UAH Global Temperature for October, down significantly

If the Global Average Sea Temperature goes down, it is safe to assume that the whole planet is cooling down (negative slope) since the ocean surface represents 70.8%. Obviously the IPCC models don’t show that at all.

I am sure that you will enjoy this article
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1225577/RICHARD-LITTLEJOHN-When-twin-religions-global-warming-shopping-collide-.html
I particularly like his description of the woman who doesn’t want anyone to have a security light on at night because then we will all drown from AGW as being from the ‘Monster Raving Green Party’.
Richard Littlejohn is a right wing popular commentator who especially targets political stupidity.

“As usual, the linear trend lines in the previous two figures should not be construed as having any predictive power whatsoever — they are for entertainment purposes only.” Actually, it is pretty meaningless, period. So why insist on superimposing it then?
Dr. Spencer, why are you comparing this month’s SSTs with those of last month’s when the annual global SSTs for the AMSU satellite is bimodal? That is, there is (a peak in March, probably reflecting the austral peak in SSTs) and another (lower) peak in late August (reflecting boreal peak in SSTs). Saying oceans cooled/warmed from last month to this month is not entirely correct procedure. Should one not be asking how does this October compare with others on the record? Or how does the mean SST for the year 2008 compare with that for 2006? What is the trend in annual anomalies (then again, any trends, even trends in annual values, determined from such a small sample size are not at all statistically significant)? It would be great if you could add these options to your AMSU website, rather than only being able to say that today the global SST (or near surface layer) is 0.x F warmer/cooler than last year. Thanks for considering.

I notice that temps go down starting around the first of the year, for the last 8 years, and for several earlier years as well, including El Nino year 1998, and also 1999. Something to do with the Earth’s rotation or orbit, if memory serves. Go for nine?

“Climate talks end in acrimony as UN and EU accuse US of endangering deal”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/nov/06/developing-nations-copenhagen-walkout
And from Al Gore “Civil unrest has a role in stopping climate change, says Gore”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/nov/06/gore-copenhagen-climate-civil-disobedience
Could mean trouble.

I think “significant” is a strong word to use for the decrease from September.

After seeing Lindzen presentation yesterday, I was wondering what is the error range on those measurements. Lindzen was displaying them with a pink fuzz on the graphics and said that it is statistically insignificant when the errors are in the same range.
Comments?

Ray, you misunderstood my post. Yes, of course, October’s anomaly was calculated form the mean global SST for all Octobers considered in the baseline. My issue is with comparing the anomaly in Sept. with that in October, for example. Or today’s temperature with that observed on the same day last year. Hence my suggestions.

Let’s all chant: “Go El Nino!”
At least that would soften the blow. Each sawtooth takes the overall signal a bit lower. The peaks are deceiving, the overall trend is down.

imapopulist (10:45:14) :
Why has Ch05 recently been indicating temperatures at record highs? Could you explain the apparent discrepancy with the above charts?
If you select years 2003-2009, you see that October 2009 is on the higher average of all of them, comparable with October 2006. However, the satellite which curves we see on AMSU page is different than that, from which the actual anomaly is calculated, so those charts are informative only. Because of continuous satellite drift, you see that even October 2006 curve looks lower, the real 2006 anomaly was higher than 2009.
One thing puzzles me on these data is, that first half of the year is usually closer to average and autumn is always higher.

I was interested in Dr Svalgaard’s observations on an earlier post – The Sun’s magnetic funk continues – about the Carrington Event, when a CME led to unusually widespread aurorae. I went back to my local paper for 1859 to see if they had been observed here – approx 54N in England – which would be very unusual. Sure enough there was a description from an Observatory at Beeston in Derbyshire. Much to my amazement the very next article in the paper was about climate change. What was interesting about the article which is reprodced below was how a relatively limited series of observations on rainfall plus some anecdotal evidence was used to support a deeply held belief in the historical reality of Noah’s Flood. On the other hand there was no suggestion that everyone should rush off to church and beg the Lord to save them from drought instead it was viewed as “the normal condition, of the globe.” Times do change apparently.
DIMINUTION OF RAIN – STARTLING SPECULATIONS. – In the quarterly return of the Registrar General ending with June it is stated that “the deficiency in the fall of rain from the beginning of the year is 1¾ inch. The deficiency in the year 1854, 1855, 1856, 1857, 1858 amounted to the average fall of one year, viz., 25 inches. From a careful examination of the fall of rain (year by year} from the year 1815, it would seem that the annual fall is becoming smaller, and that there is but little probability that the large deficiency will be made up by excess in future years.” Should this statement, made by Mr. Glaisher and adopted by the Registrar General in a document issued by authority, be confirmed, it will constitute one of the most important discoveries ever made by meteorologists. In all countries traces of dried-up streams are met with; but within the historical period there are few or no examples of new rivers coming into existence. The Dnieper at Kiev is drying up. The redoubted plains of Troy can with difficulty be recognised or traced, because the rivers mentioned by Homer, whose descriptive topography is not doubted, either cannot be found or they are now such insignificant streams as to fall far below the descriptions of the poet. About the mouths of the Nile the water is becoming shallower while there is reason to believe that the volume of its waters has been within the period of history sensibly diminished. The Baltic is decreasing. The Adriatic derives its name from a town that is now 18 miles from the shore and was once a flourishing seaport. North America is sensibly draining. The rivers are slowly wearing away the rock, and occupying a lower bed. America on the Pacific Ocean is notoriously rising, or the ocean
which surrounds it is sinking. The Deluge is a very early event in the history of mankind; and it is consistent alike with sacred and profane history to suppose that ever since that period, as well as immediately after the first few days when the dove found a resting-place, the waters of the earth have gradually dried up. If it be a fact, then, that the quantity of rain which falls has been continually diminishing through a period of 44 years, the slow and gradual diminution of rain must be considered as the normal condition, of the globe. Most of the changes which geology traces on the crust of the globe have been in progress for many ages, and, from the light which the diminution of rain reflects on many theological phenomena, we were induced, at starting, to describe it as one of the most momentous discoveries, should it be confirmed, that observation has ever made.
From a Correspondent of the Illustrated London News.