NOAA's August global SST record is the result of one data set

Yesterday NOAA announced with much fanfare that:

The world’s ocean surface temperature was the warmest for any August on record, and the warmest on record averaged for any June-August (Northern Hemisphere summer/Southern Hemisphere winter) season according to NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center in Asheville, N.C. The preliminary analysis is based on records dating back to 1880.

Besides the UAH data for August I cited, Bob Tisdale shows that some other datasets don’t agree with NOAA’s conclusion. – Anthony

Record Sea Surface Temperatures Are Only In NOAA ERSST.v3b Dataset

Guest post by Bob Tisdale

The NOAA press release claims the August Global Sea Surface Temperature (SST) was the warmest on record.

The record ERSST.v3b SST for August can be seen in Figure 1.

http://i32.tinypic.com/2jaiydh.png

Figure 1

And of course SST anomalies, Figure 2, were also at record levels in August 2009.

http://i28.tinypic.com/ive0y1.png

Figure 2

RECORD NOT CONFIRMED BY NOAA SATELLITE SST DATA

August 2009 SST, Figure 3, and SST anomalies, Figure 4, for the NOAA satellite-based OI.v2 SST dataset were not records. NOAA writes about the Optimum Interpolation (OI.v2) data, “The optimum interpolation (OI) sea surface temperature (SST) analysis is produced weekly on a one-degree grid. The analysis uses in situ and satellite SST’s plus SST’s simulated by sea-ice cover. Before the analysis is computed, THE SATELLITE DATA IS ADJUSTED FOR BIASES using the method of Reynolds (1988) and Reynolds and Marsico (1993).” [Emphasis added.]

http://www.cdc.noaa.gov/data/gridded/data.noaa.oisst.v2.html

http://i29.tinypic.com/2zgi8n7.png

Figure 3

############

http://i31.tinypic.com/ajp9ap.png

Figure 4

NOAA does not use satellite data in its ERSST.v3b SST dataset. However, when NOAA originally released the ERSST.v3b dataset in 2008, they included satellite data to supplement the buoy- and ship-based data. This was discussed in my post “Recent Differences Between GISS and NCDC SST Anomaly Data And A Look At The Multiple NCDC SST Datasets” and repeated here:

In “Improvements to NOAA’s Historical Merged Land-Ocean Surface Temperature Analysis (1880-2006)”, Smith et al note the use of satellite data for ERSST.v3 data in their abstract, “Beginning in 1985, improvements are due to the inclusion of bias-adjusted satellite data.” That’s a positive description. They further proclaim, “Of the improvements, the two that have the greatest influence on global averages are better tuning of the reconstruction method and inclusion of bias adjusted satellite data since 1985.” In fact there is a whole subsection in the paper about the satellite adjustments.

But the satellite data was removed because it was felt the satellite data caused a downward bias. Reynolds, Smith, and Liu write in a November 14, 2008 attachment to their main ERSST.v3b webpage, “In the ERSST version 3 on this web page WE HAVE REMOVED SATELLITE DATA from ERSST and the merged product. The addition of satellite data caused problems for many of our users. Although, the satellite data were corrected with respect to the in situ data as described in reprint, there was a residual cold bias that remained as shown in Figure 4 there. The bias was strongest in the middle and high latitude Southern Hemisphere where in situ data are sparse. THE RESIDUAL BIAS LED TO A MODEST DECREASE IN THE GLOBAL WARMING TREND AND MODIFIED GLOBAL ANNUAL TEMPERATURE RANKINGS.” [Emphasis added.]

The link for that quote is here:http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/sst/papers/merged-product-v3.pdf

Note that the “merged product” referenced above is their ERSST.v3b-based land plus sea surface temperature data.

RECORD NOT CONFIRMED BY ANOTHER SHIP- AND BUOY-BASED SST ANOMALY DATASET

The Hadley Centre’s HADSST2 does not show record SST anomalies for July, August, or for the Summer of 2009. Far from it. Refer to Figure 5. The Hadley Centre uses different techniques to smooth and infill missing data. The differences between the Hadley Centre and NOAA methodologies are explained in the NOAA paper about the ERSST.v3b data, “Improvements to NOAA’s Historical Merged Land-Ocean Surface Temperature Analysis (1880-2006)”.

http://i27.tinypic.com/kbuets.png

Figure 5

CLOSING

It appears that the methods used by NOAA to calculate Global SST in their ERSST.v3b dataset and the removal of the satellite data from those calculations created an upward bias.

SOURCES

NOAA’s ERSST.v3b SST anomaly data is available here:

ftp://eclipse.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/ersstv3b/pdo/aravg.mon.ocean.90S.90N.asc

NOAA’s ERSST.v3b SST data was downloaded from the KNMI Climate Explorer:

http://climexp.knmi.nl/selectfield_obs.cgi?someone@somewhere

NOAA’s OI.v2 SST and SST anomaly data is available through their NOMADS website:

http://nomad3.ncep.noaa.gov/cgi-bin/pdisp_sst.sh?lite=

THE HADSST2 SST anomaly data is listed in the second column in the following webpage. The other columns list the uncertainty ranges for measurement and grid box sampling, for coverage, for bias, and for the combination of those uncertainties:

http://hadobs.metoffice.com/hadsst2/diagnostics/global/nh+sh/monthly

UPDATE

While doing a visual check of the sources against the graphs, I noticed a difference between the SST anomaly data presented by NOAA for the same dataset. I’m noting it in case someone else spot checks the graphs. The Monthly Global Ocean Temperature Anomalies (degrees C) uses 1901 to 2000 as base years, but the ERSST.v3b data uses 1971 to 2000. Confirmation here:

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/sst/ersstv3.php

For those who want to split hairs, the difference in the base years changes the rankings of SST anomalies, Figure 6. But it has no impact on the SST data rankings.

http://i30.tinypic.com/5y6xcx.png

Figure 6

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

111 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Paul Vaughan
September 19, 2009 5:28 pm

Re: Chris Knight (14:33:28)
Thanks for the notes – in particular the note about southern ice.
Chris Knight (14:33:28) “all this seasonal signal disappears when the anomalies are plotted”
mostly true, but not exactly – (there are assumptions built in, such as cyclostationarity and a lack of shared-variance with possibly-nonstationary & conditionally-periodic temporal modes – (hence, for example, the seasonal patterns one observes in anomaly-map videos))

Paul Vaughan
September 20, 2009 2:10 am

Re: Chris Knight (14:33:28)
Chris, I dug around to find some Sea Ice time series. When I compare them with LOD I find that generally LOD leads by about a month. The factors affecting LOD (e.g. AAM) appear to go beyond just sea ice. This exchange has been helpful in sharpening holistic perception and developing new questions.

Polar Sea Ice Data:
http://polynya.gsfc.nasa.gov/seaice_datasets.html

Chris Knight
September 20, 2009 5:28 am

Paul (02:10:33)
Most of the seasonal (pattern) and intraseasonal (noise) (as remarked in the Zhou et al paper on LOD, AAM and ENSO you quoted in an earlier post) is said there to be due to atmospheric interaction with the “solid earth” – The definition of which might include 100% sea ice, but probably not 15% concentration used for sea ice extent data.
On the other hand, even loosely packed ice at the poles is different from melted ice or water vapour in terms of its effect on the total angular momentum of the earth. The temperature of, and the latitude where the water is massed is also important regarding the velocity of the earth’s rotation.
The question is whether the ENSO and sea ice are the spinning ballerina’s arms, or is she dancing to the music of the spheres? (Or both?)

Paul Vaughan
September 20, 2009 12:09 pm

Re: Chris Knight (05:28:40)
Based on your comments, I suspect you may find the following papers interesting:
Sidorenkov, N.S. (2005). Physics of the Earth’s rotation instabilities. Astronomical and Astrophysical Transactions 24(5), 425-439.
http://images.astronet.ru/pubd/2008/09/28/0001230882/425-439.pdf
Zhou, Y.H.; Yan, X.H.; Ding, X.L.; Liao, X.H.; Zheng, D.W.; Liu, W.T.; Pan, J.Y.; Fang, M.Q.; & He, M.X. (2004). Excitation of non-atmospheric polar motion by the migration of the Pacific Warm Pool. Journal of Geodesy 78, 109-113.
http://202.127.29.4/yhzhou/ZhouYH_2004JG_PM_Warmpool.pdf
http://www.shao.ac.cn/yhzhou/ZhouYH_2004JG_PM_Warmpool.pdf (alternate)
[I think you’ll recognize the pattern in the graph at the top of the 3rd page.]
Yan, X.H.; Zhou, Y.H.; Pan, J.Y.; Zheng, D.W.; Fang, M.Q.; Liao, X.H.; He, M.X.; Liu, W.T.; & Ding, X.L. (2002). Pacific Warm Pool Excitation, Earth Rotation and El Nino Southern Oscillations. Geophysical Research Letters 29, 15685-15690.
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002GeoRL..29u..27Y
Also, see the works of Yu.V. Barkin.

Chris Knight
September 21, 2009 6:41 am

Thanks for those links, Paul.
I believe Nikolay Sidorenkov’s monograph “The Interaction Between Earth’s Rotation and Geophysical Processes” has now been published. I must order a copy from the library.
If his claims are confirmed, I see a Nobel Prize on the horizon. Prediction using the ACI (shifts in atmospheric circulation from zonal to meridional patterns) for cyclicity in Ocean fish stocks in Russia have been published. There is obviously some rivalry here: Klyashtorin and Lyubushin do not credit Sidorenkov with a reference:
http://alexeylyubushin.narod.ru/Climate_Changes_and_Fish_Productivity.pdf
Just thinking outside the box, I note that your observation that LOD leads AAM by one month was identified previously by Lehmann et al. (2008)
http://www.cosis.net/abstracts/EGU2008/10515/EGU2008-A-10515.pdf?PHPSESSID=
What if LOD lags AAM by eleven months?

Chris Knight
September 21, 2009 6:47 am

sorry, not AAM, but global sea ice extent

Chris Knight
September 21, 2009 6:56 am

Second correction: Paul notes that there is a 1 month lag between sea ice extent and absolute LOD measurements. Lehmann et al.(2008) note that LOD lags AAM by one month. Therefore AAM = sea ice extent?, or is there a different temporal relationship?

SteveSadlov
September 21, 2009 12:01 pm

Warmmmmmmmmest oceannnnnnns in 120 yearrrrrrrrrrs!
Read all about it!

Paul Vaughan
September 21, 2009 4:21 pm

Chris, I’ll give the lag-patterns further consideration moving forward.
Chris Knight ” http://www.cosis.net/abstracts/EGU2008/10515/EGU2008-A-10515.pdf?PHPSESSID=
Interesting notes in there about LOD-AAM contrast patterns …more questions arise. I’ve never calculated absolute AAM from scratch, but if non-directional moduli are involved, that could be a clue about the El Nino vs. La Nina difference.
Have you read Barkin? Please update us if/when you find the new Sidorenkov work – thanks.

Chris Knight
September 22, 2009 6:36 am

Paul, when these threads get pushed down the list, they begin to be like private chats!
Sidorenkov’s book:
http://eu.wiley.com/WileyCDA/WileyTitle/productCd-3527408754.html
The price is a bit steep for me, but I will order it from my public library.
Another book to read for a historic view from 30 years ago might be:
The Earth’s Variable Rotation: Geophysical Causes and Consequences By Kurt Lambeck
As for Barkin, I’ve read “UNITY OF RHYTHMS OF EARTH ROTATION, GRAVITY AND GEODESY VARIATIONS: THEIR NATURE AND INVERSION PHENOMENON”, he has papers on many aspects of planetology – have you any specific recommendations?
In the few works I have read, neither of the above authors seem to count sea ice, as opposed to the Antarctic and Greenland ice sheet variations, as being a major player in the shift of rigid mass from pole to pole and thus the inertia of the rotating earth. See fig 1 here:
http://syrte.obspm.fr/journees2004/PDF/Sidorenkov.pdf
The difference between the observed and theoretical curves again shows the pattern we discussed above.
There is however a move away from core-mantle-lithosphere differentials (which are not directly measurable) to surface hydrosphere-cryosphere-atmosphere interactions (which are becoming more so) affecting the rate of the earth’s rotation.
Walter Munk has long commented on the role of the moon in tidal friction and braking of the earth’s rotation, and has also reversed the timeline back to when the moon was orbiting as close to the earth as physically possible, near the Roche limit, shortly after the moon’s formation. The tides would have been formidable, and the heating effect of the tidal friction is an excellent replacement for the lack of insolation from a “dim young sun”. See:
http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1968QJRAS…9..352M&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf
However there is something wrong with the calculation – about 2billion years of history is missing. Could that be accounted for by losing a liquid ocean to either a vapour hothouse or Ice snowball?
Enough of gravity for now.
One more effect of sea-ice caps is the temperature of the overlying atmosphere, and thus the composition of gases, and the overall density of the polar atmosphere. Under the coldest conditions over the Antarctic (and probably over the Arctic in winter), there is almost no water vapour nor carbon dioxide – no greenhouse effect, and there is also the ozone hole, so there is effectively no restriction on OLR, and no heating of the atmosphere by infrared.
The ozone hole also represents a local increase in TSI, in the form of short-wave UV reaching the surface. This may just be reflected by snow and ice, but must be absorbed by the southern ocean.

Paul Vaughan
September 22, 2009 11:48 pm

Re: Chris Knight (06:36:10)
Barkin’s attention has drifted towards the hydrosphere & the atmosphere in his more recent work. I’m hopeful that he will carry on with that theme, but I suspect he is running into some very formidable mathematics as he strives to overcome unrealistic conventional assumptions. I need to find some time to go back through his papers and make some notes — if/when I manage to do so I’ll probably share here at WUWT.
Thanks for sharing the notes Chris. I will be pondering your suggestions about sea ice. I look forward to exchanging further notes in future.

1 3 4 5