Tilo Reber writes in comments:
Using the May data, I now get no temperature change for the last 11 years for HadCrut3, RSS, and UAH.
http://reallyrealclimate.blogspot.com/2008/06/11-year-temperature-anomoly.html
Click for a larger image
Even with the warm spike 1998 El Nino year included, the flatness of the 3 metrics used to track global temperature is telling especially when compared to the Keeling CO2 curve for the same 11 year period:
Here is the entire CO2 record:
It seems that at least for the most recent 11 years, increasing CO2 is not tracking with temperature. CO2 has not overwhelmed natural processes during this period.
I think that a possibly even bigger reason to not believe the GISS data is purely because of the source of that data and the scientists behind it. James Hansen is a very intelligent scientist, physisist, and mathmatician. However, he has lost his compass as to the general basics of the scientific method. If you read his biography on the GISS site or any stories about him, they generally say things like how he is interested in showing how anthropogenic influence on the atmosphere is creating climate change, and things to this nature. Good scientists just do not do this. Period. Good scientists collect data and then decide what it means.
Not saying he is bad or evil. I’m just saying he’s not truely a scientist. Not anymore. His ideas drive his research and interpretations rather than having his research and data drive his ideas. In fact, it is certainly possible that the homogeneity issues and the like are believed by the GISS folks because they happen to fit their ideas.
Dreamin: Already happened. James Hansen stated, “Humans now control global climate, for better or worse… Another Ice Age cannot occur unless humans become extinct.”
Like we want another ice age!
Hmmmmm we must be moving out of Alabama now. Record low temperature in Montgomery Ala bama this morning. Low was 58 the old record was 59 set in 1965.
Just thinking it might be another cool month across the deep south.
Bill Derryberry
“You seem to be missing GISS in your collection of metrics. If you include it, the graph looks like this:”
I looked at GISS along with the others about a month ago. Considering that it is diverging from the others, considering all of the problems with the GISS record that Anthony and Steve McIntyre have pointed out, I don’t consider it worth using. In any case here is a chart which includes it and which shows the divergence. It’s a slightly different time period. It starts in Jan of 98 and stops with the data that was available when I made it – April 08.
In any case, here is that chart.
http://reallyrealclimate.blogspot.com/2008/05/divergence-of-giss-data.html
For the last decade, GISS has diverged at a rate of about .13C per decade. That is more than half of the supposed AGW rate of .2C per decade. Fairly serious divergence.
Considering the issue of having an El Nino at the beginning and a La Nina at the end of the graph is one that I have looked into. There were seven El Nino/La Nina periods over that interval. I tried to evaluate the effects of all of them on the slope of the graph, rather than just blaming the flat trend on the beginning and end.
Here is that evaluation. It covers the same time period as the divergence chart, but I don’t think that the 11 year chart would be much different.
http://reallyrealclimate.blogspot.com/2008/05/ten-year-hadcrut3-enso-effects.html
The bottom line is that the 11 year period is not flat because of El Nino/La Nina.
Interestingly CO2 seems not to be well-mixed at altitude according to this:
http://www-airs.jpl.nasa.gov/Products/CarbonDioxide/
Note the low concentrations over Antarctica and Greenland. This might explain something that has puzzled me, namely that historical CO2 measurements from stomatal index consistently give higher values than ice-core measurements of the same age. Stomatal index measurements almost always are from temperate latitudes near sea-level while the air in ice-core bubbles of course originates from 2000-3000 meters altitude.
B.C. (11:35:37) :
Maxine Waters(D) has already threatened to nationalize the Oil Industry:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.phpfa=PAGE.view&pageId=65111
Gore and his ilk don’t care whether they’re right about AGW as long as it gains them power. If AGW is proven wrong they’ll try something else, and it looks like they’re going with an oil crisis.
Bill in Vigo,
I had NO idea about the cold snap in Alabama. Thanks for letting us know about it.
I wrote about this in a TWC entry in Anthony’s site earlier, but I find it interesting that news agencies and the like show not only record high temps, but even if they get “close” to the record high temps. No mention is hardly ever made of record low temps or cold temps in general these days. Just high temps, please, Ma’am.
Welcome to the times, I suppose.
Anthony: “…I don’t trust GISS any more than I trust CBS.”
That is an extremely strong statement, coming on top of the ‘global warming will cause increased earthquake activity,’ and the CBS/Dan Rather outright fabrications that were reported as fact.
I grew up worshiping NASA. I watched the moon landing from Tuy Hoa, Viet Nam. I want to trust the government’s scientists. But they can no longer be trusted.
Mauna Loa is an active volcano. There is earthquake activity frequently on this mountain. It will erupt again and Kialuha-Kona is in the path of lava flows from the most recent previous eruptions.
Hay, Mr. Hansen, what has been the “climate sensitivity and positve feedback” numbers with the increase of CO2 and lower temperature for the last 10 years?
Where is all that CO2 induced global warming hidding?
I know this is off topic, but kind of not really far off:
http://www.peruviantimes.com/peru-declares-state-of-emergency-due-to-record-breaking-cold-spell/
“Peru declares state of emergency due to record-breaking cold spell” . . . where is warming when you need it?
“I want to trust the government’s scientists. But they can no longer be trusted.” Smokey
“To show partiality is not good, Because for a piece of bread a man will transgress.” Proverbs 28:21
A. Scientists are men.
B. Some men will transgress for a piece of bread.
C. Therefore, some scientists will transgress for a piece of bread.
oops, flaw in logic above, never mind.
Too bad that a strict constitutionalist has no chance to be elected in this country. If this broken government cannot be fixed, more and more states will be considering secession. Socialism has already been weighed and found wanting. Why are we repeating the failed policies of the Bolshevics?
It occurs to ask the following:
If CO2 is a well mixed atmospheric gas and the warming caused by CO2 is most apparent in areas which lack water vapor, why hasn’t Antarctica shown a rapid increase in temperature given that it is the driest place (trivia question is that Antarctica is the world’s largest desert) on earth by a significant margin?
Thus far in the ‘anthrocene’ period Antarctica has shown no statistically significant warming. Seems to me this alone disproves the CO2 warming theories.
stateBibleThumper42 (18:12:27) :
“A. Scientists are men.”
False. My sister is a marine biologist.
Bill Marsh:
Mostly because water vapor is a stronger greenhouse gas than CO2 (though, as we know via Clausius-Clapeyron, absolute humidity is directly proportional to temperature). So slightly more CO2 and a lot less water vapor would not necessarily lead to any net warming. Not to mention the cooling effects of a strong albedo and the hole in the stratospheric ozone layer.
tty 14:00:45
Interesting plot, no?
Large variations in CO2, more than 1ppm over the globe. Something like 15.
And this brings me to the crucial question: Why are there no continuous maps like this for all the years? Months even? I have only found this one for July 2003. CO2 is the big culprit and it is being hid. We see maps of everything under the sky, except CO2.
Is it possible that data are being suppressed because they are politically incorrect? Make statements about homogeneity of CO2 and “long stay in atmosphere” ridiculous? NASA shutting up NASA?
Traciatim (18:01:01) :
“I know this is off topic, but kind of not really far off:
http://www.peruviantimes.com/peru-declares-state-of-emergency-due-to-record-breaking-cold-spell/
“Peru declares state of emergency due to record-breaking cold spell” . . . where is warming when you need it?”
Apparently it’s in Peru. That article has a link to http://hisz.rsoe.hu/alertmap/woalert_read.php?lang=eng&glide=CW-20080620-17260-PER and if you go there, then click on Event Description, you’ll see:
How can they possibly blame this on global warming? Haven’t they heard that climate change is at fault?
tty:
Interesting link to jpl. Note the ‘warm blanket’ proper gander and the associated graph.
Roy Spencer’s F-test on the seasonal variation and long-term trend in Mauna Loa CO2 data indicated a single source (posted here months back): Southern Ocean heating is my take.
RE: Your stomata vis a vis ice core discrepancy, Zbigniew Jaworowski (a paper at Icecap) discounts ice core values entirely but for core-only comparisons, between eras; the values collapse monotonically and cannot be mapped directly to their original concentration using available technique.
In part because its mixing with air IS interesting. CO2 is heavier than air and somewhat soluble in H2O, forming carbonic acid or ‘aerial acid’-its ancient name. I wonder if the map isn’t as indicative of moisture as it might be of CO2 production (by a number of means, or fluences).
anna v: ““long stay in atmosphere” ridiculous”.
Thank you, I was beginning to feel like an irascible kook.
The chemistry of CO2 in water is another rich ground of misinformation. The carbonic acid – bicarbonate buffer system, for instance, is turned on its head when alarms are raised over ocean acidification.
I’m grateful for the expression “homogenity adjustments”; I’d got bored with “fudge factors”.
If you wanted to get the true picture of CO2, map it’s increase as a percentage of the total atmosphere. I think a lot of people would go “Huh?”
“It seems that at least for the most recent 11 years, increasing CO2 is not !tracking with temperature.”
One misstake that is done when comparing temperature and CO2 is that Temperature is compared with actual CO2 level. Imo it is like comparing speed with distance (km/h and km).
What you should compare is the RATE which CO2 change each year. All of a sudden there is a very tight connection between CO2 change and temperature.
For some reason this is rarely brought up when comparing CO2 and temperature.
This diagram shows how close the CO2 change rate FOLLOWS the temperature.
To mee it looks like gobal temperature has a bigger impact on the rate which CO2 is added to our atmosphere than the anthropogen emissions for some reason.
REPLY: Hadn’t seen that before, thanks for pointing it out – Anthony