Graph by Anthony (click for larger image) text by Dr. Roy Spencer from his blog here
May 2009 Global Temperature Update +0.04 deg. C
June 4th, 2009 by Roy W. Spencer, Ph. D.
YR MON GLOBE NH SH TROPICS
2009 1 0.304 0.443 0.165 -0.036
2009 2 0.347 0.678 0.016 0.051
2009 3 0.206 0.310 0.103 -0.149
2009 4 0.090 0.124 0.056 -0.014
2009 5 0.043 0.043 0.043 -0.168
May 2009 saw another drop in the global average temperature anomaly, from +0.09 deg. C in April to +0.04 deg. C in May, originating mostly from the Northern Hemisphere and the tropics.
A reminder for those who are monitoring the daily progress of global-average temperatures here:
(1) Only use channel 5 (”ch05″), which is what we use for the lower troposphere and middle troposphere temperature products.
(2) Compare the current month to the same calendar month from the previous year (which is already plotted for you).
(3) The progress of daily temperatures should only be used as a rough guide for how the current month is shaping up because they come from the AMSU instrument on the NOAA-15 satellite, which has a substantial diurnal drift in the local time of the orbit. Our ‘official’ results presented above, in contrast, are from AMSU on NASA’s Aqua satellite, which carries extra fuel to keep it in a stable orbit. Therefore, there is no diurnal drift adjustment needed in our official product.
E.M.Smith (04:33:15) : Wonder what folks will do when we hit negative …
Sir, I don’t know about you but once temperatures hit negative I intend to buy.. and sell when they rise again! 😉
Cheers, LilacWine
I wonder if we’ve seen the last of Dr. Meier here now that he has a new boss with iron boots and a riding crop.
DavidsBSD (09:42:54) :
Any one concerned that all three metrics, G, SH, NH are the same? How likely is that?
I would be concerned if G would be different 🙂
crosspatch (10:12:16) :
“…you discover that the most recent 12-month period is the second coolest since 1999.”
Crosspatch really must learn to communicate in NASA-speak. Let me translate: “…you discover that the recent 12-month period is the 9th hottest since 1999.”
Ozzie John (05:25:12) :
Not sure how the maths ae calculated here but can someone explain how the global average is 0.043 when the tropics are -0.168 and both NH & SH anomolies are 0.043.
Am I reading this correctly ?
Northern Hemisphere means all area to the North from the Equator, not just the northern exratropics. You can get the global average temperature anomaly relative to the 1979-98 period by averaging the NH and SH anomalies.
The tropics data covers the whole area between 20°N and 20°S, but it is also partly covered by the Northern and Southern hemispheres.
The current tropical anomaly is negative, when the NH and SH are both standing on 0.043. It means that we can find the larger positive anomaly in extratropical areas.
“What do you think about global warming?”
“It was nice while it lasted.”
I wonder if the Mt. ReDoubt eruptions helped out some with the N Hemisphere cooling off this Spring. The added aerosols have to have some effect, one would think. The northern oceans seem to have been staying generally cooler, as well.
Also of interesting note is how quiet severe weather season has been this year in the States, so far. You have to go back to the mid 90’s, I believe, since the last time we’ve seen lower numbers. (I just picked that tidbit up when I happened to be watching TWC for a forecast.) That’s a good thing.
Maybe a bit. Volcanic cooling of the lower atmosphere is usually associated with warming of the upper atmosphere. UAH does show a little bit of stratospheric warming over the last few months.
If temps stay relatively low the coming year and a half I’ll probably become less of the warmist I am today. We’ll just have to wait and see. First thing on the agenda is minimal Arctic sea ice extent.
Can’t argue with that. If more folks took that attitude, there’d be fewer on the warming side today.
I’m a lukewarmist, myself. And I buy the theory that man (with his 3%/year addition) has caused the increase in CO2 accumulation. But I am a strong CO2 skeptic; I think the mild warming is due almost entirely to natural and non-CO2 anthropogenic causes such as, dirty snow (which has a strong impact on NH ice), land use, etc.
Reinhard Bosch. I agree that every day there are ew records made, both warm and cold. My point was merely that Flanagan’s observation of “hot” in California was not accurate.
Leif. I have a problem with Warming or Cooling, as they are not absolute values, but relative values. If one is allowed to pick his start point, he can argue either case. IMHO, climate is like life, a lot more complex than is generally acknowledged. fm
‘
Does anybody out there have a copy of this paper? I’m not a subscriber. It might be interesting.
Journal of Environmental Informatics
Online ISSN 1684-8799 / Print ISSN 1726-2135
Volume 8 Number 2 December 2006 = non-subscribed
doi:10.3808/jei.200600079
JEI 8(2) 2006, Pages 86-99
A Serially Complete U.S. Dataset of Temperature and Precipitation for Decision Support Systems
Z. Chen1, S. Goddard1*, K. G. Hubbard2, W. S. Sorensen2 and J. You2
Department of Computer Science and Engineering, University of Nebraska-Lincoln Lincoln, NE 68588, USA
High Plains Regional Climate Center 727 Hardin Hall, University of Nebraska-Lincoln Lincoln, NE 68583-0997, USA
*Corresponding author. Email: goddard@cse.unl.edu
Abstract
The effect of missing data can result in errors that exhibit temporal and spatial patterns in climatological and meteorological research applications. Many climate related tools perform best with a serially complete dataset (SCD). To support the National Agricultural Decision Support System (NADSS), a SCD with no missing data values for daily temperature and precipitation for the United States was developed using a self-calibrating data quality control (QC) library. The library performs two primary functions: identifies outliers and provides estimates to replace missing data values and outliers. This study presents the development of the SCD and the QC library in detail. An in-depth evaluation in terms of root mean square error (RMSE) and mean absolute error (MAE) for the SCD for the period of 1975-2004 is provided. The study shows an impressively low average RMSE in the range of 2.27 to 3.58°F for temperature and 0.07 to 0.23 inch for precipitation for the whole country for 30 years. The goal of this study is to enhance drought risk assessment and environmental risk analysis.
Neven (10:01:13) :
It goes to show that it’s not that easy to do short-term predictions. Did David Archibald predict anything else lately?
Yes, David has predicted a 2 deg decline in global temperatures over the next “few years” which is probably even more ridiculous than his May prediction. You say it ‘s not easy to do “short-term predictions”. I disagree. I predicted that David’s prediction would be a “spectacular failure”. I found that quite easy.
Fortunately, the AGW crowd seem to have largely ignored David’s “predictions”. Thankfully, they appear to recognise that DA’s views are not typical of responsible sceptics.
It’s been raining on-an-off in Denver for weeks.
The dozen key reservoirs along the front range which serve the Denver metro area are reporting 101% “full” as of June 1, 2009. The historic median for these bodies is 85% full. A 120,000 acre-foot Strategic Water Reserve is at 100%.
http://www.denverwater.org/reslevelsmore/pdfs/res_levels.pdf
As we all know, the West is usually arid and hot; one may hope the Greens aren’t too disappointed at the lush profusion of alpine flowers blooming this year along Colorado’s green hillsides, from the glacier cirques and along the wet hillsides. I won’t see first-hand till next week, but Snowtell figures would seem to bear the prediction out, showing the “water-year-to-date”:
ftp://ftp.wcc.nrcs.usda.gov/data/water/wcs/gis/maps/west_wytdprecpctnormal_update.pdf
So Unbuntu
It is clearly Climate Progress that is in the tinfoil hats brigade. The phemomena we are seeing there is called projection.
I’m a lukewarmist, myself. And I buy the theory that man (with his 3%/year addition) has caused the increase in CO2 accumulation. But I am a strong CO2 skeptic; I think the mild warming is due almost entirely to natural and non-CO2 anthropogenic causes such as, dirty snow (which has a strong impact on NH ice), land use, etc.
I’m a warmist mainly based on the daily research I do. Every time I dig a bit deeper and check things out as thoroughly as I can I return to my subjective interpretation that AGW as a theory has more going for it than not, especially if you do a background search on the messengers. I try to remain open to any possibility as there are many things that are unexplained.
But for me AGW is just part of a collection of problems that steadily grow more serious and irreversible, such as the peaking of resources (peak oil naturally being the most conspicuous one), ocean acidification, disruption and destruction of ecosystems, etc. I’d be very surprised if all of that is a hoax or caused by natural variability. I think the underlying cause of all global problems (such as the present economic downturn) is the concept of exponential growth. I find it particularly hard to believe that this exponential growth can be infinite in a finite system. But that’s what they have us believe, or at least that’s what almost everybody is urging you not to think too much about.
Not that there is anything wrong with growth, on the contrary. However, after a certain point growth increasingly takes on the form of a cancerous tumour. And this tumour is threatening freedom, the thing that in the end everyone is most concerned with and every discussion is about essentially. I have a feeling this whole blog is here because of the owner’s views on freedom.
The problem is that everyone has a different definition for the concept of freedom. Sadly for most people nowadays freedom means nothing more than to have the freedom to do whatever the hell one wants, without much thought for the consequences of this ‘free’ behaviour and thus the responsibility that comes with it. I notice unfortunately that it’s these people that are the most clamorous on the skeptic side of the AGW debate. This is definitely one of the things that keeps me a warmist.
If AGW is one of the several ingredients of a catastrophic cocktail that’s brewing, there will be a lot less freedom for future generations to enjoy. Now I don’t know what the chances are of AGW projections being right, but I’ve seen some interesting discussions on that between people who know a thing or two about risk management.
But anyway, let’s see what the Arctic sea ice and perhaps an El Niño have in store for us. Perhaps even some sun activity? If yearly global temperatures don’t make it in the top 5 under those circumstances, the AGW theory has a problem, and not just on a PR level.
The relative cooling was a lot of fun for a lot of people, but now the real fun begins (or not).
“Before someone is critical of anothers public prediction, ISTM, they should have also made a very public prediction that was substantially more accurate. ”
I kinda addressed this point on my blog:
4.3 But Skeptics Have Not Done any Better at Predicting Temperatures
That may very well be true, but this argument is attacking a bit of a strawman. I’m not claiming that I can accurately predict future temperatures — I’m claiming that Jim Hansen cannot. At least not as well as he thinks he can. Put another way, it’s not necessary for me to accurately predict the future to win this debate.
Just to add to my last comment, suppose Miss Cleo (the psychic) predicts that in 2010, the Chicago Cubs will win the world series. It’s reasonable for me to ridicule her if (when?) her prediction fails to materialize. Even if I admit I am unable to predict world series winners years in advance.
Because the point is not that I’m a better psychic than Miss Cleo. The point is that she is not psychic and nobody else is either.
“Wonder what folks will do when we hit negative …”
You will hear a lot more references to “climate change” and a lot fewer references to “global warming.” IMHO
John A (05:03:41) :
So David Archibald was wrong by about 0.5C – better luck next time!
Chances are that these temperatures are already “massaged” by more than 0.5C
“I have a feeling this whole blog is here because of the owner’s views on freedom.”
Actually, I think Anthony has said repeatedly why this blog is here. He wanted a place where he could comment “…on puzzling things in life, nature, science, weather, climate change, technology, and recent news. You have the freedom to come into his internet abode here and comment as you see fit, as long as you are a good guest. Freedom is the reason that every one of us is here Neven, including you. IF the internet becomes a place where one’s views cannot be freely expressed this blog and many others will no longer exist. However freedom will not be denied forever.
Alex:I somehow doubt temperatures will plummet after May 2009, because an El Nino is currently forming
There are no Ninos around I sent them back to school. La Nina just went to the toilette to arrange herself..she’ll be back in a few minutes, don’t worry!.
“Frank Mosher (07:58:05) :
Anthony. Several people have criticized Archibald’s prediction. ” Those that are without sin cast the first stone”. Before someone is critical of anothers public prediction, ISTM, they should have also made a very public prediction that was substantially more accurate. A little humility goes a long way. fm”
It is not a requirement to come up with a “better” projection when someone decides to make a prediction that doesn’t past muster. IMO, the delivery of said criticisms chould be delivered in a manner that is without ridicule. The person who delivered the projection also has a responsibility to not personalize their work. It’s a viscious cycle when emotion is injected. Witness the comments on consensus CAGW sites.
Leif Svalgaard (11:29:28) :
DavidsBSD (09:42:54) :
Any one concerned that all three metrics, G, SH, NH are the same? How likely is that?
I would be concerned if G would be different 🙂
True Leif,
but my bad wording didnt convey my point.
How likely that both NH and SH are identical. when was last time that happened?
I have seen errors in reporting anomalies recently and wondered if this too is an error.
Some Canadian anecdotal to go along with this.
B.C. bakes while Ontario, Prairies freeze in the dark
Still, Phillips said that this spring (March, April and May) has been the coldest season in five years, in terms of average temperatures right across the country.
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20090605/Cda_Weather_090605/20090605?hub=TopStories
Alex (04:52:26) :
I live far, far away, but it is so gratifying to know that I am foremost in your thoughts.
I prefer to think that my prediction was just a little ahead of its time, as usual.