2007/08 0.370 0.362 +0.008
2007/09 0.412 0.410 +0.002
2007/10 0.370 0.367 +0.003
2007/11 0.266 0.266
2007/12 0.220 0.212 +0.008
2008/01 0.050 0.054 -0.004
2008/02 0.192 0.192
2008/03 0.445 0.445
2008/04 0.267 0.254 +0.013
2008/05 0.278 0.278
2008/06 0.312 0.314 +0.002
2008/07 0.403

John M Reynolds

I think:

sunspot + GRC has a similar mechanism (not necessarily equal) to a volcanic eruption.

http://climate.envsci.rutgers.edu/pdf/ROG2000.pdf
(I am skeptical)

This brings up an interesting problem that I’m trying to reconcile. Judith Lean and others suggests a Lag Time between solar effects and surface temperatures. The Pinatubo event “seems” to fly in the face of this assertion.

The only thoughts I can come up with are that the effects of aeresol induced clouds within the context of decreasing solar input are magnitudes more powerful than the solar signal itself. Thus, while temperature shows a 5-10 year lag behind a pure solar signal, the affect of clouds has the potential to decrease solar input to the point that temps fall immediately.

Maybe some of you guys who are more informed than I can suggests something.

BTW … everyone .. I apologize for the truncated WFT link. I cut and paste that from a post I made on a different blog site that automatically puts it in that format. Sorry .. didn’t mean to cause a stink :D

Deanster

But actually it seems to be fine; I guess something in the way ‘Deanster’ wrote his post did the shortening.

Shortening long URLs: see http://www.TinyURL.com

There is a Firefox add-in to convert URLs directly in the browser.

http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut3vgl/last:12/offset:-0.15/plot/gistemp/last:12/offset:-0.24/plot/uah/last:12/plot/rss/last:12

becomes

http://tinyurl.com/5we7zq

http://wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com/2008/08/08/july-uah-global-temperature-anomaly-up-a-bit-and-in-agreement-with-rss/#comment-30690

Seems to work ok on long URLs.

Something is up with Deanster’s cut and paste.

BTW, is WordPress now shortening (eliding) URLs? That’s going to make an awful mess of WFT links like Deanster’s above.

Testing: latest data for all four series with baselines adjusted:

http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut3vgl/last:12/offset:-0.15/plot/gistemp/last:12/offset:-0.24/plot/uah/last:12/plot/rss/last:12

I am afraid you are wrong about Pinatubo being insignificant. When the eruption occurred, there was an El Nino happening and solar activity was just descending from max peak. Global temps were running quite warm when it occurred, and then plunged dramatically following the eruption. There is no way to explain this sudden drop in temps other than Pinatubo.

I was just being sarcastic, but from Jan 1 2001 (start of the 21st century) till now those are the rankings for this century.

Huh? Say, what?

Does july have an anomalous curse on it?

(If it does, I suppose we may expect the anomaly to be reported and the ranking to be ignored.)

It would seem the La Nina has gone on neutral. It will be interesting to see how well the current downtick holds.

I hear people talk about Pinatubo all the time, but in a recent discussion, I went to Woodfortrees, and plotted the hadsst2 against RSS, Hadcrut, and GISS from 1980. Two things JUMPED out fo the page at me.
http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/had…temp/from:1980

1) Surface temp remarkably follows SST. (consistent with D’Aleo’s recent article)

2) Pinatubo was nothing remarkable at all.

When I say this, the downward drop in temp after Pinatubo was consistent with the cycling of SST, and the magnitude was unremarkable compared to natural variation that one would have expected. I know it is standard to believe that the aeresols of volcanoes cool the earth, but once again, that is modeling. Looking at the graph, I wonder.

I found this other paper that was I’m guessing an abstract at the Cosmic Ray conference:
http://icrc2005.tifr.res.in/htm/PAPE…h35-poster.pdf

It shows that SST correlates (R2=0.93) with long term solar fluctuations. His conclusion was that solar output would at some time return to 1906 values, and that temperature would likely follow. My thoughts are if you add a negative PDO to it, will likely be relatively rapid. If you add yet again La Nina .. you have the massive drop we saw for 2007-2008.

It sets up a relationship, that I know some of you are all too aware of, and that is a solar-ocean-temperature relationship. One thing is for sure, I just don’t see how CO2 figures into the graph at WFT. And it dern sure doesn’t figure into the graph of the Cosmic Flux paper.