Global Climate Page

Global Temperatures:

Monthly Mean Surface Temperature Anomaly – 1996 to Present

National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) – Base Period 1951-1980 – Click the pic to view at source

Annual Global Mean Temperature Anomaly Over Land & Sea – 1880 to Present

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) – National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) – Base Period 1901-2000 – Click the pic to view at source

Annual Global Average Land and Ocean Temperature Anomaly – 1850 to 2012

Met Office – Hadley Center – Base Period 1961-1990 – Click the pic to view at source

Monthly Global Average Land Temperature – 1850 to Present

Met Office – Hadley Center – Base Period 1961-1990 – Click the pic to view at source

HadCRUT4 Global, Northern and Southern Hemispheric Temperature Anomalies

University of East Anglia (UEA) – Climatic Research Unit (CRU) – Base Period 1961-1990 – Click the pic to view at source

UAH Lower Atmosphere Temperature Anomalies – 1979 to Present

University of Alabama – Huntsville (UAH) – Dr. Roy Spencer – Base Period 1981-2010 – Click the pic to view at source

UAH Lower Atmosphere Temperature Anomalies – 1979 to Present

University of Alabama – Huntsville (UAH) – Dr. Roy Spencer – Base Period 1981-2010 – Click the pic to view at source


RSS Temperature Lower Troposphere (TLT) – 1979 to Present

Remote Sensing Systems (RSS) – Microwave Sounding Units (MSU) – Base Period 1979-1998 – Click the pic to view at source

Note: Per John Christy, RSS and UAH anomalies are not comparable because they use different base periods, i.e., “RSS only uses 1979-1998 (20 years) while UAH uses the WMO standard of 1981-2010.”

RSS Temperature Middle Troposphere (TMT) – 1979 to Present

Remote Sensing Systems (RSS) – Microwave Sounding Units (MSU) – Base Period 1979-1998 – Click the pic to view at source

Temperature Troposphere / Stratosphere (TTS) – 1987 to Present

Remote Sensing Systems (RSS) – Microwave Sounding Units (MSU) – Base Period 1979-1998 – Click the pic to view at source

Temperature Lower Stratosphere (TLS) – 1979 to Present

Remote Sensing Systems (RSS) – Microwave Sounding Units (MSU) – Base Period 1979-1998 – Click the pic to view at source

Global Sea Surface Temperature Anomaly – NCDC

climate4you.com – Ole Humlum – Professor, University of Oslo Department of Geosciences – Base Period 1901-2000 – Click the pic to view at source

Global Sea Surface Temperature Anomaly – HadSST2

climate4you.com – Ole Humlum – Professor, University of Oslo Department of Geosciences – Base Period 1961-1990 – Click the pic to view at source

Global Ocean Heat Content – 0-700 Meters – 1955 to Present

National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) – National Oceanographic Data Center (NODC) – Base Period 1901-2000 – Click the pic to view at source

Atmospheric Transmission of Solar Radiation

Apparent Atmospheric Transmission of Solar Radiation at Mauna Loa, Hawaii

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) – Earth System Research Laboratory (ESRL) – Click the pic to view at source

Sea Ice:

Global Sea Ice Area – 1979 to Present

http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/global.daily.ice.area.withtrend.jpg

Cryosphere Today – Arctic Climate Research at the University of Illinois – Click the pic to view at source

Sea Level

Global Mean Sea Level Change – 1993 to Present:

climate4you.com – Ole Humlum – Professor, University of Oslo Department of Geosciences – Click the pic to view at source

Global Mean Sea Level Change with a “Correction” of 0.3 mm/year added May, 5th 2011, due to a “Glacial Isostatic Adjustment (GIA)” – 1993 to Present;

University of Colorado at Boulder – Click the pic to view at source

NOAA’s NODC Thermosteric Sea Level Anomaly – 0-700 Meters – 1955 to Present

NOAA – National Oceanographic Data Center (NODC) – Click the pic to view at source

Sea-Level Deviation

NOAA – National Climatic Data Center – Click the pic to view at source

Tropical Cyclones

Global Tropical Cyclone Accumulated Cyclone Energy (ACE)y – 1971 to Present

Ryan N. Maue PhD – PoliClimate.com – Click the pic to view at source

Global Tropical Cyclone Frequency- 1971 to Present

Ryan N. Maue PhD – PoliClimate.com – Click the pic to view at source

Global Hurricane Frequency – 1978 to Present

Ryan N. Maue PhD – PoliClimate.com – Click the pic to view at source

Northern Hemisphere Snowfall

Northern Hemisphere Winter Snow Cover – 1967 to Present

Rutgers University – Global Snow Lab (GSL) – Click the pic to view at source

Northern Hemisphere Fall Snow Cover – 1967 to Present

Rutgers University – Global Snow Lab (GSL) – Click the pic to view at source

Northern Hemisphere Spring Snow Cover – 1967 to Present

Rutgers University – Global Snow Lab (GSL) – Click the pic to view at source

Humidity

Atmospheric Relative Humidity

climate4you.com – Ole Humlum – Professor, University of Oslo Department of Geosciences – Click the pic to view at source

Atmospheric Specific Humidity

climate4you.com – Ole Humlum – Professor, University of Oslo Department of Geosciences – Click the pic to view at source

Shortlink for this page, suitable for blog posts and Twitter feeds:
http://wp.me/P7y4l-9yA

Source Guide:

climate4you.com – Ole Humlum – Professor, University of Oslo Department of Geosciences
Home Page -http://climate4you.com/
Ole Humlum Bibliography – http://climate4you.com/Text/BIBLIOGRAPHY%20OLE%20HUMLUM.pdf

Coolwx.com – Robert Hart, PhD -
Home Page – http://www.coolwx.com?bandwidth=high/

DrRoySpencer.com – Dr. Roy Spencer
Home Page – http://www.drroyspencer.com/
Current Temperature Page – http://www.drroyspencer.com/latest-global-temperatures/
Uploads Page – http://www.drroyspencer.com/wp-content/uploads/

Cryosphere Today – Arctic Climate Research at the University of Illinois:
Home Page – http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/
Products Page – http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/
Images Indexed By Date – http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/

Florida State University – Department of Earth, Ocean, and Atmospheric Science – Moe – Robert Hart, PhD.
Home Page – http://moe.met.fsu.edu/
Products Page – http://moe.met.fsu.edu/~rhart/web.php

Met Office – Hadley Center
Home Page – http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/
Products Page – http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/hadobs/
Global Temperature Products Page – Products Page – http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/hadobs/hadcrut3/diagnostics/comparison.html

National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS)
Home Page – http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/
Products – http://data.giss.nasa.gov/

National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) – Climate Prediction Center (CPC)
Home Page – http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/
Products Page – http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/
Monitoring and Data Products Page – http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/MD_index.shtml
Atmospheric & SST Indices Page – http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/data/indices/
Regional Climate Maps – http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/analysis_monitoring/regional_monitoring/
Monitoring and Data Page – http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/monitoring_and_data/
FTP Page – ftp://ftp.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) – Earth System Research Laboratory (ESRL)
Home Page – http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/
Physical Sciences Division (PSD) Products Page – http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/products/
Physical Sciences Division (PSD) Data Data Page – http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/data/
Physical Sciences Division (PSD) Data Maps Page – http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/map/

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) – National Operational Hydrologic Remote Sensing Center (NOHRSC)
Home Page – http://www.nohrsc.noaa.gov/
Snow Analysis Page -http://www.nohrsc.noaa.gov/nsa/
Forecasts – http://www.nohrsc.noaa.gov/forecasts/

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) – National Climatic Data Center (NCDC)
Home Page – http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/about/about.html?bandwidth=high
Products Page – http://www.ncdc.noaa.govgov/oa/ncdc.html?bandwidth=high
FTP Page – http://www1.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/cmb/?bandwidth=high

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) – National Ice Center (NATICE):
Home Page – http://www.natice.noaa.gov/mission.html?bandwidth=high
Products Page – http://www.natice.noaa.gov/products/products_on_demand.html?bandwidth=high

Ryan N. Maue PhD – PoliClimate.com
http://policlimate.com/weather/

Remote Sensing Systems (RSS)
Home Page – http://ssmi.com/?bandwidth=high
MSU Page – http://ssmi.com/msu/msu_browse.html?bandwidth=high
MSU FTP Page – ftp://ftp.ssmi.com/msu/?bandwidth=high
FTP Page – ftp://ftp.ssmi.com/?bandwidth=high

Rutgers University – Global Snow Lab (GSL)
Home Page – http://climate.rutgers.edu/snowcover/index.php?bandwidth=high
Products Page – http://climate.rutgers.edu/snowcover/chart_seasonal.php?ui_set=eurasia&ui_season=1?bandwidth=high

University of Colorado at Boulder
Home Page – http://sealevel.colorado.edu/
Sea Level Calibration Page: http://sealevel.colorado.edu/content/calibration
Sea Level Release Notes Page: http://sealevel.colorado.edu/content/release-notes
Temperature Results Page – http://sealevel.colorado.edu/results.php
FTP Page – http://sealevel.colorado.edu/current/

University of East Anglia (UEA) – Climatic Research Unit (CRU)
Home Page – http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/
Data Page – http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/data

About these ads

44 Responses to Global Climate Page

  1. John Blake says:

    Notice that quite a number of charts end in mid-2010, now going on a year ago. Why the dilatory updates?

    Great resource! Digesting diverse measures in detail curls one’s toes.

  2. Monroe says:

    Fantastic!

  3. icecover says:

    Are the graphs real time?

  4. Steeptown says:

    Great set of data.

    But isn’t there a sea level graph going back much further in time (like several hundred or thousand years)?

  5. Rhyl says:

    I have been looking for a much longer time period of history that correlate world events with climatic events eg LIA with famine, plague, witch burnings, crop failures, wars etc and MWPeriod with growth of wealth, cathedral building, improved living conditions, and/or wars, territorial expansion. Can anyone point me to such a resource?

    The concentration of the above graphs starting from about 1970s – which I know is based on introduction of different technologies – seems silly to me because many cycles are much longer than 70s to present. You have to live long enough to experience a change or two in the cycles to see that, really, there is little change occurring that is not natural. The 1950s were extremely wet in Australia, as were the 1970s, the 1990s were also wet and now we are back in the wet cycle again.

    We experienced the 1968-70 drought in Central Qld which caused us to study local area rainfall charts that started in 1863. This revealed there were two 11 year cycles that followed each other. One cycle was wetter, the other dryer; some of these 22 year cycles were dryer than others, while others were wetter. The first half of the 20th Century was generally drier than the second half, and it seemed silly for the Climate Change proponents to choose the beginning of this period as the start of their claims that the changes were dangerous. The climate changes all the time.

    Accepting this and adapting to it is a much more productive way than spending billions to control something beyond our control.

  6. jack mosevich says:

    Steeptown: Here is a link to sea level a bit further into the past:

    http://www.cmar.csiro.au/sealevel/downloads/CSIRO_GMSL_figure.pdf

  7. ferd berple says:

    1981 was a really bad ski season!

  8. icecover says: April 30, 2011 at 9:27 pm

    Are the graphs real time?

    The graphs are “real time” in the sense that each time you refresh a Reference Page it presents the most recent version of the graph/graphic from the 3rd party source page. However, in terms of whether the graphics themselves are really “real-time”, i.e. up to date, current data, etc. this is highly dependent upon the source, e.g. the University of Boulder Sea Level chart;

    hasn’t been updated since Release 5 (12/15/2010):

    http://sealevel.colorado.edu/release_notes.php

  9. Steeptown says:
    April 30, 2011 at 11:25 pm

    But isn’t there a sea level graph going back much further in time (like several hundred or thousand years)?

    Rhyl says: May 1, 2011 at 5:56 am

    I have been looking for a much longer time period of history

    The Global Climatic History Page was intended to present only regularly updated measurement data. There are a number of new Reference Pages in progress, but a Global Paleoclimatic History Page will be added to the cue.

  10. R. de Haan says:

    Rhyl says:
    May 1, 2011 at 5:56 am
    “I have been looking for a much longer time period of history that correlate world events with climatic events eg LIA with famine, plague, witch burnings, crop failures, wars etc and MWPeriod with growth of wealth, cathedral building, improved living conditions, and/or wars, territorial expansion. Can anyone point me to such a resource?”

    Maybe this is what you’re looking for:

    http://www.climate4you.com/ClimateAndHistory.htm

    Good luck.

  11. Sunspot says:

    Rhyl says:
    May 1, 2011 at 5:56 am

    “Accepting this and adapting to it is a much more productive way than spending billions to control something beyond our control.”

    This sentence should bet put up in bright flashing lights. We need to get this message across to our dopey government and of course the MEDIA.

    Well done.

  12. Bruce King says:

    A fantastic accumulation. Should be required reading for high school seniors. The
    references added by comments adds additional information. A great teaching aid.
    A copy of this should be sent to every legislator.

  13. Brian says:

    Even including the few graphs going back to the 1850’s, these are such a short time span that it doesn’t take into account what has happened previously, to compare and look for trends over many thousands of years.
    Its normal for the media to take the information that looks sensational and run with it.

  14. Bob Shapiro says:

    Is there a Global Precipitation historical chart?

  15. Phil Fishman says:

    Something appears to amiss in the chart on global ocean heat content. If it were true that the heat content of the oceans has gone up 300% in 50 years, the pro- AGW people would be ecstatic and broadcasting that fact? unceasingly on all the networks.

  16. Global sea level since 1700: see “Recent global sea level acceleration started over 200 years ago?”, Jevrejeva, S., J. C. Moore, A. Grinsted, and P. L. Woodworth (2008), Geophys. Res. Lett., 35, L08715, doi:10.1029/2008GL033611.

  17. Jason Calley says:

    Looking at the very bottom chart, “20 Year Northern Hemisphere Snow Cover”, I see on odd pattern in the anomaly % graph. The first years, 1992, 1993, 1994, show a well defined cyclical variation, but then, starting in 1995, the anomalies become very chaotic. Why is this? Is this just an artifact of poor data for the first few years?

  18. confluence01 says:

    The title of this page is misleading. Most of this data refers to weather,not climate.and only relate to but ONE datum point on the Climate graph.
    This lack of perspective is very counterproductive and dogs many of the issues raised on this web site.
    Perhaps we should have a reminder graph at the top of this page which shows that our planet is on the downward path of a short [in climate terms] warm interglacial period in our history as we move into the next ice age.?
    And perhaps also data showing the relationship between CO2 levels and global temperature going back millions of years.

    PS: As an aside two questions:: Has anyone yet produced a machine driven by the greenhouse effect?
    And: Does the IPCC definition of FR [forcing rate in W/m^2] comply with thermodynamic law, in that it appears to cross a boundary between two systems without causing a change of state in the recipient system?

  19. confluence01 says: October 7, 2012 at 2:48 am

    The title of this page is misleading. Most of this data refers to weather,not climate.

    Um, not at all. Climate is defined as, “the average course or condition of the weather at a place usually over a period of years as exhibited by temperature, wind velocity, and precipitation”

    http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/climate

    Perhaps we should have a reminder graph at the top of this page which shows that our planet is on the downward path of a short [in climate terms] warm interglacial period in our history as we move into the next ice age.?

    When I get time I am going to make this page into the Short-Term Global Climate Page and Create a Long-Term Climate Page.

  20. Doug Hamilton says:

    The link to “Global Mean Sea Level Change – 1993 to the Present” needs to be fixed. It takes us to a graphic on specific humidity. Thanks..

  21. Doug Hamilton says: June 27, 2013 at 4:12 am

    The link to “Global Mean Sea Level Change – 1993 to the Present” needs to be fixed. It takes us to a graphic on specific humidity. Thanks..

    Corrected, thank you.

  22. Climatologist says:

    See also Climate 4 You, Humlums website

  23. warrenlb says:

    @Rhyl:
    Scientists don’t use the start date of the 1970s to look at Global Temperature trends as evidence of AGW – –as you say, that’s too short a time frame. They start when fossil fuel burning started to pick up –typically, mid 19th century or a little later.
    What’s the basis for your assertion that adaption is wiser than mitigation? Suurces?

    My recommendation on this topic:: “The Climate Casino” by Yale’s William Nordhaus. A thorough treatment of the economics of adaption vs mitigation.

  24. RACookPE1978 says:

    justthefactswuwt says:
    May 1, 2011 at 10:35 am

        Excellent!

    We are (obviously) on a question-and-reply type format.

    After comments ease – or after you have resolved such issues and corrections as may be required, do you anticipate “closing reply” box and presenting the data as in the Solar Reference Page and Sea Ice Page?

  25. RACookPE1978 says:

    warrenlb claims:
    May 30, 2014 at 7:36 pm

    Scientists don’t use the start date of the 1970s to look at Global Temperature trends as evidence of AGW – –as you say, that’s too short a time frame. They start when fossil fuel burning started to pick up –typically, mid 19th century or a little later.

    True “scientists” know that atmospheric CO2 was NOT influenced by man’s contributions until 1945. Show me your values that show man’s release of CO2 significantly affected total atmosphere ppmv prior to 1945.

    Temperature increases in 1840 – 1870 were almost as fast as those between 1915 – 1940, and 1915 – 1940 was the same as 1975 – 1996.

  26. warrenlb says:

    Global Average Temperature ~1.6F higher today than in 1880

  27. warrenlb says:

    Atmospheric CO2 has indeed not been higher than prior peaks of the Milankovitch cycles until after 1945: http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence — which has nothing to do with the correlation and causal relationship between rising CO2 and temperature.

    In the MIlankovitch cycles, temperature rise caused, and thus led, CO2 rise (CO2 being driven from the oceans), whereas since about 1850, the fossil fuel combustion driven CO2 rise from a base lower than the MIlankovitch peaks has in turn driven, and led, temperature rise due to the Greenhouse properties of CO2. Both casual relationships are operative at all times: In the 19th and 20th centuries, the temperature-driving CO2 causal relationship amplified the original temperature effect, as one of several factors leading to a net positive feedback on temperature due to CO2 increase, and a climate sensitivity of about 3C for a doubling of CO2 — a number verified multiple times by calculation from proxy data from multiple epochs in Earths prehistoric past.

  28. RACookPE1978 says: May 30, 2014 at 7:44 pm

    Excellent!
    We are (obviously) on a question-and-reply type format.

    After comments ease – or after you have resolved such issues and corrections as may be required, do you anticipate “closing reply” box and presenting the data as in the Solar Reference Page and Sea Ice Page?

    Comments on the reference pages have offered a good forum for people to provide input. They have been helpful in maintaining continually evolving data elements.from different sources, e.g. suggesting new content, or pointing out when something breaks or gets stale. Also, some interesting occurrences have come in on the reference pages, e.g. the comment from Tim that I reference in this recent article:

    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/05/26/new-wuwt-enso-forecast-page-underwater-upgrades-to-the-wuwt-enso-page-and-a-disturbance-in-the-equatorial-atlantic/

    The Solar, Sea Ice and ENSO pages, are actually the outliers, as Anthony created them, thus comment notifications would go to him. Perhaps we should treat the Reference Pages more like Tips and Notes, and delete any comments that don’t add to the substance of the reference page?

  29. RACookPE1978 says:

    justthefactswuwt says:
    May 30, 2014 at 10:38 pm

    A strong comment for consideration and change!

    The first seven plots are clear with respect to source institute and range of plots. Very compelling information.

    BUT! But the titles below each plot (that part of the web page that we (you) are able to edit as a permanent label to the linked institution’s ever-changing web page) needs to include the reference period for each: 1970-1990, 1960 – 1980, 1990-2000, etc. Without thaose different reference dates, the apparent differences between each of the seven temperature records becomes very, very confusing. Is May 2014 +0.17, 0.75, 0.50, 060, 0.25 degrees?

    2. You knew there had to be a “2” didn’t you?

    Add please the Antarctic long term temperature trend (it has been negative for many years!) below the long term Arctic trend. That source can be the same as on the Sea Ice page.

  30. warrenlb says:

    @RACook1978
    RACook says: “True “scientists” know that atmospheric CO2 was NOT influenced by man’s contributions until 1945. ”

    In the MIlankovitch cycles, the CO2 rise occurs in time frames of the order of one, or a few 10s of thousands of years, much faster than the more gradual downtrend at end of cycle. In contrast, the rise in CO2 that began in the early to mid 1800s has occurred in < 200 years — two orders of magnitude faster than Milankovitch CO2 increases.
    Your statement does nothing to disprove the conclusion that this < 200 year-long rise in atmospheric CO2 rise is the consequence of mans addition of Greenhouse gases to the atmosphere.

  31. RACookPE1978 says:

    Let me ask again.

    What exactly do YOU calculate as man’s contribution to the earth’s CO2 level in ppmv at the following dates:
    (1) 1800 –
    (2) 1890 –
    (3) 1915 – When warming began
    (4) 1945 – When cooling began again
    (6) 1975 – When CAGW warming began
    (7) 1996 – When CAGW warming stopped

    What was the increase in global average temperature based on that change in CO2 on each of those dates?

  32. warrenlb says:

    @RACook:

    You asserted that the CO2 rise cannot be attributed to man. Show your evidence that invalidates that it has.

  33. warrenlb says:

    @RACOOK:
    My case is that of the IPCC, backed up by evidence and the Science. I welcome your evidence that disproves this case.

  34. RACookPE1978 says:

    @RACOOK:

    My case is that of the IPCC, backed up by evidence and the Science.

    Rather “My case is that of the IPCC my chosen priests of my religious faith who are rewarded based on their faith in my religion, backed up by evidence that I refuse to present (because I refuse to present information that contradicts my religious faith) and the Science my sacred Text as written by the chosen priests of my religious faith.” Well, that is what you mean, right?

    I welcome your evidence that disproves this case.

    CO2 levels were steady. Global average temperatures rose at the same rate they were rising between 1975 – 1996.
    CO2 levels were steady, temperatures were steady.
    CO2 levels were steady, temperatures fell at the same rate that they fell between 1945 and 1975.
    CO2 levels rose, temperatures fell.
    CO2 levels rose, temperatures were steady.
    CO2 levels rose, temperatures rose at the same rate that they rose when CO2 levels were steady.

  35. RACookPE1978 says:

    warrenlb says:
    May 31, 2014 at 8:53 am

    @RACook:

    You asserted that the CO2 rise cannot be attributed to man. Show your evidence that invalidates that it has.

    FALSE!

    I told YOU to show by specific evidence HOW MUCH of the CO2 increase at each of seven specific dates was due to man’s release of CO2.

    YOU are the man demanding tens of thousands of innocents die because YOU want to unnaturally and artificially restrict CO2 emissions worldwide. “I” am merely trying to get YOU to admit in public exactly how little of the CO2 increase that did occur was emitted by man at those specific dates earlier in history. YOU refuse to provide those values because those numbers prove YOUR theory is wrong.

  36. RACookPE1978 says: May 31, 2014 at 8:12 am

    A strong comment for consideration and change!

    Certainly any comment that you think detracts from a reference page, feel free to delete.

    The first seven plots are clear with respect to source institute and range of plots. Very compelling information.

    These reference pages are a collaborative effort, if you see something missing, e.g. the range of plots on a label, please feel free to update it.

    BUT! But the titles below each plot (that part of the web page that we (you) are able to edit as a permanent label to the linked institution’s ever-changing web page) needs to include the reference period for each: 1970-1990, 1960 – 1980, 1990-2000, etc. Without thaose different reference dates, the apparent differences between each of the seven temperature records becomes very, very confusing. Is May 2014 +0.17, 0.75, 0.50, 060, 0.25 degrees?

    Good point, it just so happens that I created a comment for just such a purpose, i.e.:

    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/05/23/crowdsourcing-an-opensource-temperature-data-monitoring-methodology-and-spreadsheet/#comment-1314625

    “UAH

    The global, hemispheric, and tropical LT anomalies from the 30-year (1981-2010) average

    http://www.drroyspencer.com/2013/04/uah-global-temperature-update-for-march-2013-0-18-deg-c-again/

    GISS

    Anomalies are relative to the 1951-80 base period means

    http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata_v3/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt

    HadCRUT4

    Time series are presented as temperature anomalies (deg C) relative to 1961-1990

    http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/hadobs/hadcrut4/data/current/download.html

    RSS

    Anomalies are computed by subtracting the mean monthly value (averaged from 1979 through 1998 for each channel) from the average brightness temperature for each month.

    http://www.ssmi.com/msu/msu_data_description.html#rss_msu_data_analysis

    Beginning in December 2010, all lower troposphere, middle troposphere, and lower stratosphere satellite data are reported here with respect to the 1981–2010 base period. Prior to December 2010, data were reported with respect to the 1979–1998 base period. Remote Sensing Systems continues to provide data to NCDC with respect to the 1979–1998 base period; however, NCDC readjusts the data to the 1981–2010 base period so that the satellite measurements are comparable. http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/temp-and-precip/msu/

    NOAA NCDC

    “The global and hemispheric anomalies are provided with respect to the period 1901-2000, the 20th century average.”

    “Why do some of the products use different reference periods?

    The maps show temperature anomalies relative to the 1981–2010 base period. This period is used in order to comply with a recommended World Meteorological Organization (WMO) Policy, which suggests using the latest decade for the 30-year average. For the global-scale averages (global land and ocean, land-only, ocean-only, and hemispheric time series), the reference period is adjusted to the 20th Century average for conceptual simplicity (the period is more familiar to more people, and establishes a longer-term average). The adjustment does not change the shape of the time series or affect the trends within it.

    http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cmb-faq/anomalies.php

    NOAA CPC

    NOAA’s Climate Prediction Center has already changed their Normals to the 1981 – 2010 base period? Why are those Normals not available?

    Many organizations, including NOAA’s Climate Prediction Center (CPC), develop their own averages and change base periods for internal use. However, NCDC’s climate Normals are the official United States Normals as recognized by the World Meteorological Organization and the main Normals made available for a variety of variables. Below is a brief summary of changes to http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cmb-faq/anomalies.phpthe CPC products due to the change in climate base period from 1971 – 2000 to 1981 – 2010:

    NOAA Climate Prediction Center’s CAMS station temperature anomaly dataset. “CAMS” is an acronym for the “Climate Anomaly Monitoring System” in use at the Climate Prediction Center (CPC).

    CAMS station surface air temperature anomalies for the globe with respect to the 1971-2000 climatological base period.
    http://iridl.ldeo.columbia.edu/maproom/Global/Atm_Temp/Monthly_stn_anom.html

    I’ll begin to add base periods when I get an opportunity.

    2. You knew there had to be a “2″ didn’t you?

    Add please the Antarctic long term temperature trend (it has been negative for many years!) below the long term Arctic trend. That source can be the same as on the Sea Ice page.

    I am hesitant to add regional temperature graphs, e.g. like these;
    ftp://ftp.ssmi.com/msu/graphics/tlt/plots/

    to the “Global” Climate page, as this page is broader than just regional temperature. The Global Temperature page has Northern and Southern Hemisphere sections at the bottom and I’ve added the RSS Northern and Southern Polar Temps there. I also might build out a Regional Temperature page when I get an opportunity.

  37. warrenlb says: May 31, 2014 at 8:53 am

    You asserted that the CO2 rise cannot be attributed to man. Show your evidence that invalidates that it has.

    I covered that in depth here;

    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/03/29/when-did-anthropogenic-global-warming-begin/

    and you can look at the CO2 data here, in our under development CO2 Page:

    http://wattsupwiththat.com/reference-pages/atmosphere-page/co2-page/

    I have found no evidence that Anthroprogenic CO2 emissions were a significant influence on atmospheric CO2 concentrations or Earth’s Temperature, prior to 1945/50. Can you present any evidence?

  38. warrenlb says:

    @RACOOK:

    http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-early-20th-century.htm

    Mainstream science conclusions are similar, but not as black and white as yours. The analysis and evidence shows anthropogenic contributions as non-zero, and less than natural forcings up to around 1945. After that, anthropogenic forcings accelerate.

  39. RACookPE1978 says:

    warrenlb says:
    May 31, 2014 at 1:46 pm

    Mainstream science conclusions are similar, but not as black and white as yours. The analysis and evidence shows anthropogenic contributions as non-zero, and less than natural forcings up to around 1945. After that, anthropogenic forcings accelerate.

    See! I agree with you.

    Now, WHAT WERE THOSE CONTRIBUTIONS before 1945 due to Man’s release of CO2? Nothing else. Just man’s CO2 release.

    That is, after all, why YOU are demanding the death of millions more innocents each year between now and 2100 – to stop the future releases of CO2 into the atmosphere. If today’s releases of tens of billions of tons each year for 17 years have no effect on temperatures, surely you have some evidence somewhere that 1/1000 of that much CO2 released over 50 years had – what “more” effect on global temperatures? If satellite measurements “prove” a release of tens of trillions of tons of CO2 into the air between 1979 and 2014 increased global temperatures by 1/5 of one degree in 45 years, surely the release of 1 million, 10 million, 100 million, or even 1 billion tons of CO2 between 1800 and 1945 would be demonstrable, right?

    Surely you do not condemn millions to death for no reason but the “hand waving” of your so-called experts, do you? What are those numbers: How much do you believe temperature rose each year prior to 1945 due to man’s release of CO2 between 1800 and 1945?

  40. RACookPE1978 says:

    By the way, once you have decided on what those man-caused temperature effects – due to CO2 alone! were between 1800 and 1945 … You can go ahead and try to figure out why all of the natural changes that were happening prior to 1945 are not going on in the 60 years after 1945.

  41. warrenlb says:

    RACook:
    Name calling and mysticism. I want no part of either –you may stay in your cave –alone.

  42. RACookPE1978 says:

    What names? I “did” point out that you are the direct cause of thousands of innocent deaths in the UK, but ….

    So, you refuse to back up your so-called “science” with numbers. Figures. See, if you did understand the actual simple numbers involved, you would see the fallacies of your claims about the influence of man-released CO2 before 1945. And, for that matter, after 1945 as well. But, because you do NOT want to see these errors, you refuse to answer a simple question requiring only simple arithmetic. Typical.

  43. RACookPE1978 says:

    Funny, these things called numbers.
    Odd that the so-called warrenlib refuses to even do the math.

    But, to support the arthimatic involved, I did start by looking up the mass of the earth’s atmosphere:
    and, you know, you’d figure after 200 billion of paid research, we would know how much of the stuff is there.

    But, no.

    Got the following after a few minutes looking:

    4.99 x 10 ^18 kg
    5.0  x 10 ^18 kg
    5.0  x 10 ^18 kg
    5.1  x 10 ^18 kg
    5.12 x 10 ^18 kg
    5.2  x 10 ^18 kg
    5.2  x 10 ^18 kg
    5.27 x 10 ^18 kg
    5.3  x 10 ^18 kg
    5.4  x 10 ^18 kg
    5.5  x 10 ^18 kg
    

    Now Trenberth, NCAR, in 1994 wrote up 5.1441 x 10^18 kg, but then NCAR corrected that value and is now using 5.1353 x 10618 kg. Since Trenberth has not been found correct before, I’m tempted to go with the NCAR number as the most accurate answer – because, obviously, it is the one with the highest number of digits!

    Thus, if warrenlib agrees, we will use NCAR’s 5.1353 x 10^18 kg as the atmospheric mass.

    More important, then, can all readers agree that N2, O2, and Ar are the most important non-IR absorbing gasses?
    If so, can we consider them constant while looking at the small number of tons of CO2 emitted by man?
    If so, would all readers check the following, since warrenlib apparently cannot?

    
          ppmv  mass pct  total mass 
    N2 780,840  75.3      3.866  x 10^18 kg
    O2 209,460  23.1      1.1886 x 10^18 kg
    Ar   9,340   1.288    0.0661 x 10^18 kg
    

    From this starting point, and the data in the graphs above on this page that assume a pre-1800 CO2 level of 280 ppmv, we should be able to determine how many ppmv’s of CO2 were emitted by man at any particular year in question, right?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s