December 3rd, 2010 by Roy W. Spencer, Ph. D.
YR MON GLOBE NH SH TROPICS
2010 1 0.648 0.860 0.436 0.681
2010 2 0.603 0.720 0.486 0.791
2010 3 0.653 0.850 0.455 0.726
2010 4 0.501 0.799 0.203 0.633
2010 5 0.534 0.775 0.292 0.708
2010 6 0.436 0.550 0.323 0.476
2010 7 0.489 0.635 0.342 0.420
2010 8 0.511 0.674 0.347 0.364
2010 9 0.603 0.555 0.650 0.285
2010 10 0.426 0.370 0.482 0.156
2010 11 0.381 0.513 0.249 -0.071
The tropical tropospheric temperature anomaly for November continued its cooling trend, finally falling below the 1979-1998 average…but the global anomaly is still falling slowly:+0.38 deg. C for October, 2010.
2010 is now in a dead heat with 1998 for warmest year.
Read the rest of the story here.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
is there any explanation for the step up from 1999 to 2001?
Dec. 1998 Global = +0.277
peterhodges says: “is there any explanation for the step up from 1999 to 2001?”
It’s actually a step up in the North Hemisphere (north of 20N) after the 1997/98 El Nino. I used RSS TLT anomaly data in this June 2009 post because the Hovmoller provided by RSS helps the illustration of the step.
http://bobtisdale.blogspot.com/2009/06/rss-msu-tlt-time-latitude-plots.html
Coincidentally, I’m working on a post to help explain it. I’m trying to have done in a few days.
And for those interested, I’ve posted the preliminary (Reynolds OI.v2) Global and NINO3.4 SST anomalies for November:
http://bobtisdale.blogspot.com/2010/11/preliminary-november-2010-sst-anomaly.html
Global SST anomalies dropped about 0.04 deg C.
Not really sure how it matters if 2010 is even 0.01C Warmer than 1998 – surely that shows temperatures have not risen +0.25 over the past 12 years as was supposed to happen? Even if 2010 pips 1998 slightly there has still been no new global warming since 1998. Here on our Hog farm in Devon we are constantly told in this country that we have the warming, but the UK seems to be cooling. This is the 2nd year in a row where my Hogs are are found frozen in the fields and it is so hard for us simple folk in Devon to make a living, never mind understand this complex science which is beyond the education standards in this remote part of the UK.
Kinda O/T,
The deepest point in the ocean, the Mariana Trench (6.8 miles deep) is located near the lower left of the globe as shown, I.E. the oceans greatest depth can not even be depicted at the scale of this view.
Nor the depth our atmosphere.
It makes me wonder.
Peter Hearnden 4:29
In this case, you perhaps understand more about climate from experience than those who may claim to have mastered this complex science. You express more wisdom about the meaning of a fraction of a degree as compared to your hogs freezing to death – you at least have empirical knowledge instead of a worthless mathematical model that says your hogs should be burning up.
The 1997-98 El Nino peaked at +2.80C while the 2009-10 El Nino peaked at +1.82C. The La Ninas which followed these El Ninos have developed in a very similar manner and the AMO seems to have also followed a very similar pattern in the two years following.
So, we should have expected 1998 to be about 0.07C higher than 2010 (just based on the difference in the two El Ninos with no net difference from other ocean cycles). In addition, the CO2-based climate models have also predicted we should have seen about 0.24C of warming in the past twelve years.
Well, 2010 looks like it will be about -0.011C less than 1998 (in UAH). So, we got 0.06C of warming versus the 0.24C the CO2-based climate models expected.
And don’t forget there is a 3 month lag from the La Nina which is yet to come. Temps are still going down for at least the next 3 to 9 months. Another 0.30C of decline to go perhaps.
How is the UHI effect handled in this data?
Well, it took 12 years, but by golly we found some global warming. Now watch those global anomalies anomolize themselves through the roof!
No way is 2010 warmer. Maybe the best measure is crop production. A truer picture of climate.
Peter Hearnden -yep pard, that says it all. I’m the son of a NE Oregon Cowboy
who cried at the sight of a newborn Calf frozen to the earth in a cold spring.
All the warmist theology in the world has no idea of cycles and life on the
farm/ranch…
So when is the CAGW going to start? I thought the atmospheric CO2 concentrations were well above the limits needed to start CAGW. In the pipeline?
Peter Hearnden says:
December 3, 2010 at 4:29 pm
“Not really sure how it matters if 2010 is even 0.01C Warmer than 1998 – surely that shows temperatures have not risen +0.25 over the past 12 years as was supposed to happen? Even if 2010 pips 1998 slightly there has still been no new global warming since 1998. Here on our Hog farm in Devon we are constantly told in this country that we have the warming, but the UK seems to be cooling. This is the 2nd year in a row where my Hogs are are found frozen in the fields and it is so hard for us simple folk in Devon to make a living”, never mind understand this complex science which is beyond the education standards in this remote part of the UK.”
Your admission is honest.
It is clear that you don’t understand the difference between climate and weather. The year 1998 is notable for the most powerful El Nino in modern times. El Nino events have a powerful effect on global average temperatures. So the elevated global temperature of 1998 is weather noise rather than the indication of a peak in a warming trend.
The UK is a tiny part of the globe. The weather in the UK is not an indicator of a global trend. It can be cool in the UK and at the same time, a global average high temperature can occur.
If you recognize that you are “simple folk” , you should listen to what the climate scientists have to say, rather than look at the weather in your own backyard, as the basis for your conclusions.opinion on global warming.
Bill Illis @ur momisugly http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/12/03/nov-2010-uah-global-temperature-update-0-38-deg-c/#comment-543157 says:
The 1997-98 El Nino peaked at +2.80C while the 2009-10 El Nino peaked at +1.82C. The La Ninas which followed these El Ninos have developed in a very similar manner and the AMO seems to have also followed a very similar pattern in the two years following.
So, we should have expected 1998 to be about 0.07C higher than 2010 (just based on the difference in the two El Ninos with no net difference from other ocean cycles). In addition, the CO2-based climate models have also predicted we should have seen about 0.24C of warming in the past twelve years.
This is all very strange. I was led to believe, in no small part thanks to NASA climatology and other reports that natural processes were holding down temperatures, hence the lack of statistically significant warming. But here, you seem to be saying that there has been no statistically significant warming, and that natural processes have cooled by 1C over the same time period. Doesn’t that mean that there has been 0.75C of warming?
One thing is for sure: the warmest year will be declared, even if they have to redefine what “warmest” is.
Mark my words.
the global anomaly is still falling slowly:+0.38 deg. C for October, 2010.
This evidently should read “for November”. Dr. Spencer has corrected it on his site.
Way back when (a long time ago) when I was a physics grad., I would have deservedly got an “F” for showing results without discussing the measurement errors.
Meanwhile here in Germany we’re having the third hard winter in a row with the temperatures in some places already heading down towards -20C overnight.
I guess if this was the third hot *summer* in a row, the climatologists would be all over the press pushing their narratives.
We can rest assured that any handling of the UHI effect served to accentuate it. The data “handlers” are incapable of principle of lowering values that are less than 50 years old. First off, properly adjusting for UHI is against their religion. Second, everybody knows that you can only add to recent data and subtract from old data. I think they teach that in grade school or such.
There’s also December yet to include. We’ll see . . .
Since so many have experienced long cold spells this year, I assume the global heat has to be explained by a very warm year in largely uninhabited areas, which is plausible since these areas are big. But this makes AGW harder to sell as it makes AGW a kind of “god of gaps”, i.e. warming is happening where hardly anyone around to witness it.
Why is it a 13 month running average doesn’t end at the same point as the data, the average should be from the present to 13 months ago.
Just looking at the graph it looks like a much shorter running average than 13 months, it just appears to be a smoothed version of the raw data over a much shorter period than 13 months, maybe 3 months tops.
1930s was much much warmer, problem is, no satelites. Who cares anyway, warmer is better we should be throwing a party
Eadler, you should put the term “climate scientists” in inverted commas, as I have done here, or use this alternative: ‘climate scientists’.
‘Climate science’ has morphed into a huge self-servicing bureaucracy, where data distortions/manipulations are the bedrock on which the grant and funding troughs are built.
It is a cult in which the concept of the Earth’s natural climate cycles are a heresy.
In the world of real science, today’s normal practices of ‘climate scientists’ would not be tolerated.
Sorry you guys are having a cold nasty winter. We are having a fantastic spring in New Zealand right now with predictions of a beautiful warm La Nina summer to follow.
eadler says:
December 3, 2010 at 8:27 pm
If you recognize that you are “simple folk” , you should listen to what the climate scientists have to say, rather than look at the weather in your own backyard, as the basis for your conclusions.opinion on global warming.
Being a mongrel American, I’m not used to hearing language like that, except maybe occasionally around MIT. In stark contrast to the AGW elite, Peter Hearnden (December 3, 2010 at 4:29 pm) is doing something valuable and important for other people on this planet. There is deep wisdom in those who work in the real world. People locked in ivory towers never get out to see it. Perhaps you should get out more often.