I sent a query to Dr. John Christy, curator of the UAH global temperature anomaly dataset, inquiring about some of the changes in the RSS dataset. In addition to commenting on that, he was also kind enough to send along an advance copy of the soon to be posted UAH data for October, which you can see here.
Here is the plot, not much change, essentially steady up .006°C to 0.167°C from 0.161°C
Click for a larger image
Dr. Christy also writes about the RSS data set and it’s recent revise from Version 3.1 to 3.2:
Anthony:
As our last several papers show, we find considerable evidence that our
current procedure better represents the temperature variations than does
RSS’s, particularly in the 1990 period where we show RSS displays a
relative warming to every other independent dataset we’ve studied.
The Oct numbers have been run but not yet mounted on the website. I hope
to do that tomorrow. Globally, Oct almost the same as Sep.
John C.
Sad to report the Geophysical Research Letters have rejected Dr. Christy’s latest papers and furthermore they told him not to resubmit. Shame on them.
Dr. Christy’s comment explains that slight bowing I noticed in this graph:
http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2008/11/rss_tlt_trend_compare.png
When I scroll that image so that the orange line touches the edge of the screen I noticed a slight downward bowing during the ’90’s. Good work on their part to correct what might have been a problem if left in place.
Tony I can’t access the large version of the temp graph. You can delete this comment to make way for real reasoning on the subject.
REPLY: Fixed thanks, the graphics manager had a corrupt file – Anthony
Because Christy says (Douglas & Christy Aug 08)
These conclusions are contrary to the IPCC [2007] statement: “[M]ost of the observed increase in global average temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations.”
And who, reading New Scientist or GRL, will even realize this?
‘Click for a larger image’ doesn’t work “File not found”
12 month runing trend continues it’s decline…..
The paper is rejected by a publication.
For an observer such as myself, the problem is – how does one determine unambiguously whether the paper was not acceptable for publication at that time for some genuine reason; or whether it was not acceptable for publication because of a bias against papers which state a view(s) contrary to the AGW theory?
Hmmmn.
Seems that “political science” is coming to a stage (er, classroom) near you.
Does this imply Christie is covering his future funding against the election returns, or because GRL is rejecting previous words skeptical about AGW, or because GRL is requiring an equivalent premise of AGW?
I suppose also that – emotionally – I would have preferred to see October’s temperatures continue a downward spiral showing that AGW is indeed continuing to globally going away – BUT (heavy emphasis on the BUT) – rationally we need to continue letting the graphs record the real temperatures.
Not change the graphs to record our wishes.
REPLY: You mean like the monthly GISS revise?
If it is not too much trouble would a blink comparator chart be available 3.1 vs. 3.2?
Yea, a slight uptick…
Not surprising here, we had a wonderful Indian Summer here in Colorado, even broke a several decade record one day. November has stumbled in as very fallish, with temps near freezing on the east slope and plains.
OT, The paper today says Obama is going to use executive order to recind Oil drilling in Utah (and off-shore). So much for the tax break. (quoting the parrot in Alladin) “I might die of a heart attack from not surprise!”
Mike
GISS global temp anomaly for October is 0.88 Celsius. This is the warmest October since… well, ever.
Will be interesting also to follow global temperatures for November. AMSU temperatures indicate it is starting very hot (actually the hottest November so far).
Must be another sign global cooling is on its way.
We can expect however temps to fall a bit again in the beginning of 09, since we have positive SOI for several weeks now and the delay is typically 4-6 months.
REPLY: GISS isn’t considered reliable anymore. It’s an outlier, and does not take microsite biases and UHI properly into account. HadCRUT “appears” better, but they won’t disclose their methods. Hansen would either until last year when the Y2K error that came from site surveys was exposed by McIntyre and there was a loud call for the code. Still can’t get that train wreck of Fortran programming to compile and run properly. I don’t even bother posting reviews on GISS monthly anymore because Hansen is so politically biased, he’s lost track of the science, such as his defense of vandals in England. GISS/Hansen just isn’t credible anymore. Sat data is the key to understanding, not the corrupted surface record. – Anthony
UAH – October, 2008 shows it as the second coldest October this century.
http://vortex.nsstc.uah.edu/data/msu/t2lt/uahncdc.lt
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/img/climate/research/2008/oct/01_10_2008_DvTempRank_pg.gif
More “weather” news.
GISS tells us that the world has just had its warmest month since 2002. Their anomaly for October is 0.78.
With some minor adjustments to other recent months that makes their average for this year so far as 0.428 and the average for the last twelve months 0.431.
Off topic-latest word from Al Gore:
The Climate for Change Published: NYT November 9, 2008
By AL GORE
“….The world authority on the climate crisis, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, after 20 years of detailed study and four unanimous reports, now says that the evidence is “unequivocal.” To those who are still tempted to dismiss the increasingly urgent alarms from scientists around the world, ignore the melting of the north polar ice cap and all of the other apocalyptic warnings from the planet itself, and who roll their eyes at the very mention of this existential threat to the future of the human species, please wake up. Our children and grandchildren need you to hear and recognize the truth of our situation, before it is too late.”
Can someone suggest a means to promulgate the real information to public and policy makers ? Something a normal citizen like me can do? Thanks. as
The October UAH data is now available. The data here
http://vortex.nsstc.uah.edu/public/msu/t2lt/uahncdc.lt
rounds both September and October to 0.16. But the global numbers mask a lot of interesting regional variation. For instance, global temperature (anomaly) over the ocean fell from .11 to .03. In the Northern Extra Tropics, the temperature over land increased from .28 to .62, while over ocean fell from 0.43 to 0.04! Over USA48, it increased from -0.13 to 0.14, which frankly surprises me in view of the weather we’ve had lately. The RSS change for CONUS is only about half what UAH reports. If you go to this site
http://www.remss.com/msu/msu_data_monthly.html
and browse the monthly images for September and October, you’ll see some blue (mid south) over CONUS in September that is not there in October, and some red (northeast) in October that is not there in September. I don’t have the time now, but it would be useful to see how well this agrees with spatial variation of surface station reports during September and October.
Patrick Henry: you mean “UAH shows october 2008 is colder than octobers 01-07 but hotter than almost any October in the 20 years before that”.
Steve : have you tried doing the same over Russia… Oops!
OT, but does anyone know why the Arctic Sea Ice News Analysis section of NSIDC (http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/) says that “We provide an update during the first week of each month, or more frequently as conditions warrant” and so far there is nothing there for November? Embarassment perhaps? Or they just haven’t found the right words yet to blame the rapid ice increase on AGW? The longer they leave it the worse it will get.
Alaska and Greenland both had one of the coldest Octobers on record. Arctic ice possibly set the record for greatest October increase. Antarctica had a cold October as well, as did many other places in South America, Africa and much of the US.
There are good reasons why we don’t let one of the coaches also referee the game.
how does one determine unambiguously whether the paper was not acceptable for publication at that time for some genuine reason; or whether it was not acceptable for publication because of a bias against papers which state a view(s) contrary to the AGW theory?
You could read the paper! I assume it is this one
http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0809/0809.0581.pdf
In my opinion GRL were right to reject, the conclusions are based on unjustifiable assumptions, there is some discussion here…
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=595#comment-98850
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=595#comment-98931
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=595#comment-99194
JP
Flanagan,
UAH shows October, 2008 as 10th warmest in the 30 year record, and within one standard deviation (0.19) of the mean. It was cooler last month than in October, 1987.
The GISS data is suspect, at best.
Month after month we hear about the hot weather, and yet…..
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/img/climate/research/2008/oct/01_10_2008_DvTempRank_pg.gif
I agree with Al. Humans are evil, and should be sacrificed to the climate gods. Let’s start with him.
“There are good reasons why we don’t let one of the coaches also referee the game.”
Beautifully put.
And keep score.
On GISS– They currently report October as warmer than September. On the other hand, their temperature for August dropped 0.11C. Due to the features associated with their algorithm, a monthly GISS temperature reports seems to be unstable for at least three months.
I have a jpg showing the current update and the cache at my blog.
John Philip:
Reading the paper won’t tell me why it was not acceptable for publication. I can assume it is because of the final statement: ‘These conclusions are contrary to the IPCC [2007] statement: “[M]ost of the observed increase in global average temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations.”’
Blimey! That is a big delta for GISS, the biggest move away from the satellites for a while, even when you take the different baselines into account:
http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/wti/last:12/plot/hadcrut3vgl/last:12/offset:-0.15/plot/gistemp/last:12/offset:-0.24/plot/uah/last:12/plot/rss/last:12
Interesting to see where HADCRUT3 goes….
None of you are qualified to make climate statements until you complete the following curriculum…Master in Disaster
http://www.achgut.com/dadgdx/index.php/dadgd/article/master1/
Patrick Hadley:
GISS is simply laying the data down for an Obama government takeover.
Over at Lucia’s Blackboard (http://rankexploits.com/musings/) , it can be seen that although the UK Met Office is reporting all of the UK cooler than normal for October, the GISTemp is showing is significantly warmer than normal. GISTemp cannot be trusted.
The Nino 3.4 region warmed by +0.4C in July (and since there is a 3 month lag in the Nino versus global temps), temps should have increased by about 0.024C October. So I’m assuming the AMO index (which also drives global temps) declined in October given the small increase in UAH and the small decrease in RSS.
Hi Anthony,
This is my first message to you, but I’ve been a long time reader. Thank you for your excellent site.
I am a candidate for council election in the Sandridge (Port Melbourne) ward of Port Phillip, which is inner bayside Melbourne, Australia.
Please view my campaign website http://www.scrinis.info for a comprehensive description of my beliefs and platform.
(I credit and link your website regarding the Melbourne weather station.)
I want this to be an electoral test of public opinion on climate policies and their implications locally and federally.
At the moment, I am conducting this campaign completely independently, with my own limited resources.
I am seeking the support of local and international scientists for this campaign.
This will add credibility to my candidature, as well as the scientific evidence presented.
Jennifer Marohassy has already done so.
I would be honoured if you would endorse the principles of this campaign.
This could take the form of a simple one line written statement which includes my name.
As I have a print deadline there is some urgency to receiving this.
Election day is November 29.
Your assistance will be greatly appreciated.
Please contact me should you require further information on +61 3 401 026 706 or anthony@scrinis.info
Please forward this to people or organisations you deem appropriate.
I look forward to hearing from you.
Kind regards,
Anthony Scrinis
Sat data is the key to understanding, not the corrupted surface record. – Anthony
The Sat data (AMSU 900mb) actually supports the surface record. Asia, Russia, Eastern Europe, South America, the Arctic and even Africa have all been much warmer than normal during the past month. November seems to be even warmer. This global cooling nonsense needs to be nipped in the bud or else the whole AGW sceptic movement is going to be left with a lot of egg on it’s face.
Yet the satellite record and GISS seem to have parted company rather dramatically for October.
Andrea Smith
Andrea, everyone should read this inspiring -save the planet – Op-Ed. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/09/opinion/09gore.html?_r=1&pagewanted=print&oref=slogin
“Here’s what we can do — now: we can make an immediate and large strategic investment to put people to work replacing 19th-century energy technologies that depend on dangerous and expensive carbon-based fuels with 21st-century technologies that use fuel that is free forever: the sun, the wind and the natural heat of the earth.”
“What follows is a five-part plan to repower America with a commitment to producing 100 percent of our electricity from carbon-free sources within 10 years. It is a plan that would simultaneously move us toward solutions to the climate crisis and the economic crisis — and create millions of new jobs that cannot be outsourced.”
Each time the high priest opens his mouth to speak, I am thankful for “hanging chads.” Have we now leaped from the frying pan into the fire?
Mr. Finn, I was just as crityical of the ’70s global cooling alarm as I am of the AGW alarm today.
Phillip Bratby
“…is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations.”’
In the specious, spurious science of AGW, the above is sufficient forensic evidence to determine guilt and convict. Imagine a court of justice where the guilty plea is the only plea.
Flanagan…
One more time for you: you can’t take the daily satellite readings at face value. There is drift, which is then corrected for in the monthly numbers. Haven’t you noticed how almost every month at some point it appears 2008 has reached “the highest point on record”, and yet that month does not end up anywhere near the actual records. November 2008 is NOT running warmer than any other year on record according to UAH, I guarantee it.
John Finn –
How can you say the satellite record matches GISS, when both UAH and RSS show October 2008 as the coolest since 2000, while GISS claims it is easily the warmest ever? The discrepency is HUGE.
Also, how can the Arctic have been much warmer than normal last month, when we just saw the greatest ice extent increase in October on record?
How can you say the satellite record matches GISS, when both UAH and RSS show October 2008 as the coolest since 2000, while GISS claims it is easily the warmest ever?
Because the satellite measurements nearest to the surface (i.e. @ 3,300 ft) are also warm. The higher the measurements – the cooler the anomalies. In any case, I’m not sure that you’re argument is – are you saying Russia and Asia weren’t warm? or South America or the Arctic.
The fact that the Arctic is refreezing means nothing. We expect it to freeze in winter.
Mr. Finn, I was just as crityical of the ’70s global cooling alarm as I am of the AGW alarm today.
Me too. And I’m even more critical of the latest global cooling nonsense. There is no evidence to suggest the world is cooling. Nor is there any evidence to suggest that a weak solar solar cycle will have any appreciable effect on global temperatures. ENSO events are a factor but even though there are still lingering effects from the recent La Nina, temperature data from all sources (satellite and surface) still show anomalies above the long term mean.
I think someone at GISS is putting his thumb on the scale again!
John Finn-
I don’t think you comprehend how the UAH monthly anomaly works. You see, that number is a measurement of the lowest levels of the troposphere, the 3300′ you reference. Therefore, the +.167 October UAH anomaly is very far from the +.78 GISS anomaly (yes, I realize their base periods are different..the difference is still huge).
And the Arctic hasn’t just been “refreezing”, it refroze at a faster rate than ever recorded in October. And snowcover over Asia is greater and thicker than it was last year at this time. And yet somehow we are supposed to believe that Asia was much warmer than last year (and all years previous for October)?
You see, that number is a measurement of the lowest levels of the troposphere, the 3300′ you reference
Is it? I thought it was an average of the temps between 850mb to 300mb but it’s been a while since I looked. I certainly don’t think UAH (or RSS) readings are representative of temps at a single height of 3300 ft (900 mb), though.
Jared
I think the difference in the base line between the two is about 0.5 degrees C, actually a bit more than that. So it may be most of the diffence in the anomally numbers.
At least that is how Phillippe explained it over at Skeptical Science web site.
John
I don’t know what the long term mean temperature you refer to, nor do I know that it has any significance.
However, unless the fossil record is pure junk that “long term mean” temperature of the earth is higher than the present. Or were you intending to digress into a creationist argument?
“Wondering Aloud”: The difference between UAH and GISTEMP is around 0.24K – derivation at http://www.woodfortrees.org/notes#baselines
The “Green Jobs” program is just today’s “Forced Collectivization” of yesteryears which if taken to the degree it was in Russia, would have the same result – famine and death of large parts of the population.
What I find interesting about the UAH graph, is that definite sawtooth substructure, that seems to show a repetitive sudden dive and an essentially linear and fixed time constant slow recovery. My seat of the pants suggests to me, that that is not just sheer random wandering, but there appears to be some definite physical reason for that behavior; and no, I am not competent to even suggest what that might be; but I’ll bet that Dr Christy, and Dr Roy Spencer have wondered about that and have some ideas.
Maybe you Might ask Dr Christy what HE thinks that is; it looks too repetitive to just be sheer luck.
George