a paper we had two different people determine the classes independently, then a third person would settle any discrepancies.) But the approach is used often enough we should at least discuss it briefly here. Raymond Arritt (talk) 04:33, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

How does that look? Thegreatdr (talk) 21:08, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Nice! The graphic of air mass source regions is really good.

BTW I'll need to lay low for a while. There's a guy who's got it in for editors who follow the scientific consensus on global warming. Objectively he doesn't have a leg to stand on, but unfortunately he's well-connected in Wikipolitics so I'd rather stay out of his way until things become clearer. You guys are doing great without me! Raymond Arritt (talk) 05:35, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Your pointers were quite useful. If we can get this to GA, climatology will likely be worked on within the near future, also for a GA attempt. Thegreatdr (talk) 00:49, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

GS Success

Congratulations everyone, especially Thegreatdr! Anyone interested in pushing Climate change back to GA level? It has been delisted recently for minor issues. Splette :) ^{How's my driving?} 00:26, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Climate --what is it??...x

cliamte is the average weather in a coutry or contintent....

eg in england the climate is quite cold and can be very windy where as in florida/america the average weather is quite warm and has a high humidity —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.2.28.217 (talk) 16:12, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Contradicting Information

Can someone reconcile the article, which shows modern temperatures rising, with this article of a reputable source. Or discredit the latter. [6] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.67.39.44 (talk) 10:32, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

There is no contradiction, as a trend over 11 years is not generally considered climate, as per the beginning of the article that states the generally accepted period of observation is 30 years. --98.223.36.163 (talk) 01:19, 2 December 2009 (UTC) Valin11786

yeah man —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.231.186.40 (talk) 19:51, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Archiving

Does anyone object to me setting up automatic archiving for this page using MiszaBot? Unless otherwise agreed, I would set it to archive threads that have been inactive for 30 days and keep ten threads.--Oneiros (talk) 13:50, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

 Done--Oneiros (talk) 21:22, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Oops

I made a vandalism revert that had the effect of restoring vandalism rather than deleting it. This was due to my misreading the diff. --Tasty monster 07:43, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

the temperature is high with low rainfall in summer rain.this foud in the lower plate basin in the south east. the costal climate is found in southrn chila with moderate temperature ad throughout the year the mediterranean type of climate with hot dry summers and mild winters are experinced in central chil the winters are wet here becausein that season along with the sun the wind belts move northwards . —Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.130.11.200 (talk) 12:56, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

First map--what classification system is it?

It would be nice if the caption of the first climate map, File:ClimateMap World.png, shown prominently at the top of the page, said what Climate classification system it's using. It does not seem to be Köppen. The types have names similar to the Strahler system, but it does not look much like the Strahler map I have in a textbook here. The map's page does not say what system is being used. The present caption, "Worldwide Climate Classifications", leaves a bit to be desired. The map shows only one classification scheme, so "classifications" is wrong. I'd change the caption is "Worldwide Climate Classification", but that would only make the lack of info about what classification is it more obvious. Ideas? Pfly (talk) 20:31, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Describing climate

What's the normal or most accepted way to describe the climate of a country. For example, what term would you use to describe the climate of France or the Netherlands? Sorry, probably a really simplistic question.. --HighKing (talk) 13:15, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

you have to know the difference between climate and weatherTwonumbers (talk) 13:03, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Explain use of average "low" and average "high" temperatures in climate charts

It would be very helpful if this article explained the climate charts that appear throughout the site in articles for cities. These charts display average "high" and average "low" temperatures in the city for each month of the year. However, it is not clear exactly what the numbers on the charts represent (presumably, the numbers are the highest temperature on each day of the month over the last several instances of the month). There is also no explanation for why the average "high" and average "low" temperatures are relevant for a person curious about the climate in a city; how related are these temperatures to the temperature during the course of a day in general? Why are average temperatures for each month not reported instead of, or in addition to, the average high and low temperatures? I think this article would be a sensible place for this discussion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.211.101.117 (talk) 15:27, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Earth Cloud cover maps,

Are the cloud maps, changing 2014 cloud cover by month, and a 13 year cloud map, worth including this article? For descriptions and changing map: see http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-bright-side-of-13-years-of-clouds-in-1-map/ also see: http://neo.sci.gsfc.nasa.gov/view.php?datasetId=MODAL2_M_CLD_FR I read the map images are free to use per http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/ImageUse/ Jcardazzi (talk) 14:32, 14 May 2015 (UTC)jcardazzi

Surely they are. As examples of the climate they indicate that change is of the essence. An article is rightly illustrated with examples; and there is no pressure at all to try to keep up to date by changing images every day/week/month/year, it simply doesn't matter. Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:51, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

added Climate change and Global warming references to the top?

Could references to Climate change and global warming articles be placed in the top scope section? They are explained in the last sentences of the lead, but I think it would be helpful to readers to alert readers at the top also to the other articles. Thank you, Jcardazzi (talk) 18:04, 14 May 2015 (UTC)jcardazzi

I made a first attempt, which you can see at the top of the article. Howzitlook? NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 18:11, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, the text looks informative to me. Jcardazzi (talk) 18:17, 14 May 2015 (UTC)jcardazzi

Updated "Climate" definition added

Updated "Climate" definition has been added (see below) - seems better - *entirely* ok with me to rm/rv/mv/ce the edit of course - Comments Welcome - in any case - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 23:51, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Copied from the "Climate" article:

Climate is the average (statistically, mean and variability) weather, usually over a 30-year interval.

References

NASA-TV/ustream (11/12/2015@12noon/et/usa) - "Global warming-related" News Briefing.

IF Interested => NASA-TV/ustream and/or NASA-Audio (Thursday, November 12, 2015@12noon/et/usa) - NASA will detail the Role of Carbon on the Future Climate of the Earth - in any case - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 14:09, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

• BRIEF Followup - REPLAY LINK (Audio; 66:01) => http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/77531778 - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 19:44, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
• SUMMARY (and possible addition to article) (see below) - Comments Welcome - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 13:03, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

NASA scientists report that human-made carbon dioxide (CO₂) continues to increase above levels not seen in hundreds of thousands of years: currently, about half of the carbon dioxide released from the burning of fossil fuels remains in the atmosphere and is not absorbed by vegetation and the oceans.

Carbon dioxide in Earth's atmosphere if half of global-warming emissions are not absorbed.
(NASA simulation; November 9, 2015)

References

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Climate. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081014093644/http://www.uwsp.edu/geo/faculty/ritter/geog101/textbook/climate_systems/humid_subtropical.html to http://www.uwsp.edu/geo/faculty/ritter/geog101/textbook/climate_systems/humid_subtropical.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:55, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Climate. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080225054655/http://www.radford.edu/~swoodwar/CLASSES/GEOG235/biomes/rainforest/rainfrst.html to http://www.radford.edu/~swoodwar/CLASSES/GEOG235/biomes/rainforest/rainfrst.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080225082154/http://www.radford.edu/~swoodwar/CLASSES/GEOG235/biomes/savanna/savanna.html to http://www.radford.edu/~swoodwar/CLASSES/GEOG235/biomes/savanna/savanna.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090805040919/http://www.uwsp.edu/geo/faculty/ritter/geog101/textbook/climate_systems/mediterranean.html to http://www.uwsp.edu/geo/faculty/ritter/geog101/textbook/climate_systems/mediterranean.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080525080242/http://www.uwsp.edu/geo/faculty/ritter/geog101/textbook/climate_systems/subarctic.html to http://www.uwsp.edu/geo/faculty/ritter/geog101/textbook/climate_systems/subarctic.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110609021800/http://www.radford.edu/~swoodwar/CLASSES/GEOG235/biomes/taiga/taiga.html to http://www.radford.edu/~swoodwar/CLASSES/GEOG235/biomes/taiga/taiga.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:33, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Climate. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080527223539/http://www.enhr2007rotterdam.nl/documents/W15_paper_DeWerk_Mulder.pdf to http://www.enhr2007rotterdam.nl/documents/W15_paper_DeWerk_Mulder.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080516233555/http://www.uwsp.edu/geo/faculty/ritter/geog101/textbook/climate_systems/icecap.html to http://www.uwsp.edu/geo/faculty/ritter/geog101/textbook/climate_systems/icecap.html
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.slabongrade.net/DesignSeminars/SeminarDownloads/Science_of_Expansive_Clay.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080320094503/http://www.iao.florence.it/training/geomatics/Thies/Senegal_23linkedp6.htm to http://www.iao.florence.it/training/geomatics/Thies/Senegal_23linkedp6.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100118201820/http://nsidc.org/arcticmet/glossary/climate_change.html to http://nsidc.org/arcticmet/glossary/climate_change.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090204080827/http://www.climateprediction.net/science/model-intro.php to http://www.climateprediction.net/science/model-intro.php
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://128.194.106.6/~baum/climate_modeling.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050902220920/http://www.atmosphere.mpg.de/enid/1442 to http://www.atmosphere.mpg.de/enid/1442

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:27, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Wrong Terminology

"Climate is the statistics of weather over long periods of time" is incorrect twice over.

Climate is officially measured over 30 years. It is a man made retrospective analysis based on data. That data cannot be used to predict the future. Nothing can accurately predict the future about anything. The data is unanalysed raw figures, not statistics. Statistics is a branch of mathematics dealing with the collection, analysis, interpretation, and presentation of numerical data in order to assess probability. Climate change measurement is even more lengthy......... This is from NASA "Weather is the short-term changes or current conditions of temperature, clouds, precipitation, humidity and wind in a region or a city. Weather can vary greatly from one day to the next, or even within the same day. In the morning the weather may be cloudy and cool, but by afternoon it may be sunny and warm. The climate of a region or city is its weather averaged over many years. This is usually different for different seasons. For example, a region or city may tend to be warm and humid during summer. But it may tend to be cold and snowy during winter. The climate of a city, region or the entire planet changes very slowly. These changes take place on the scale of tens, hundreds and thousands of years".

The sentence in the web page should read "Climate is the atmospheric pattern of a defined region as measured and statistically analysed over a period of not less than 30 years".

The problem is in the measurment. For example, tide changes over lunar cycles affect the measurement of water depth, land-sea borders etc. Ice cap borders vary with the seasons, tides, sea currents and major world events such as volcanos. Temperature measurement is heavily influenced by the time of the day and the weather at the time, as well as the number and location of the measurement devices. For example, measurement of temperature at an airport with its black surfaces and hot engines is not representative of the surrounding area. Unortunately, of recent years, temperatures of airports have been used as representative, while measurement instruments in cooler nearby areas have been removed. The bias is obvious, the motivation for such changes is speculative. Long term climate cycles are mostly influened by Earth's orbit around the Sun, its passage through the Sun's magnetosphere and the precession (Wobble) of the orbit. Shorter term variations in climate (and weather) are largely influences by volcanic emission above and below the seas, by cloud cover, and occasionally (mercifully) by meteor impact. Historygypsy (talk) 19:00, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Historygypsy! You clearly have a lot of expertise on climate as well as knowledge of WP editing. I hope you'll go ahead and make the changes that should be made to the article, which would ultimately be more helpful than giving such good information but leaving it to someone else to add it. Be bold! Even if you don't have time to put in citations (yet), at least the article will be more accurate and, if you don't have time, others can come along and add sources. Scrawlspacer (talk) 09:10, 3 January 2018 (UTC) Scrawlspacer (talk) 09:10, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Vostok ice

Any chance of getting the Vostok ice graph in more detail; for the last 10k or 20k years. ...additional to, not in place of, the current graph. Or from anywhere; Greenland maybe? (But then I’d also want to see the 450k record to compare with Vostok). MBG02 (talk) 19:40, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

Climate and cold

For the artice: Human tendencies for living in the cold have some basic reasons, one of which is the ability to refrigerate meat; which is something which has drastically changed in the modern era with refrigeration, but which also means that there is less need to live in cold places, and the whole economics of cold climate living are different in the modern context. -Inowen (nlfte) 22:22, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

Splitting proposal

I'm proposing we split the article into climate and the climate system.

1) Why: a) The terms are quite far apart, with climate system also including the effects such as ice. b) I notice, editing other articles, that I often need to refer to the components of the climate system that don't directly affect the weather, hence a link to this page is out of place. For instance, many of the tippings points in tipping points in the climate system might primarily be concerned with tipping points in the ocean and biosphere, and less directly with how this impacts the climate.

2) How: The current article is already almost completely about climate, so in practice this involves only changing a few lines. The advantage is that the effect of the five different components of the climate system on climate can be described in more detail. I've started a (very immature) article on the climate system in my sandbox. There will be a bit of work fixing links to this article. Femke Nijsse (talk) 12:45, 6 May 2019 (UTC)

Since there weren't any reactions and I don't think this is controversial, I've executed the split and climate system is now it's own article. Femke Nijsse (talk) 11:00, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

redundant climate system text

Recent edits at climate system plus some tweaks to the first paragraph here today make this text redundant. Not that it matters, but I added this text some years ago, and am amused to be pruning it today. But I thought I'd park it here for re-use as the new tweaks are reviewed and improved upon.

A region's climate is generated by the [[climate system]], which has five components: [[Earth's Atmosphere|atmosphere]], [[hydrosphere]], [[cryosphere]], [[lithosphere]], and [[biosphere]].<ref name="IPCC glossary">[http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/syr/en/annexes.html AR4 SYR Synthesis Report Annexes]. Ipcc.ch. Retrieved on 2011-06-28.</ref>

NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 12:24, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

conceptual question about classification

In the current version (906376402) a lot of the main body is about climate classification. The IPCC provides two definitions (average weather and state of the climate system). So does the taxonomy and classification scheme belong more to the first definition or the second? That's sort of a basic noob question, but it would help write some glue so this article flows smoothly from one context of "climate" to the other. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 13:02, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

My reading of this page: The Köppen classification maps entirely on the first definitions (average weather), while the other two definition take in more aspects of the climate system. Femke Nijsse (talk) 13:10, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 13:11, 15 July 2019 (UTC)