Last week I posted the University of Alabama, Huntsville (UAH) Microwave Sounder Unit (MSU) global temperature anomaly data for February 2008 with a note that it showed only a marginal increase from January 2008 data, and remained near zero.
The February 2008 global temperature anomaly data from RSS (Remote Sensing Systems of Santa Rosa, CA) is out, and is in good agreement with that. You can see it the raw RSS data yourself here
First here is UAH satellite derived temperature anomaly. For February 2008, it shows a slight rebound from the -0.046°C value of January 2008 to 0.016°C for a slight change (∆T) of .062°C upwards.
click for a larger image
Next we have the RSS satellite derived temperature anomaly. It also shows a slight rebound from the -0.080°C value of January 2008 to 0.007°C for a slight change (∆T) of .0.073°C upwards. The anomaly remains near zero as does the UAH data.
click for a larger image
It appears the La Niña in the Pacific and the solar minimum are continuing to affect temperatures globally, resulting in this cooler period for the last 13 months starting in January 2007.
click for a larger image
Below: A plot of sunspots showing our current position in the solar minimum. Note the uncertainty for the two projections of the next cycle 24.
I’ll plot the other metrics (GISS, HadCRUT) as soon as they are available.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
The GISSTEMP anomaly is available: http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt
Their figure is 0.26 for February. That is their lowest figure for February since 1994. The moving yearly average GISSTEMP anomaly is now 0.48, down from 0.57 at the end of 2007.
The last graph is introduced with “…the two projections of the next cycle 25”. Of course, we’re still waiting for cycle 24 to take over, it just seems as though we’ve waited long enough for cycle 25 to be due.
REPLY: That was a typo, fixed.
thanks patrick…
Anyway. prediction for 2008. 2008 according to giss will come in
at an anomaly of between .06 and .46…. so .26C +.2C
Well, the SOI was 21.3 last month, the highest it’s been since late 2000. So I expect this La Nina to persist for a while still. Last time it was above 20 it was another 5 months before it went negative again, so I’ll predict we’ll have a La Nina pattern until the summer, at least.
This should be one of the coolest years out of the last 20.
So, even money. 2008 might be dang close to 1994. Coldest year in last 10-15 years. Note: this is just the weather.
Mr. Watts, here is a link to a more modern solar cycle graphic, one updated Feb. 29, 2008
http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/SolarCycle/sunspot.gif
REPLY: Thank you!
2008 is certainly starting out in a hole. Looking at RSS data, by my very rough guesstimate, in order for 2008 to top 1998 as #1, the remaining 10 months are going to have to AVERAGE an anamoly of +.75C. That’s just not going to happen. In order for 2008 to even make the top 10, the remaining 10 months are going to have to average an anamoly of +.3C. That *could* happen, but it’s going to have to warm up quickly to do it, and the SOI data says this La Nina is going to hold for a while, so it would be a bad bet.
I say 2008 doesn’t make top 10. Mark it down.
Yeah, there’s no way natural forcings can overcome the almighty CO2 molecule…
A “leading question” about how GISS handles pack ice. First, some background. I am *NOT* making any assumptions about how GISS handles this. I don’t know, which is why I’m asking. Correct me if I’m wrong; “land temperatures” are actually air temperature approx 4 feet above the land (e.g. Stevenson Screen). “Sea temperatures” are SST (Sea Surface Temperature). Those are two different animals. However, just like using a different base period for normals, it’s not necessarily a problem ***IF THE DIFFERENCES ARE CONSTANT***. We know that GISS estimates (“GISStimates”) temperatures in the polar regions, which the other data sets don’t do. Again, not necessarily a problem, ***IF THE BASIS IS KEPT CONSTANT***.
Now for the leading question… how does GISS treat solid pack ice in the Arctic Ocean?
Option 1) Estimate the SST of the water that the pack ice is riding on top of. In years when the pack ice melts, do the same. The accuracy of the estimate may be open to question, but at least you’re still comparing apples-to-apples.
Option 2) Treat pack ice as “pseudo land”, in which case the data gets skewed to Hell and back. Let me explain. Air temperature 4 feet above regular land can vary wildly. Air temperature 4 feet above solid pack ice temds to be strongly influenced by cooling due to contact with the ice which, by definition, is at or below freezing temperature. Open water, by definition again, has a SST at or above the freezing point (slightly below zero Celsius for salt water). During a year when ice pack retreats significantly (e.g. 2007), this treatment replaces millions of square km of “pseudo land” (air temperatures can easily get down to -10 or -20 C), with opean sea, which, by definition, *MUST* be at or above the melting point. And “global average temperature” shoots through the roof.
Hopefully, GISS is using option 1.
Patrick Hadley, “That is their lowest figure for February since 1994.”
1994 was still a volcano year (Pinatubo). 1984 and 1985 were also volcano years (El Chichon). So it’s probably safe to go back to February 1982.
MattN “Well, the SOI was 21.3 last month, the highest it’s been since late 2000. So I expect this La Nina to persist for a while still.”
SOI was 21.3 in November 2000, but this is March. La Ninas usually weaken in March.
Using ONI (which is the only data that defines La Nina and El Nino) you can see the pattern.
http://www.cpc.noaa.gov/products/analysis_monitoring/ensostuff/ensoyears.shtml
Using MEI (which does not define La Nina) you can see the same pattern, although not as clear, MEI uses 2-month periods while ONI uses 3-month periods.
http://www.cdc.noaa.gov/people/klaus.wolter/MEI/table.html
There is no definition of La Nina or El Nino using SOI. SOI is the difference in pressure over Tahiti and Darwin. SOI usually follows ENSO events but can throw you off if a low or high-pressure system stalls near one of those areas during an ENSO event. Both Darwin and Tahiti are south of the Nino regions.
This La Nina is starting to weaken. The high-pressure systems that bring cool water north along the South American coast (cooling the Nino 1+2 region) started weakening about 10 weeks ago and the Nino 1 + 2 region warmed in that time. The warm water in Nino 1 + 2 did not spread to the east much because 850 hPa winds in that area (MJO) were either slow or blowing to the East. That has changed over the last several weeks and the winds are now blowing warm surface water into the Nino 3 and 3.4 regions.
SST animation here:
http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/analysis_monitoring/enso_update/sstanim.shtml
Graph of Nino regions here:
http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/analysis_monitoring/enso_update/ssta_c.gif
Current 850 winds here:
http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/precip/CWlink/MJO/pentad850winds_total.shtml
OOPS! Map that shows the Nino regions is here:
http://www.srh.noaa.gov/mlb/enso/images/nino-regions.gif
has anybody calculated Feb temps from the RSS data here (daily) to check if its accurate?
http://discover.itsc.uah.edu/amsutemps/
I think it 4.4 km high
Looking at March it may going well below FEb ( I know Anthony does not like to rely on this graph but it would be nice to know how it stacked up)
Given that northern hemisphere land snow cover when from positive anomolies in Jan and Feb to negative anomolies in March, I’m willing to guess that the globally averaged temperature anomoly will be warmer in March.
http://moe.met.fsu.edu/snow/
La Nina has been weakening during the last few weeks. That points to a warmer in March anomoly too.
This may be due to Australia adopting Kyoto. We are saved!
As “crosspatch” noted the current solar cycle graphic is here http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/SolarCycle/sunspot.gif. If you go into the “Wayback Machine” of Archive.org, a history of this graphic is available here http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.sec.noaa.gov/SolarCycle/sunspot.gif. If you look at the February 2007 prediction http://web.archive.org/web/20070210112845/http://www.sec.noaa.gov/SolarCycle/sunspot.gif, Solar Cycle 24 should have stated over 9 months ago! If you go back to the February 2006 prediction http://web.archive.org/web/20060216220801/http://www.sec.noaa.gov/SolarCycle/sunspot.gif, Solar Cycle 24 should have stated in early 2007. By NASA own data, Solar Cycle 24 is now over a year late now!
The coldest DJF in 15yrs!
Anthony
Is it the old cynic in me or are NASA/space weather .com inventing sunspots?
The last and only 2 spots in Jan and Feb have been invisible to me and yet have counted as sunspot no. 13 and 12. The latest appeared yesterday, they say and has disappeared today =12. I don’t care about the size of the number but I can’t see the spots!!!
REPLY: Are you looking at the magnified image, or are you actually lookimg for spots through your own telescope?
Here is NASA unedited original prediction for Solar Cycle 24 which is more off the mark and includes the full history of Cycle 23 through March 2006.
http://www.nasa.gov/vision/universe/solarsystem/solar_cycle_graphics.html
http://www.nasa.gov/images/content/144055main_Cycle24PredictionHathaway%5B3.jpg
Note the amplitude for Cycle 24 in the 2010-2011 time period, during the renegotiation of the Kyoto Protocol. Using this prediction Solar Cycle 24 is late by 1.5 years.
We should start archiving Solar Cycle 24 predictions in a safe place; data in the Wayback Machine can be deleted. We may need a good laugh on those cold summer nights.
Virgil,
The snow cover map seems misleading. It shows removal of snow off the coast of Labrador, which is very unlikely. Here in Quebec, we are breaking records for snow falls that go back to the 1930’s. Over the past ten years, there was usually very little snow left at this time of year in Montreal. This year, it seems like we’ll be stuck with it until July! I don’t know the global anomaly, but March is certainly colder this year than in a long time.
February is typically the warmest month of the year with a 30 year anomaly of +0.0993 compared to January, at number 2, with a 30 year anomaly of +0.0949 so the “adjusted” difference between the two is even less.
January 2008 was 0.1389 cooler then average and 0.6380 cooler then January 2007.
February 2008 was 0.0833 cooler then average and 0.4340 cooler then February 2007.
PS: My heat just kicked on (Georgia)
Anthony, whilst I do have a good scope, I am actually looking at the magnified images from spaceweather and solar24 which I think are the same source.
REPLY: Ok next time one of these blipspots happens, try the “sunspots” link on the far lower right side of my page, it will give you a medium size, then click that picture, and you’ll get supersize, straight from SOHO’s website. I think its a matter of the spots being so small thay can’t be seen easily at the sizes presented.
On the supersized image, I can see the fading remnants of spot 985.
Sean
Remember these are anomalies that you refer to not temperature. Anomalies are in themselves refered to particular periods/records.
FYI, I’ve got a dedicated server, and can provide an archive mirror for such things. Can’t be too safe.
REPLY: Go for it Jeff, I’ll be happy to dedicate a display page here.
Sean–
I thought the monthly anomalies were reported relative to baselines calculated for that month. (So January is compared to the 30 year average for January, etc.)
Is this incorrect?
Also, can anyone tell me where to find monthly anomalies for NOAA? I want to add those to my hypothesis test analysis of the IPCC projections.
Why did my message not appear? Was it because it was alarmist in nature?
REPLY: No it’s because you apparently didn’t read the reply to your last post yesterday, you are welcome to post that theory on your own blog, then provide a link. I’ll be happy to post a one or two sentence intro to that link to your own blog.
here it is again:
My choice is that if you want to make points about things you believe in, you are more than welcome to do so. Unlike the majority of people here, you have you own blog. My advice is that you concentrate on that and exercise your ideas there, where you can expound to your heart’s content. If you wish to post simple RELEVANT comments here for example, something like this:
“I have a treatise on the role of man’s evolution as it relates to global warming that you may find interesting, see it here at this [URL]”
I’ll be happy to post simple things like that, so that people who choose to do so can visit your blog and discuss the issue there. But no more hijacking of the threads here, no more repetitive posts saying the same thing over and over again. But you’ll have the opportunity to suggest discussion on your forum. That’s not banishment, but the ability to suggest redirection as a courtesy.
Bear in mind that any more than a sentence or two with URL where it can be discussed on your blog is all that I will post. If you are unhappy with that decision, so be it, but you’ve been rude, condescending, repetitive, and disruptive, and all the while being completely unapologetic for doing so. My patience (and that of many others) is thus at an end for this boorish behaviour.
This is unbelievable and I hope some here will have the good sense to recognize it for what it is.
I have already presented my views on my blog. I am only trying to enlighten others. You are making that impossible.
Congratulations!
It is hard to believe isn’t it?
REPLY: “You are making that impossible.” Actually, no. People that wish to be enlightened by your ideas will be able to visit your blog and soak it up all they wish. As I said, you can post links to your blog if you wish, (as your comment below does) along with a one or two line sentence, but since you have your own blog, I will not allow you to continue to hijack mine for your purposes.
If you want to be part of a larger community, where more people will find your views, may I suggest you transfer your content to a free wordpress blog. I’ll even add you to my blogroll if you want to do that.
Here is the free signup: http://wordpress.com/signup/