This just doesn’t seem to add up given what we’ve seen from anecdotal weather information and satellite data. For example the UAH global temperature for the lower troposphere shows that the temperature in 2008 doesn’t get anywhere close to this claim made by NOAA:
The combined global land and ocean surface temperature for summer 2008 was 0.85 degrees F (0.47 degrees C) above the 20th century mean of 60.1 degrees F (15.6 degrees C).
From my perspective as surveyor of the USHCN network, and knowing firsthand just how corrupted the data measuring system is, I have a lot of trouble believing this claim. The satellite data says otherwise.
Here is NOAA’s Press Release today:
Contact: John Leslie FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
301-713-2087, ext. 174 Sept. 16, 2008
NOAA: Global Summer Temperature Was Ninth Warmest
Tenth Warmest August Since Records Began
The combined global average land and ocean surface temperature for summer 2008 was the ninth warmest since records began in 1880, and this August was the tenth warmest, according to an analysis by NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center in Asheville, N.C.
Summer (June – August) Highlights
- The combined global land and ocean surface temperature for summer 2008 was 0.85 degrees F (0.47 degrees C) above the 20th century mean of 60.1 degrees F (15.6 degrees C).
- Separately, the global land surface temperature for the summer was 1.12 degrees F (0.62 degrees C) above the 20th century mean of 56.9 degrees F (13.8 degrees C).
- The global ocean surface temperature for summer ranked ninth warmest on record and was 0.74 degrees F (0.41 degrees C) above the 20th century mean of 61.5 degrees F (16.4 degrees C).
August Highlights
- The August 2008 combined global land and ocean surface temperature was 0.79 degrees F (0.44 degrees C) above the 20th century mean of 60.1 degrees F (15.6 degrees C) and tied with 1995 for the tenth warmest August on record.
- The global land surface temperature for August was 0.88 degrees F (0.49 degrees C) above the 20th century mean of 56.9 degrees F (13.8 degrees C).
- The global ocean surface temperature for August was 0.77 degrees F (0.43 degrees C) above the 20th century mean of 61.4 degrees F (16.4 degrees C), which tied for seventh warmest August with 2001.
Other Highlights
- El Nino-Southern Oscillation (ENSO) neutral conditions continued in August, and are expected to last through the end of 2008, according to NOAA’s Climate Prediction Center.
- Arctic sea ice extent at the end of August was at its second lowest extent on record according to the National Snow and Ice Data Center. Sea ice declined by a record rate in August, decreasing by 950,000 square miles (2.47 million square kilometers) between Aug. 1 and Sept. 3. The current extent is 800,000 square miles (2.08 million square kilometers) below the 1979-2000 average.
- Tropical Storm Fay struck the Dominican Republic, Haiti, Cuba, Jamaica, and the Cayman Islands between August 15 – 17, claiming 23 lives across the Caribbean. Hurricane Gustav affected the same countries August 24 – 31, claiming an estimated 95 lives in Haiti, the Dominican Republic, and Jamaica. Tropical Storm Kammuri struck southern China on August 6, bringing torrential rains to Hong Kong. Rain from Kammuri caused 120 deaths in northern Vietnam. On Aug. 20, Typhoon Nuri made landfall in the Philippines and killed seven people.
- In southern India, heavy monsoon rains killed 99 people, while in northern India flash flooding claimed 74 lives and left about 50,000 people homeless. Varanasi, India received 11.5 inches (292.1 mm) of rain in just 24 hours. Torrential downpours claimed 27 lives in northwestern Pakistan during the first week of August. In Laos, heavy monsoon rains raised the Mekong River to its highest recorded level of 44.88 feet (13.68 m). Also in August, extensive flooding affected China, Japan, Mexico, and Great Britain.
- On Aug. 17, Eyre in Western Australia registered a low temperature of -7.2 degrees C (19 degrees F), setting the record for the all-time lowest temperature for that Australian state, according to the Australian Bureau of Meteorology.
- Severe storms over northern France on Aug. 4 spawned a tornado that killed three people in the town of Hautmont. Another tornado hit Mykanów, Poland, on Aug. 15, killing three and injuring 37.
- Moderate-to-severe drought impacted northern parts of China during August, according to the Beijing Climate Center. Below-average August rainfall over parts of eastern and southern Australia worsened drought conditions in those areas. Parts of southwest Australia experienced their lowest August rainfall since records began there in 1900.
NOAA understands and predicts changes in the Earth’s environment, from the depths of the ocean to the surface of the sun, and conserves and manages our coastal and marine resources.
On the Web:
NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov
NCDC August 2008 analysis: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/2008/aug/aug08.html
– 30 –
Although this year’s temperature is down compared to recent years, the records show that the temperatures in recent years are higher than almost all the years in the record.
The 1990s and 2000s have been the warmest years recorded so while we are down right now, the temperatures ares still higher now than in the 1970s for example.
There are two additional points to be here.
First, Anthony’s trip to the NCDC earlier this year showed the current temperature adjustment algorithm being applied. By my reckoning, the temperature trend has been increased by 0.65C as a result of these adjustments (rather, the old historical temperatures have been adjusted DOWN by 0.65C going back to about 1900.)
If you don’t trust these adjustments, then maybe today’s temps are not in fact, higher than the temps of old.
Second, it is becoming more clear that GHGs do in fact result in additional global warming. The trends over the past 50 to 100 years points to a very low climate sensitivity figure 0f 1.0C to 1.5C per GHG doubling (an inconsequential amount really). So it is to be expected that even a cool year in 2008 would be on average warmer than previous years. But a few tenths of a degree warmer is nothing to worry about and certainly nothing to cause us to shut down our coal and oil industries.
DR,
If the following is correct,
http://spacescience.spaceref.com/newhome/headlines/essd06oct97_1.htm
“How do we know the Satellite Data are Correct?
In theory, one could argue that the computer models are accurate, and that the real measurements have some problem. However this is not the case. An incredible amount of work has been done to make sure that the satellite data are the best quality possible. Recent claims to the contrary by Hurrell and Trenberth have been shown to be false for a number of reasons, and are laid to rest in the September 25th edition of Nature (page 342). The temperature measurements from space are verified by two direct and independent methods. The first involves actual in-situ measurements of the lower atmosphere made by balloon-borne observations around the world. The second uses intercalibration and comparison among identical experiments on different orbiting platforms. The result is that the satellite temperature measurements are accurate to within three one-hundredths of a degree Centigrade (0.03 C) when compared to ground-launched balloons taking measurements of the same region of the atmosphere at the same time.”
Why is it that RSS and UAH disagree? What is it exactly that RSS is doing to the data? Surely it is possible to get a series of balloon-borne observations and compare them to RRS data to show the bias.
I know of the problems that GISS has.
http://climatesci.org/2008/08/11/guest-weblog-a-comment-on-the-report-unified-synthesis-product-global-climate-change-in-the-united-states-by-joseph-d-aleo/
What I wonder about is why GISS and NOAA haven’t been called to account via a peer reviewed paper published in, say, Nature. Science is about facts. To win this debate we have to establish the facts. Why is this so hard to do?
–Mike Ramsey
My kids all have science classes. AGW is accepted fact in their classes. We live in TN.
Statistically, what is the probability 2008 wouldn’t be in the top 10 or 20? Not very high. Let’s face it, many scientists and prognosticators have staked their reputations (and possibly careers) on AGW and will not go down easy.
By my reckoning, the temperature trend has been increased by 0.65C as a result of these adjustments (rather, the old historical temperatures have been adjusted DOWN by 0.65C going back to about 1900.)
I thought the adjustment was more on the order of 0.42°C.
I know NOAA doesn’t have the guts to post the USHCN-2 adjustment graph the way they did for USHCN-1 (which is now one of the Most Cited Graphs by skeptics). And I haven’t seen where they ‘fessed up to their adjustment numbers.
How did you derive 0.65C? That’s over TWICE the USHCN-1 adjustment.
Here’s some evidence of the cool year it has been. This graph shows 29yrs of data for Jan-Aug average temps in the US. Black line represents the last century(1901-2000) average. Notice that we are very similar to 1980, 1983,1989,1996, and 1997.
http://climvis.ncdc.noaa.gov/tmp/graph-Sep1622:44:416656799316.gif
evanjones – “How did you derive 0.65C? That’s over TWICE the USHCN-1 adjustment.”
Anthony posted a powerpoint presentation by the NCDC which outlined the adjustments (but I can’t find it now – perhaps Anthony can link to it.)
The powerpoint split the temp adjustments in to Maximum and Minimum temps but the average of the two was 0.65C. As you noted, they do not have the guts to show this to the public now (but it was in the powerpoint linked to by Anthony.)
We really need to have access to the raw data as well as the adjusted data.
I think I have that pwp download. I’ll check it out. Thanks.
My 13 year old daughter’s science teacher last year said A-CO2-GW was real in response to a comment my daughter made to another student. Luckily I had prepped her that this was a controversial position and being that she is at the top of her class, she was smart enough not to push the issue.
RI, USA
Can’t seem to find it.
It has maps, but no comprehensive data.
It also has a comparison–I assume this is after adjustment (NOAA does not say which)–that well sited and badly sited stations have no differences at all.
However, I infer, however, that this is not because the bad stations have been adjusted to match to good stations, but the other way around. The NOAA presentation is scrupulous not to say . . .
Is this the right pwp?
I think the purported temperature measurements are so close to the margin of error as to make them practically meaningless. Coupled with the horrendous condition of the “high quality” network… No I don’t trust the measurements or the adjustments.
Rev, do you have any insight re. the USHCN-2 overall adjustment for the 20th Century?
Bill Illis
“…showed the current temperature adjustment algorithm being applied.” Not being a meteorologist, I am curious about the need for a temperature adjustment algorithm. What is its purpose, if temperatures are read from a calibrated temperature sensor?
“…it is becoming more clear that GHGs do in fact result in additional global warming.” Where is the data supporting the clarification that GHGs are causing additional global warming? Are you saying that GHGs trap thermal energy and therefore an increase in one, or all, of the GHGs results in additional global warming? Is that necessarily true? To paraphrase a recent comment by a scientist: It may be true that there has been no global warming in the last decade and possibly a slight cooling, but AGW is being masked by other factors. That sort of reasoning sounds like there might a contradiction in his deductive assessment.
We deniers are not organized, the true-believers are organized. We are confronting a mindset: a set of assumptions, methods or notations held by one or more people or groups of people which is so established that it creates a powerful incentive within these people or groups to continue to adopt or accept prior behaviors, choices, or tools.
The true-believers are invested in the illusion of control: The tendency for human beings to believe they can control or at least influence outcomes that they clearly cannot.
Ever think that our K-12 system has devolved into communist indoctrination rather than education?
Sorry, folks, but it may not be the hottest 2008 on record. That would have to depend on which calendar system you are using.
Currently, the Chinese year is 4706, and the Jewish calendar stands at 5768, and I’m fairly certain there are others past 2008.
3.1C this morning in Rhineland Pfalz, with five more days of summer to go. This has anecdotally been a cool summer for central Europe.
As a casual observer many of the postings here reinforce my opinion that people from a rural/farm background tend to be more skeptical of AGW than those who are from urban areas. Coming from a farming background myself whatever weather we have if i cannot then my father can recall and quote a year when it happened before. When i am at home i can look out to sea and see the weather for the next 12 hours, when i am in a city i am lucky if i can guess the weather for the next hour.
Denis Hopkins (15:00:01) “My students know that I […] We do assemblies on the topic. Even so, you always get the consensus argument thrown back at you. The IPCC has attained unimpeachable status… ”
The manipulation of youth, Denis, is an obscenity. To use their “education” time for “indoctrination” is a measure of how low civilisation has sunk. A better world from brighter minds adding to accumulated knowledge is exactly what those of limited brain and large ego do not want and cannot tolerate. Such threatens “them”. “Their” selfish needs threaten the future.
People of goodwill and wisdom must continue, as you do, to resist.
Thank you for your further insight.
Off Topic
Have you picked up on this?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/debates/2970482/Britain-faces-serial-power-cuts-in-next-decade-warns-expert.html
AT 7:00 am BST it was on the “Front Page” of the web-site at 9:00 BST it was lost and had to be searched for.
[…] Watts Up With That? (Comment from hyonmin) 16 September, […]
“Brian D (19:47:38) :
Here’s some evidence of the cool year it has been. This graph shows 29yrs of data for Jan-Aug average temps in the US. Black line represents the last century(1901-2000) average. Notice that we are very similar to 1980, 1983,1989,1996, and 1997.
http://climvis.ncdc.noaa.gov/tmp/graph-Sep1622:44:416656799316.gif ”
Just so you are aware from this graph 1996 Lan Nina; 1989- La Nina
2007 La Nina…so the colder year is not unusual
The graph is useful as it shows the upward rise in temperatues and how defintate the trend is for warmer temperatures in the US.
“Mike Ramsey (08:26:31) :
…..Until then, each side will be content to only consider its own data and will feel justified in ignoring the other guy’s data. ”
It’s more accurate to say “ignoring the other guy’s anecdotes.” In essence this is what the argument is breaking up into, scientific data versus population biased anecdotes. Believe in whatever you want.
For comparison here’s how well gistemp and hadcrut3gl have agreed so far about the the TOP n ranking of summer means (JJA means 1880-2007):
TOP 01 ) had: 1998 giss: 1998 agree: 1998
TOP 02 ) had: 2005 giss: 2005 agree: 2005
TOP 03 ) had: 2003 giss: 2007 agree: NO
TOP 04 ) had: 2001 giss: 2006 agree: NO
TOP 05 ) had: 2002 giss: 2003 agree: NO
TOP 06 ) had: 2006 giss: 2002 agree: NO
TOP 07 ) had: 1997 giss: 2001 agree: NO
TOP 08 ) had: 2007 giss: 1991 agree: NO
TOP 09 ) had: 2004 giss: 1995 agree: NO
TOP 10 ) had: 1995 giss: 1995 agree: 1995
TOP 11 ) had: 2000 giss: 2000 agree: 2000
TOP 12 ) had: 1991 giss: 1990 agree: NO
TOP 13 ) had: 1999 giss: 1981 agree: NO
TOP 14 ) had: 1990 giss: 1996 agree: NO
TOP 15 ) had: 1987 giss: 2004 agree: NO
TOP 16 ) had: 1944 giss: 1988 agree: NO
TOP 17 ) had: 1994 giss: 1997 agree: NO
TOP 18 ) had: 1988 giss: 1994 agree: NO
TOP 19 ) had: 1996 giss: 1987 agree: NO
TOP 20 ) had: 1941 giss: 1983 agree: NO
From the above post
“For example the UAH global temperature for the lower troposphere shows that the temperature in 2008 doesn’t get anywhere close to this claim made by NOAA”
In what way are the UAH readings and surface readings inconsistent?
AFAICT The UAH/MSU readings for the lowest part of troposphere (i.e. 3,300 ft) are still well above average. It’s only higher up in the troposphere that any significant cooling is observed.
Since the lower trop readings are closest to the surface I would expect them to be in closer in agreement. And they are!
PS:
The ranking’s agreement about the coldest summers:
TOP 01 ) had: 1903 giss: 1891 agree: NO
TOP 02 ) had: 1911 giss: 1904 agree: NO
TOP 03 ) had: 1904 giss: 1882 agree: NO
TOP 04 ) had: 1908 giss: 1887 agree: NO
TOP 05 ) had: 1910 giss: 1912 agree: NO
TOP 06 ) had: 1909 giss: 1903 agree: NO
TOP 07 ) had: 1907 giss: 1884 agree: 1907
TOP 08 ) had: 1913 giss: 1884 agree: NO
TOP 09 ) had: 1892 giss: 1896 agree: NO
TOP 10 ) had: 1912 giss: 1918 agree: NO
TOP 11 ) had: 1916 giss: 1895 agree: NO
TOP 12 ) had: 1902 giss: 1913 agree: NO
TOP 13 ) had: 1890 giss: 1902 agree: NO
TOP 14 ) had: 1894 giss: 1881 agree: NO
TOP 15 ) had: 1923 giss: 1888 agree: NO
TOP 16 ) had: 1918 giss: 1894 agree: NO
TOP 17 ) had: 1885 giss: 1899 agree: NO
TOP 18 ) had: 1884 giss: 1923 agree: NO
TOP 19 ) had: 1891 giss: 1892 agree: NO
TOP 20 ) had: 1891 giss: 1929 agree: NO
Certainly the NOAA claim does not sit well for the southern hemisphere. Just looking at Sydney with data from 1890 to 2008 I ranked the data from the warmest to coldest.
Summer 2008 was 36th/77 groupings (equal years are grouped)
Winter 2008 was 21st/84
Summer average was 22.133 C versus data average of 22.052.
Winter average was 13.567 C versus data average of 13.036.
The warmest summer was 1991 at 24.65 bC and warmest winter 1988 at 14.567 C.
I also keep a plot of a 12 month moving avaerage by month to month from 1890. In 2008 the yearly average has fallen from 18.95 in Jan 08 to 18.3 C in Aug 08. This is, forgive me, “unprecedented” in the 188 years of data.
It is early yet but Sep looks like lowering it again by 0.1 C