Guest Post By Bob Tisdale
The Seth Borenstein AP article about the recent high sea surface temperature…
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jLv3LpI0fw21ULmgkJtinBFrwm7AD9A6OUF06
…is misleading. There is a significant difference between what Seth Borenstein reported and what NOAA stated in the July “State of the Climate”.
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/?reportglobal&year2009&month7
Borenstein does not clarify that it is a record for the month of July, where NOAA does. NOAA writes, “The global ocean surface temperature for July 2009 was the warmest on record, 0.59°C (1.06°F) above the 20th century average of 16.4°C (61.5°F). This broke the previous July record set in 1998.” Refer to Figure 1, which is a graph of SST for July from 1982 to 2009 (NOAA’s ERSST.v3b version).
http://i28.tinypic.com/2ut3rzp.png
Figure 1
Borenstein readers are told that July 2009 Sea Surface Temperatures (SSTs) were the highest since records began, but that is false. Figure 2 illustrates monthly SSTs from November 1981 to July 2009. I’ve added a red horizontal line to show the July 2009 value.
http://i28.tinypic.com/wwho49.png
Figure 2
Whether or not July SSTs represented a record is also dependent on the SST dataset. NOAA’s satellite-based Optimally Interpolated (OI,v2) dataset presents a different picture. That dataset clearly shows that July 1998, Figure 3, had a higher SST.
http://i32.tinypic.com/2ynkzsm.png
Figure 3
And looking at the monthly OI.v2 data since November 1981, Figure 4, there are numerous months with higher SSTs.
http://i31.tinypic.com/2hzslme.png
Figure 4
The Borenstein article also claims that Arctic SST anomalies are as high as 10 deg F (5.5 deg C) above average. Wow!! Really??
I used the SST map-making feature of the NOAA NOMADS system to create the map of high latitude Northern Hemisphere SST anomalies for July 2009. The Contour Interval was set at 1 deg C to help find the claimed excessively high SST anomalies. Alas, Borenstein was right, BUT, as you will note, the ONLY area that reaches the 5 to 6 deg C range is the White Sea (indicated by the arrow) off the Barents Sea.
http://i26.tinypic.com/1yk3v7.png
Figure 5
And to put that in perspective, Figure 6 is the global map. Based on the Kartesh White Sea Biological Station website…
http://www.zin.ru/kartesh/general_en.asp
…the surface area of the White Sea is approximately 90,000 sq km. If the surface area of the Arctic Ocean is 14 million sq km, the White Sea represents less than 0.6% of it. And for those who want to compare it to the surface area of the global oceans, its surface area is 361 million sq km. Too many zeroes after the decimal point to worry about.
http://i26.tinypic.com/vzd36t.png
Figure 6
And the SST anomalies of one miniscule area do not represent the SST anomalies for the Arctic Ocean, as is obvious in Figure 7. Arctic SST anomalies have declined over the past few years.
http://i31.tinypic.com/nv8l8k.png
Figure 7
SST anomaly graphs through July 2009 for the Arctic Ocean and other individual oceans can be found at my July 2009 SST Anomaly Update.
To sum up the Borenstein article, it’s factually incorrect in places, and in others, it raises alarmism to ridiculous levels by dwelling on a meaningless statistic, the July SST anomaly of the White Sea.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
000
NOCA42 TJSJ 011628
PNSSJU
PUBLIC INFORMATION STATEMENT
NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE SAN JUAN PR
1228 PM AST SAT AUG 1 2009
…SAYING GOOD BYE TO A VERY UNUSUAL MONTH…JULY 2009..
End of message
ON THE OTHER HAND…YOU MIGHT MEET SOMEONE FROM FROM CHICAGO
WHERE THE AVERAGE TEMPERATURE WAS 68.9 MAKING IT THE COOLEST JULY
SINCE 1942 WHEN THE STATION WAS MOVED AWAY FROM THE LAKEFRONT…OR
GRAND RAPIDS MICHIGAN THAT BROKE THEIR RECORD COOLEST JULY SET IN
1992. OR MORE LIKELY SOMEONE FROM NEW YORK CITY WHICH HAD ITS
SECOND COLDEST JULY. YOU MIGHT EVEN MEET SOMEONE FROM THE SOUTH
POLE WHICH HAD A BONE CHILLING AVERAGE TEMPERATURE OF MINUS 86.8
DEGREES FAHRENHEIT BREAKING THE RECORD SET BACK IN JULY 1965.
THEIR LOWEST TEMPERATURE LAST MONTH WAS ONLY 108.2 DEGREES…BELOW
ZERO. IT MAKES OUR MID 80S AVERAGE LOOK POSITIVELY INVITING.
$$
SNELL
Dennis Ward
We live in a planet which is normally warm and virtually ice free. We are currently in an interglacial period where there has naturally been warming. If you want to join the discussion please show or link us to sources that show beyond dispute that the current warming is due to man made CO2 rather than other climate forcing. Could you perhaps explain why, historically, CO2 levels far in excess of current values have not triggered runaway warming, how we have had glaciation with far higher levels and how we have had higher temperatures with lower CO2 levels.
tty (10:41:34) :
Your information should be added to the the head of this post.
That’s the stuff of an almost perfect BIAS. (BTW the origin of the colorful display of NOAA maps)
Anthony,
I was wondering if the White Sea Anomaly is the result of “smearing” the color around a bit. The Stieg et al method. Has anyone taken a look?
It seems to me that Seth Borenstein is not following the instructions given to him by the contextual “karma anagram” of his own name, insert be honest. Thus, it is no wonder that by not following that suggestion the words he writes turn out the way that they do.
Something is strange around Arkhangelsk, it shows up as a “heat island” in this map of European july temperatures:
http://iridl.ldeo.columbia.edu/ds:/SOURCES/.NOAA/.NCEP/.CPC/.CAMS/.anomaly/.temp/-9999/replaceNaN/-9999/-9999/flagrange//name//tmask/def/SOURCES/.NOAA/.NCEP/.CPC/.CAMS/.anomaly/.temp//name//tanom/def/DATA/1./STEP/startcolormap/DATA/-10./10./RANGE/white/purple/purple/-10./VALUE/cyan/-1./VALUE/white/white/1./bandmax/yellow/1./VALUE/red/10./VALUE/firebrick/endcolormap/:ds/figviewer.html?my.help=&map.T.plotvalue=jul+2009&map.Y.units=degree_north&map.Y.plotlast=75N&map.here.x=0&map.here.y=0&map.url=a-+.tanom+-a-+.tanom+-a-+.tmask+-a+X+Y+fig%3A+colors+grey+nozero+contours+mask+black+thin+solid+countries_gaz+%3Afig&map.domain=+%7B+%2FT+555.5+plotvalue+X+340.+400.+plotrange+Y+35+75+plotrange+%7D&map.domainparam=+%2Fplotaxislength+700+psdef+%2Fplotborder+72+psdef+%2FXOVY+null+psdef&map.zoom=Zoom&map.Y.plotfirst=35N&map.X.plotfirst=20W&map.X.units=degree_east&map.X.modulus=360&map.X.plotlast=40E&map.tanom.plotfirst=-10.&map.tanom.units=degree_Celsius&map.tanom.plotlast=10.&map.plotaxislength=700&map.plotborder=72&map.fnt=Helvetica&map.fntsze=12&map.color_smoothing=auto&map.XOVY=auto&map.iftime=25&map.mftime=25&map.fftime=200
Maybe it’s all those old nuclear submarines heating up the area…
comment copied from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/6049302/Tourists-warned-as-Asian-hornets-terrorise-French.html
BREAKING NEWS…
A recent scientific study into the serial and systemic breakdown of journalistic integrity suggests that global warming is to blame. Professor Ned Schlobotnic of The Oliver Stone School of Retconned US History states ” It would appear that increased global temperatures have caused the average journalist’s brain to swell to a degree that rational thought is often impeded. In a normal person’s brain, this has no real effect as a normal brain expands only a fraction of its original size…but a journalist’s brain, the size of a mere chick-pea, any degree of swelling practically doubles it’s size, so you can readily see where their cognitive ability would be impaired.”
dennis ward (08:55:48)
Without addressing the issue of whether or not your figures are accurate, they’re still not meaningful by themselves. Many here (myself included) see a cyclical pattern of rising and falling temperatures thru-out history, and easily preceding the invention of the SUV. If you refer to a start point along the the rising part of a curve in a cyclical pattern (as you have), then it is possible to declare every year higher than the first until you pass below the initial level on the down slope in the latter half of the cycle.
Since you recognize that La Nina predominance and extended minima result in falling temps, you’ve painted yourself into the corner of admitting that El Nino predominance and solar maxima begat rising temps as well.
Bob Tisdale
You question the data when you write:
“Borenstein does not clarify that it is a record for the month of July, where NOAA does. ”
This is not true, the sum of the highest mean temperature(16.4° for July) and the highest anomaly of the entire time series(not only july) gives the higher mean temperature of the entire time series not only July according to NOAA ocean dataset.
ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/anomalies/monthly.ocean.90S.90N.df_1901-2000mean.dat
My apologies for not having read all the above comments – does anyone have a read on how this corrrsponds with ARGO data?
dennis ward: You wrote, “All of these graphs show one thing quite transparently. Global warming did not peak in 1998.”
Causation was not the topic of this post or thread. But since you insist… In numerous other posts that Anthony co-posted here, I’ve shown how the rise in global SST anomalies since 1976 is the result of step changes caused by El Nino events. Here are links to a two-part post “Can El Nino Events Explain All Of The Global Warming Since 1976?”
Part 1:
http://bobtisdale.blogspot.com/2009/01/can-el-nino-events-explain-all-of.html
Part 2:
http://bobtisdale.blogspot.com/2009/01/can-el-nino-events-explain-all-of_11.html
Here’s a similar post that uses a Time-Latitude Plot (Hovmoller) from RSS to illustrate the same effect in TLT anomalies:
http://bobtisdale.blogspot.com/2009/06/rss-msu-tlt-time-latitude-plots.html
And a here’s yet another one, a few days old, that used Hovmollers of Low Latitude Pacific SST anomalies to show the same effect:
http://bobtisdale.blogspot.com/2009/08/hovmollers-of-pacific-low-latitude-sst.html
If you have any questions when you’re done reading those posts and all of the links they contain, please ask.
let’s say that the earth is NOT warming, how about cutting down about all of the industrial pollution there is in the world?
That can be done cheaply, effectively, and without excessive expense. (And, to the great benefit of the environment, with greater emissions of CO2.)
I got reamed over at Daily Kos for questioning an even more alarmist post than the Borenstein article. The article supposedly quoted from an AP article –
“And in the Arctic, water temperatures are up 10 degrees. ”
The AP article said –
“It’s most noticeable near the Arctic, where water temperatures are as much as 10 degrees above average.”
Which is bad enough – seeing as how the extreme difference was only in one locale. But the misquote in Daily Kos has a fundamentally different meaning – i.e. that the entire Arctic was 10 degrees warmer.
When I pointed out that this was a crock, I was called a “denier” and worse. It seems that they had little concern for the misrepresentation of data.
<>
I must add a caveat. I am quite left-leaning and a liberal. I simply want to see materials presented honestly and discussed openly. That is my definition of liberalism.
PaulHClark: You asked, “does anyone have a read on how this corrrsponds with ARGO data?”
ARGO data is not available in a user-friendly basis, or if it is, I haven’t found it.
If memory serves me well, ARGO floats appear on the surface every 10 days to take samples and transmit data. The rest of the time they’re dropping down to maximum depths or rising up from it, sampling as they go. There are other float systems that have been in place for multiple decades, such as the TAO project floats in the tropical Pacific, but retrieval of their data also isn’t user friendly.
Dr. Spencer has a new post up on his site about this
Record July 2009 Sea Surface Temperatures? The View from Space
http://www.drroyspencer.com/2009/08/record-july-2009-sea-surface-temperatures-the-view-from-space/
PaulHClark (12:36:14) :
I was wondering the same thing earlier on in the day, but the only thing I could find was on the ARGO site itself. It talks about a study done by Rommhein & Gilson which showed warming of 0.06degC from the sixties to this year.
“There is a significant difference between what Seth Borenstein reported and what NOAA stated in the July “State of the Climate”… Borenstein does not clarify that it is a record for the month of July…”
This is what the NOAA press release says: “The global ocean surface temperature for July 2009 was the warmest on record, 0.59°C (1.06°F) above the 20th century average of 16.4°C (61.5°F). This broke the previous July record set in 1998.”
This is what I read in the Borenestein article: “The world’s oceans this summer are the warmest on record.
The National Climatic Data Center, the government agency that keeps weather records, says the average global ocean temperature in July was 62.6 degrees. That’s the hottest since record-keeping began in 1880. The previous record was set in 1998.”
I don’t see any “significant difference” between Borenstein’s article and the NOAA press release, rather the same data presented in a slightly different order. One might dispute the term “summer” in Borenstein’s lead, but since the June ocean temperature was also the warmest on record, this would be a minor quibble.
Argo in brief
Access Argo Data
Jeremy (08:38:10) :
“Completely off-topic… I found this page thoroughly entertaining…
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20327155.800-metal-comes-to-the-rescue-of-revolutionary-plane.html
Why?
It’s an article about Boeing again having issues getting their 787 into production and service. It contains this quote:
“Data from the test did not match our computer model,” says Boeing vice-president Scott Fancher. That highlights the difficulty of predicting the behaviour of advanced CFRP materials being used in very large structures for the first time.
And this advertisement image:
… on a cover of the very same periodical talking about sea level rise being “worse than we thought.”
It is getting truly humorous now. I just hope it is publicly obvious when the emperor looks down and realize he is naked”.
Jeremy,
Apart from the loss of time resulting in late deliveries, these changes will have a devastating effect on the design of this aircraft.
It will end up a far cry from the original specifications.
It will be more expensive to build, it will be heavier, resulting in a lower pay load and it will be less fuel efficient.
But the result will be better computer models.
Dave (09:00:44) “Stick to the topic phoenix, we’re talking about GW hysterics not pollution.”
–
OBJECTION to Dave’s comment:
‘phoenix mattress’ raises a fundamentally salient point.
A new breed of spiteful & dishonest environmentalists (including some corrupt scientists) has ripped the environmental movement to shreds, tearing it apart from the inside out.
Effectively, the environmental movement has been divided & conquered by itself.
This is a tragedy.
I raised a red flag, warning my colleagues & contacts about this trajectory in the past. Things have progressed exactly how I imagined.
Meanwhile, serious environmental problems have been pushed right off the radars to make room for fake problems.
–
Might we see more step-rises in global T with each El Nino as Bob Tisdale has shown us for El Ninos in the recent past? Why should the pattern suddenly stop & reverse?…
…If one believes some of the regulars around here, “the sun does nothing“, “the deep ocean can have no effect”, “solar system oscillations have no effect” — in summary: some are hoping we have 5-year-old-minds that are gullible enough to feel comforted by a “nothing has any effect” lullaby – laughable for sure.
The conservative mind trying to make sense of all the flying-fur might opt for prudence:
1) Be prepared for warming &/or cooling (whatever the cause).
2) Fight toxicity (not CO2, which is plant food) on legitimate grounds.
For those who need a little more to feel inspired, I will add one more:
3) Abandon large amounts of pavement to make way for natural (not genetically-modified) forest. DO NOT MENTION CO2 in advocating this – (you’ll look like a total whack-job &/or distortion-artist if you do – so stick to legitimate arguments).
The way to weather climate change (whatever its cause & direction) is via natural population health (i.e. NOT via scandalous politicized obfuscation about CO2).
Diversity is the key to survival – in other words: not all eggs in one *A*GW basket.
Paul Vaughan
Ecologist, Parks & Natural Forest Advocate
–
A picture is worth 1000 words?
Earth’s polar motion is telling a story and few are listening…
http://www.sfu.ca/~plv/M4PxPyf123.png
http://www.sfu.ca/~plv/ChandlerPeriod.PNG
http://www.sfu.ca/~plv/(J,N),r..png
http://www.sfu.ca/~plv/(J,N)o2&Pr.png
http://www.sfu.ca/~plv/1931UniquePhaseHarmonics.png
http://www.sfu.ca/~plv/EstChandlerPeriodMorlet(2pi).PNG
http://www.sfu.ca/~plv/ccM4Py.png
http://www.sfu.ca/~plv/ChandlerPeriodAgassizBC,CanadaPrecipitationTimePlot.PNG
http://www.sfu.ca/~plv/ClimateRegimeChangePoints.PNG
http://www.sfu.ca/~plv/f(Pr.,-2r..,-3LNC)LOD.png
http://www.sfu.ca/~plv/OMMO_2.png
http://www.sfu.ca/~plv/Phase(r..,LNC).png
http://www.sfu.ca/~plv/CCaa1mo&11aT1mo.PNG
http://www.sfu.ca/~plv/LODaa(yoy)diffsqHadSST.PNG
Beware those who use baseball bats to suppress open-mindedness about the unknown & nature’s raw complexity. Due to their sloppy tactics, their agenda has become clear: the protection of belief paradigms inspired by (1) religion, (2) flawed & selfish discipline-centric dogma, & (3) anthropogenic computer fantasies —– a potently toxic combination when mixed.
The White Sea isn’t a sea at all. It is a shallow coastal inlet (average depth 60 meters) similar to Chesapeake Bay for example.
Check Aug/Sep 2008, 2007, 2006. Same heat island every year….
Brendan H: “I don’t see any ‘significant difference’ between Borenstein’s article and the NOAA press release, rather the same data presented in a slightly different order. One might dispute the term ‘summer’ in Borenstein’s lead, but since the June ocean temperature was also the warmest on record, this would be a minor quibble.”
The headline and the article are incorrect because they do not clarify that the record is for the month of July. He writes that it occurred in July, but the July SST is not the all-time record SST, as his article implies. I’ve illustrated that with graphs from two SST datasets.
You selectively quoted part of the sentence in which I wrote “Borenstein does not clarify that it is a record for the month of July, where NOAA does”. Did you miss the meaning of the entire sentence?
John Egan (13:34:45) “When I pointed out that […] I was called a “denier” and worse. […] I must add a caveat. I am quite left-leaning and a liberal. […]”
There is nothing inconsistent with being a liberal (or even a left-winger) and at the same time being non-alarmist. Supporters of any political party who are incapable of evading climate distortion are a serious liability. (This applies to right, left, & centre (i.e. liberal) parties as well as to any parties that do not see themselves as occupying a position on a left-right spectrum.) Thank you for sharing your comment.
From Wikipedia:
“Terrorism is the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion.[1] At present, there is no internationally agreed definition of terrorism.[2][3] Common definitions of terrorism refer only to those acts which are intended to create fear (terror), are perpetrated for an ideological goal (as opposed to a lone attack), and deliberately target or disregard the safety of non-combatants.”
The proposed revision of the Australian terrorism laws includes:
“Under the proposed changes there will be a new terrorism hoax offence, punishable by up to 10 years’ jail, for anyone seeking to create a false belief that a terrorist act will occur.”
Mr Borenstein’s article would appear to be “seeking to create a false belief” to “create fear and terror” regarding Man’s effect on the world.
We need someone to invite all of the fear-mongering, biased reporters (and others) to Australia.