We’ve already told you that the Russian heatwave had everything to do with weather, and not climate. NOAA agrees:
NOAA on the Russian heat wave: blocking high, not global warming
At least NASA Goddard agrees with this, sort of. – Anthony
An unparalleled heat wave in eastern Europe, coupled with intense droughts and fires around Moscow, put Earth’s temperatures in the headlines this summer. Likewise, a string of exceptionally warm days in July in the eastern United States strained power grids, forced nursing home evacuations, and slowed transit systems. Both high-profile events reinvigorated questions about humanity’s role in climate change.
But, from a global perspective, how warm was the summer exactly? How did the summer’s temperatures compare with previous years? And was global warming the “cause” of the unusual heat waves? Scientists at NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) in New York City, led by GISS’s director, James Hansen, have analyzed summer temperatures and released an update on the GISS website that addresses all of these questions.
This map, based on land surface temperatures observed by the Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) on NASA’s Terra satellite, shows temperature anomalies for the Russian Federation from July 20–27, 2010, compared to temperatures for the same dates from 2000 to 2008. For more information about this image, please visit NASA’s Earth Observatory. Credit: NASA/Goddard/Earth Observatory
Globally, June through August, according to the GISS analysis, was the fourth-warmest summer period in GISS’s 131-year-temperature record. The same months during 2009, in contrast, were the second warmest on record. The slightly cooler 2010 summer temperatures were primarily the result of a moderate La Niña (cooler than normal temperatures in the equatorial Pacific Ocean) replacing a moderate El Niño (warmer than normal temperatures in the equatorial Pacific Ocean).
As part of their analysis, Hansen and colleagues released a series of graphs that help explain why perceptions of global temperatures vary — often erroneously — from season to season and year to year. For example, unusually warm summer temperatures in the United States and eastern Europe created the impression of global warming run amuck in those regions this summer, while last winter’s unusually cool temperatures created the opposite impression. A more global view, as shown below for 2009 and 2010, makes clear that extrapolating global trends based on the experience of one or two regions can be misleading.
The four graphs show seasonal-mean temperature anomalies relative to 1951-1980 for the most recent two summers and winters; that is, they show how temperatures during the various seasons differ from the mean temperatures from 1951-1980, which serves as a reference period. Unusually warm summers in eastern Europe and much of the United States created the impression of record global temperatures this summer (lower right), while unseasonably cool winters in the same regions had the opposite effect during winter of 2010 (lower left). For more information about this image, please visit the GISS website. Credit: NASA/Goddard Institute for Space Studies/Hansen
“Unfortunately, it is common for the public to take the most recent local seasonal temperature anomaly as indicative of long-term climate trends,” Hansen notes. “[We hope] these global temperature anomaly maps may help people understand that the temperature anomaly in one place in one season has limited relevance to global trends.”
Last winter, for example, unusually cool temperatures in much of the United States caused many Americans to wonder why temperatures seemed to be plummeting, and whether the Earth could actually be experiencing global warming in the face of such frigid temperatures. A more global view, seen in the lower left of the four graphs above, shows that global warming trends had hardly abated. In fact, despite the cool temperatures in the United States, last winter was the second-warmest on record.
Though calendar year 2010 may or may not turn out to be the warmest on record, the warmest 12-month period in the GISS analysis was reached in mid-2010. The lower portion of the graph shows when major volcanic eruptions have occurred with green triangles. The lowest part shows El Niño (red) and La Niña (blue) trends. For more information about this graph, please visit the GISS website Credit: NASA/Goddard Institute for Space Studies/Hansen
This map shows temperature anomalies relative to 1951-1980 for the summer of 2010; that is, how temperatures in June through August 2010 differed from the mean temperatures from 1951-1980. A NASA visualizer created it based on data from the Goddard Institute for Space Studies. For more information about this image, visit the Earth Observatory site. Credit: NASA/Goddard/Earth Observatory
Meanwhile, the global seasonal temperatures for the spring of 2010 — March, April, and May — was the warmest on GISS’s record. Does that mean that 2010 will shape up to be the warmest on record? Since the warmest year on GISS’s record — 2005 — experienced especially high temperatures during the last four calendar months of the year, it’s not yet clear how 2010 will stack up.
“It is likely that the 2005 or 2010 calendar year means will turn out to be sufficiently close that it will be difficult to say which year was warmer, and results of our analysis may differ from those of other groups,” Hansen notes. “What is clear, though, is that the warmest 12-month period in the GISS analysis was reached in mid-2010.”
The Russian heat wave was highly unusual. Its intensity exceeded anything scientists have seen in the temperature record since widespread global temperature measurements became available in the 1880s. Indeed, a leading Russian meteorologist asserted that the country had not experienced such an intense heat wave in the last 1,000 years. And a prominent meteorologist with Weather Underground estimated such an event may occur as infrequently as once every 15,000 years.
In the face of such a rare event, there’s much debate and discussion about whether global warming can “cause” such extreme weather events. The answer — both no and yes — is not a simple one.
Weather in a given region occurs in such a complex and unstable environment, driven by such a multitude of factors, that no single weather event can be pinned solely on climate change. In that sense, it’s correct to say that the Moscow heat wave was not caused by climate change.
However, if one frames the question slightly differently: “Would an event like the Moscow heat wave have occurred if carbon dioxide levels had remained at pre-industrial levels,” the answer, Hansen asserts, is clear: “Almost certainly not.”
The frequency of extreme warm anomalies increases disproportionately as global temperature rises. “Were global temperature not increasing, the chance of an extreme heat wave such as the one Moscow experienced, though not impossible, would be small,” Hansen says.
For GISS’s full analysis, please visit:
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/
I don’t know about the NH at this time, but, as I have posted before, September was the coldest in ~16 years. That is across the entire east and south coast of Australia.
I didn’t know Al Gore was in Aus.
***“Would an event like the Moscow heat wave have occurred if carbon dioxide levels had remained at pre-industrial levels,” the answer, Hansen asserts, is clear: “Almost certainly not.”***
And this is substantiated how? Because he says so?
CO2 caused a blocking high?
Of course it did, Hansen says so.
Though calendar year 2010 may or may not turn out to be the warmest on record…
Ha. Ha ha.
Well at least they’re allowing the possibility of a sufficiently large asteroid and/or meteorite impact, or a gigantically massive volcanic eruption, plunging the planet into a deadly “nuclear winter” style deep freeze under a sun-blocking atmospheric layer of particulates. Which appears to be the only possible event that’ll keep them from declaring 2010 the hottest year EVAH, despite what annoying things like satellites, actual Sea Surface Temperature measurements, and temperature records that have not been serially adjusted, homogenized, folded, spindled, and mutilated, may say.
I thought the arctic had a cool summer according to the DMH Polar Temperature chart, which actually involves recording temperatures within the arctic circle
Are these numbers and graphs including the extrapolated temperatures above 80N?
It seems most of the “warming” is there.
The secret NOAA algorithm revealed:
1. Input – target temperature
2. Input – noisy data from all over the place
3. Adjust noisy data until a match is achieved with target temperature
4. Output – target temperature
Of course, don’t forget:
5. Change historical records randomly to obfuscate the process
I was looking at US GISS numerical table yesterday and the figures look like the pre-Y2K fix numbers. Is this just a mistake or is NASA taking us for a ride again? Sorry but I don’t have the web page on my phone.
How did they manage to establish that northern hemisphere temperatures for winter 2010 (09/10 I assume) were the second warmest on record when land temperatures were consistently lower than normal across most of the NH through much of last winter? Sea surface temps (which lag land temps when the temperature is falling)?
Their ref period is of course almost as most blatantly unrepresentative of the 20th C as it’s possible to choose.
Continuously reducing historic temperatures makes analyses by GISS of current record high temps a slam dunk.
“Would an event like the Moscow heat wave have occurred if carbon dioxide levels had remained at pre-industrial levels,” the answer, Hansen asserts, is clear: “Almost certainly not.”
Almost only counts in Horseshoes & Hand Grenades.
Almost certainly says the assertion is not 100% clear.
Remember, GISS has almost no data points up in the Arctic, and almost nothing in the Southern Oceans. Antarctica consists of what, almost 10% coverage with the Peninsula and the S. Pole ??
So, we can safely say 2010 was almost the warmest summer ever, but not with 100% certainty.
Error bars, always Hansen GISS comes to the show without the error bars.
Does GISS redo the anomalies each time they change the 30 year baseline. When did it change from the warmer 1961 – 1990 period to today’s 1951 – 1980 cooler period?
As a non-scientist and sometime reader of this blog, I’m at a loss to understand the millions of dollars wasted by you scientists in studying the change in climate? Tell me why a change of .50 to .75 of 1 degree is worth such largess when we have millions of people dying of hunger and disease. I am disgusted by you scientists, you should all hang up your degrees and retire. For the average Joe out there, you have ruined your reputations and I have found you to be nothing but political shills.
One only has to read the time period for reference line to understand it’s all BS.
Basic statistics dictate you use a proper reference if you want your statistics to be trustworthy. You don’t go and change your references when you feel like it or because it makes your statistical result make the “correct” show. Correctly used, statistic, depict reality, and no matter how statistics is incorrectly used it’ll never make the lunatics version of reality into reality.
Almost certainly not = maybe/maybe not
James Hansen should be nick-named “The Waffle”.
If I am correct in reading the graphs, they indicate that this winter (Jun-Jul-Aug) for us here on the southern cost of Africa has been equal to or slightly warmer than 2009. This is not correct, and I would venture that it has been exactly opposite to what is shown, IE. 2009 was a lot warmer, with a very short winter. This year has been much milder, with periodic cold fronts from the southern ocean continuing to drop temperatures as is the norm. For sure any surfer from Jeffrey’s bay (awesome) has a better handle on winds and temperatures in this part than an entire govt. weather bureau.
“It is likely that the 2005 or 2010 calendar year means will turn out to be sufficiently close that it will be difficult to say which year was warmer, and results of our analysis may differ from those of other groups,” Hansen notes.
Ya, especially with this going on at GISS (more videos like this on the way) :
I wonder which base period they will use next… Easy to get the picture you want when you can cherry pick the “normal” temperatures to use.
GISS not differs with other data sets but it differs with itself.
I have my problems with the GISS approach, mostly based on methodological and technical reasons. That said, I think Dr. Hansen has shown a more science based attitude in his analysis; however the, “most certainly not” comment, shows this zebra has not changed its stripes.
Or rather: How cold was this summer?. This is more meaningful; there we know we are at a solar minimum.
James Hanson is a disgrace to his profession, a disgrace to NASA, a disgrace to science and a disgrace to humanity.
If 2010 fails to be the “warmest on record” you can bet your bottom Dollar they will switch it to “warmest 365 days on the record.” :o)
1DandyTroll says:
October 2, 2010 at 11:43 am
If Hansen had compared 2010 to the 1920-1950 base period (the previous warm period) it wouldn’t look so hot.
“In fact, despite the cool temperatures in the United States, last winter was the second-warmest on record.”
I find this so hard to believe that I’m tempted to investigate this claim for myself.