NCDC data shows that the contiguous USA has not warmed in the past decade, summers are cooler, winters are getting colder

See update below: New comparison graph of US temperatures in 1999 to present added – quite an eye opener – Anthony

There’s been a lot of buzz and conflicting reports over what the BEST data actually says, especially about the last decade where we have dueling opinions on a “slowing down”, “leveling off”, “standstill”, or “slight rise” (depending on whose pronouncements you read) of global warming.

Here’s some media quotes that have been thrown about recently about the BEST preliminary data and preliminary results:

“‘We see no evidence of it [global warming] having slowed down,’ he told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme. There was, he added, ‘no levelling off’.” – Dr. Richard Muller

In The Sunday Mail Prof Curry said, the project’s research data show there has been no increase in world temperatures since the end of the Nineties:

‘There is no scientific basis for saying that warming hasn’t stopped,’ she said. ‘To say that there is detracts from the credibility of the data, which is very unfortunate.’ – Dr. Judith Curry in The Sunday Mail

Climatologist Dr. Pat Michaels in an essay at The GWPF wrote:

“The last ten years of the BEST data indeed show no statistically significant warming trend, no matter how you slice and dice them”. He adds: “Both records are in reasonable agreement about the length of time without a significant warming trend. In the CRU record it is 15.0 years. In the University of Alabama MSU it is 13.9, and in the Remote Sensing Systems version of the MSU it is 15.6 years. “

In the middle of all those quotes being bandied about, I get an email from Burt Rutan (yes THAT Burt Rutan) with a PDF slideshow titled Winter Trends in the United States in the Last Decade citing NCDC’s “climate at a glance” data. This is using the USHCN2 data, which we are told is the “best”, no pun intended. It had this interesting map of the USA for Winter Temperatures (December-February) by climate region on the first slide:

Hmmm, that’s a bit of a surprise for the steepness of those trend numbers. So I decided to expand and enhance that slide show by combining trend graphs and the map together, while also looking at other data (summer, annual). Here’s a breakdown for CONUS by region for Winter, Summer, and Annual comparisons. Click each image to enlarge to full size to view the graphs.

Winter temperatures and trends °F, 2001-2011. Note that every region has a negative trend:

Summer temperatures and trends °F, 2001-2011. Note that 5 of 9 regions have a negative summertime trend:

And finally here is the Annual yearly mean temperature trend for the last decade. Since 2011 is not yet complete for annual data (though is for Winter and Summer data), I’ve plotted the last decade available, from 2000-2010:

Only 1 of 9 regions has a positive decadal trend for the Annual mean temperature, the Northeast.

This data is from USHCN2, from the National Climatic Data Center (NCDC). Note that I have not adjusted it or even self plotted it in any way. The output graphs and trend numbers are from NCDC’s publicly available “Climate At A Glance” database interface, and these can be fully replicated by anyone easily simply by going here and choosing “regions”:

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/cag3/cag3.html

I find the fact that summer temperatures were negative in five of 9 regions interesting. But most importantly, the trend for the CONUS for the past 10 years is not flat, but cooling.

The trend line for the contiguous lower 48 states looks like this for the same period when we plot the Annual mean temperature data for 2001-2010 (we can’t plot 2011 yet since the year isn’t complete):

And if we back it up a year, to 2000, so that we get ten full years, we get this:

So according the the National Climatic Data Center, it seems clear that for at least the last 10 years, there has been a cooling trend in the Annual mean temperature of the contiguous United States. Pat Michaels in his GWPF essay talks about 1996 :

A significant trend since these periods began is not going to emerge anytime soon. MSU temperatures are plummeting and are now below where they were at this time of the year in the 2008 La Nina. NOAA is predicting an extreme La Nina low in 2012. If the 1976-98 warming trend is re-established in 2013, post-1996 warming would not become significant until 2021.

So when you run the NCDC “climate at a glance” plotter from 1996 for the USA on Annual mean temperature data for the contiguous United States for 15 years of data, you get this, flatness:

Warming, for the USA seems pretty “stalled” to me in the last 10-15 years. Bear in mind that BEST uses the same data source for the USA, the USCHN2 data. Granted, this isn’t a standard 30 year climatology period we are examining, but the question about the last 10 years is still valid. “Aerosol masking” has been the reason given by the Team. Blame China.

For the inevitable whining and claims of cherry picking that will come in comments, here’s the complete data set from NCDC plotted from 1895. I added the 1934 reference line in blue:

Interestingly, we’ve had only two years that exceeded 1934 for Annual mean temperature in the United States and they were El Niño related. 1998 and 2006 both had El Niño events.

While the United States is not the world, it does have some of the best weather data available, no pun intended. Given the NCDC data for CONUS, it certainly seems to me that warming has stalled for the United States in the last decade.

UPDATE: 11/06/2011 8AM PST

When I wrote the post above, I had concerns that the 1998 and 2006 peaks might not have actually exceeded 1934. I didn’t have the energy to explore the issue last night. This morning looking anew, I recalled the GISS Y2K debacle and recovered the graphs from Hansen’s 1999 press release. This was originally part of “Lights Out Upstairs” a guest post by Steve McIntyre on my old original blog. Just look at how much warmer 1934 was in 1999 than it is now. Much of this can be attributed to NCDC’s USHCN2 adjustments.

=============================================================

Steve wrote then:

In the NASA press release in 1999 , Hansen was very strongly for 1934. He said then:

The U.S. has warmed during the past century, but the warming hardly exceeds year-to-year variability.Indeed, in the U.S. the warmest decade was the 1930s and the warmest year was 1934.

This was illustrated with the following depiction of US temperature history, showing that 1934 was almost 0.6 deg C warmer than 1998.

From a Hansen 1999 News Release: http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/briefs/hansen_07/fig1x.gif

However within only two years, this relationship had changed dramatically. In Hansen et al 2001 (referred to in the Lights On letter), 1934 and 1998 were in a virtual dead heat with 1934 in a slight lead. Hansen et al 2001 said

The U.S. annual (January-December) mean temperature is slightly warmer in 1934 than in 1998 in the GISS analysis (Plate 6)… the difference between 1934 and 1998 mean temperatures is a few hundredths of a degree.

From Hansen et al 2001 Plate 2. Note the change in relationship between 1934 and 1998.

Between 2001 and 2007, for some reason, as noted above, the ranks changed slightly with 1998 creeping into a slight lead.

The main reason for the changes were the incorporation of an additional layer of USHCN adjustments by Karl et al overlaying the time-of-observation adjustments already incorporated into Hansen et al 1999. Indeed, the validity and statistical justification of these USHCN adjustments is an important outstanding issue.

============================================================

I’ve prepared a before and after graph using the CONUS values from GISS in 1999 and in 2011 (today).

GISS writes now of the bottom figure:

Annual Mean Temperature Change in the United States

Annual and five-year running mean surface air temperature in the contiguous 48 United States (1.6% of the Earth’s surface) relative to the 1951-1980 mean. [This is an update of Figure 6 in Hansen et al. (1999).]

Also available as PDF, or Postscript. Also available are tabular data.

So clearly, the two graphs are linked, and 1998 and 1934 have swapped positions for the “warmest year”. 1934 went down by about 0.3°C while 1998 went up by about 0.4°C for a total of about 0.7°C.

And they wonder why we don’t trust the surface temperature data.

In fairness, most of this is the fault of NCDC’s Karl, Menne, and Peterson, who have applied new adjustments in the form of USHCN2 (for US data) and GHCN3 (to global data). These adjustments are the primary source of this revisionism. As Steve McIntyre often says: “You have to watch the pea under the thimble with these guys”.

============================================================

UPDATE2: 10:30AM PST 11/07/2011 – Dr. Pat Michaels writes in with an update.

Anthony–

The post on Muller is a little long in the tooth but I do need to correct something.

The comment was that I said NOAA was predicting an “extreme” La Nina in 2012.  That was true when I wrote it, but since then the October 31 forecast has come out and I used that in my most recent posting on this at the Cato site:

http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=13827

Here’s the relevant portion from the text:

We are currently experiencing another — for now — moderate La Niña, or the cold phase of El Niño. Satellite temperatures, as of this writing, have dropped below where they were in the previous La Niña of 2008, so 2011 isn’t going to be particularly warm compared to the average of the last 15 years.

In addition, the latest forecast from the Department of Commerce’s Climate Prediction Center is for the current La Niña to become stronger and persist through at least the first half of 2012:

La Niña forecast, October 31, 2011. La Niña conditions exist when the temperature anomaly is below -0.5°C. The ensemble mean of the current forecast (dashed line) is for colder conditions than now to persist for at least the first half of next year.

Consequently, 2012, like 2011, is not likely to be particularly warm when compared to the last 15 years.

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

224 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Hexe Froschbein
November 5, 2011 6:10 pm

Alternatively you can just ask folks how the tomatoes in the garden have worked out… 🙂
I live in the UK, and I’ve now officially given up on tomatoes after wasting my time those past 4 summers. 🙁
REPLY: Maybe we need a global garden tomato success index as a proxy for temperature – Anthony

Theo Goodwin
November 5, 2011 6:14 pm

I do not think the phrase “global warming” means what the Warmista think it means.

Dave Springer
November 5, 2011 6:18 pm

This article looks really good on my smart phone!

November 5, 2011 6:19 pm

I believe that you will find, as I did when I looked, that the recent rise in temperatures along the Eastern Seaboard, including the Northeast came after a decline in their average temperatures from 1950 to 1965 approximately. (See posts on the topic at Bit Tooth Energy and on one of the effects of that drop on the black capped chickadee .

Stephen Brown
November 5, 2011 6:19 pm

Avid UK gardener here and I, too, have given up on tomatoes; I’ve even given up on trying to grow chillies and peppers in the greenhouse. They simply don’t produce. I’ve spent the last two growing seasons experimenting with what are known as cold-weather crops with some success.
I can no longer grow the proliferation of crops with which I am so familiar. It is just not warm enough for long enough.

pat
November 5, 2011 6:21 pm

Whoa. Are the NASA/NOAA/EPA outright lying? While i was aware of a general cooling trend, that shows a complete reversal of the entire 1980-1998 warming trend.

November 5, 2011 6:29 pm

The warming appears to have stalled while we see:
Biggest jump ever seen in global warming gases
Link: http://www.usatoday.com/tech/science/story/2011-11-03/huge-increase-in-global-warming-gasses/51065082/1
I know: correllation doesn’t mean causation, but still…
are the increased “global warming gases” stopping the warming?

Interstellar Bill
November 5, 2011 6:41 pm

There never was any ‘global’ warming,
which necesarily means that temperatures rise everywhere,
whereas in truth much of the world actually cooled off
over the last 50 years (Antarctica and high-latitude southern oceans)
and only another part (northern latitudes) actually warmed much.
GW is nothing but a two-word lie when applied
to a pseudo-science ‘average temperature anomaly’,
which as a global-status indicator is a 100% fraud.
Their current ‘global-wilding’ mantra is even more pathetic.

November 5, 2011 6:47 pm

I’m going to join the others here and say my own “seat of the pants” impression is that it has been cooler overall, summer and winter, over the last several years. Sure, here in Maryland we had a month long spell this summer of 90+ days, but the heat was late getting here, and it cooled off fast afterward. In other words, the growing season was too short this year for what we planted. Our garden was a disaster. Last year was little better. And my impression is that the winters for the last few years have had longer periods of bitter cold. In fact, last winter I put a heat lamp in the chicken house to help keep it warmer at night. But I’m not a climate scientist, just an accountant. What do I know about climate.

Matt in Houston
November 5, 2011 6:57 pm

Great article. Nothing like the cold hard facts slapping the warmistas in the face. Of course I am sure the warmistas will tell us that CONUS is not climate so this data means nothing blah blah blah…sure and Santy Claus will be right down the chimney. Perhaps Dr. Muller should turn his PhD credentials into the nearest Al Gore fan club in exchange for some nice robes and other church of Gore paraphenalia…while I was still working at JSC we had a plaque on the wall that read “In God we trust, all others bring data” -this article nails it.
While at JSC I was also privy to a few 2nd hand emails from Mr. Rutan and his comments at one of the last few Shuttle launches and being in the presence of Mr. John Holdren…something about “I must turn away lest i sully my hands with the blood of a fool” …I like Mr. Rutan very much, smart man, brilliant engineer. He has some great charts floating around on the web with his take on globull warming from a few years ago, as I recall they were very well put together, a quick google search will turn them up if anyone is interested.

tokyoboy
November 5, 2011 6:58 pm

Quite OT, but the newest five reviews to Donna’s book are all from the CAGW camp.
So desperate…….

Mr.D.Imwit
November 5, 2011 7:11 pm

In reply to JohnWho,
It’s obvious that CO2 is putting out the fire,after all everyone knows about CO2 fire extinguishers.Lets have more CO2 at hand just in case Globull Warming gets out of control.

November 5, 2011 7:12 pm

Hello IPCC, UNFCCC, GREEN PEACE, CARNEGIE Instituion of science and others; looking forward to hearing from all of you!!!!
Challenge to IPCC / UNFCCC, SHAME ON YOU
Solution to CC and Power crisis
Dear Dr. Pachauri and Mr. Algore,
Please give me either one scientific reason/ theory that justifies CC is due to gases OR STOP ACCUSING GASES for CC. Just accusation is not science. CC by gases is impossible. Please visit devbahadurdongol.blogspot.com for solutions to CC and ‘power crisis’. Summary is attached for your convenience. I have also explained the mistake being done in the hydropower engineering and, its correction can give us unlimited hydropower.
Challenger,
Dr. Dev
Email: dev.dangol@yahoo.co.uk
“already sent to the addressees, green peace and many others throughout the world”

Cirrius Man
November 5, 2011 7:13 pm

Mike, Gavin, don’t stress…
In a few years this data will be homoginized, adjusted, corrected and smoothed and all will be good again 🙂

November 5, 2011 7:20 pm

I have just read The Inconvenient Skeptic by John Kehr. He addresses the long term temperature trends in considerable detail and makes some extremely interesting points about trends as well as Radiative Heat Transfer. I am keen to hear views and reviews of John Kehr’s work – from my reading of it, in spite of the appalling editing quality of the book (Kindle version), it is a ground breaking study, but then, I am only an architect. What do you say Willis?

November 5, 2011 7:25 pm

To follow up on my last comment and to demonstrate that I am not OT one of the points John Kerr makes from his study of ice core data and a comparison of the Holocene with the Eemian is that the last 1,000 years is the coolest 1,000 year period in the last 9,000 years – a statistic that puts this discussion of the last 15 years into perspective!

Gail Combs
November 5, 2011 7:28 pm

Hexe Froschbein says:
November 5, 2011 at 6:10 pm
Alternatively you can just ask folks how the tomatoes in the garden have worked out… 🙂
I live in the UK, and I’ve now officially given up on tomatoes after wasting my time those past 4 summers. 🙁
REPLY: Maybe we need a global garden tomato success index as a proxy for temperature – Anthony
________________________________________
Not a bad idea Anthony. Plants do not LIE. They also say MORE CO2 please.

Sandy
November 5, 2011 7:30 pm

I wonder if 1934 really has been beaten.

ROM
November 5, 2011 7:53 pm

Burt Rutan says:
November 5, 2011 at 6:43 pm
Yes THAT Burt Rutan.
Ah! THAT Burt Rutan! Who’s Burt Rutan?
________________________________________
In the world of my flying hobby THAT Burt Rutan is one of the most highly regarded engineers and persons ever in aviation, aerodynamics, aero structures and just plain good old fashioned innovative engineering of a standard beyond any other’s plus a common sense approach to life and the world around us that is rarely matched on this planet.
And this is from an old Australian power and glider pilot who will never be lucky enough to meet THAT Burt Rutan in person.

REPLY:
Actually that comment wasn’t from the real Burt Rutan, it was from some faker in the UK. Email and IP didn’t match, so I deleted it. I’m honored that Burt follows WUWT, and emails me tips. – Anthony

Chris Nelli
November 5, 2011 7:53 pm

Here’s the issue. Even if 2012 is cold, and 1997-2012 rss data shows no trend (16 years), the warmistas say that the trend can be masked by enso events/aerosols/etc. Even if that is true, how strong can CO2 be if it can be masked for 16 years? Proverbial mountain out of a molehill, or a solution (global control of energy) looking for a problem.

nofreewind
November 5, 2011 8:07 pm

Temp is flat for 10 yrs, or more.
What coal trains of death? World wide coal consumption has increased from 50% from 5 MST to 7.6 MST from 2000 to 2009.
http://www.desdemonadespair.net/2011/10/steep-increase-in-global-co2-emissions.html
Which mirrors a CO2 increase of 50% from 2000 to 2010.
http://www.desdemonadespair.net/2011/10/steep-increase-in-global-co2-emissions.html

jack morrow
November 5, 2011 8:07 pm

It does not matter as long as the progressives are in control of the world economies and the political structures. They will continue their barrage of climate control policies. The only way to stop this is by the vote. What is it that people don’t understand? What will happen if they win again? Hmmmm?

Bill Sticker
November 5, 2011 8:31 pm

First snow seen on the mountains on mid Vancouver Island today. Windchill down to minus one Celsius prophesied. Current temperature outside my back door 2 Celsius. That’s about fifty metres above local mean sea level at 8:30pm PST.
It’s definitely cooler than usual. Although this only Weather you understand.

~FR
November 5, 2011 8:37 pm

Isn’t the issue here exactly *which* warming we are talking about?
If I am not mistaken, there is a real warming trend since the LIA, and a stall of a decade or so does not necessarily mean that we have reached the top of this alternation.
Then there is a speculative AGW trend caused somehow by CO2. Such a trend, if it was real, should NOT have stalled as there is more CO2 than ever in the atmosphere.

J. Felton
November 5, 2011 8:38 pm

It’s not just the US. Up here on the West Coast of Canada, we’ve had colder temperatures as well, with this winter looking to be no exception. Snow’s expected, and the summer was nothing if not gray.
Also, one question. Forgive me if I sound ignorant but I was wondering, when it quotes Pat Michael’s, GWPF essay,
” A significant trend since these periods began is not going to emerge anytime soon. MSU temperatures are plummeting and are now below where they were at this time of the year in the 2008 La Nina. NOAA is predicting an extreme La Nina low in 2012. If the 1976-98 warming trend is re-established in 2013, post-1996 warming would not become significant until 2021.”
Does this mean NOAA is predicting another La Nina for 2012, aside from the one predicted this year, ( and the one that occured last year as well? ) Or does it mean that this year’s La Nina will result in a low in 2012?

1 2 3 9
Verified by MonsterInsights