September 2009 UAH Global Temperature Update +0.42 deg. C
October 7th, 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 +0.045 +0.046 +0.044 -0.166
2009 6 +0.003 +0.031 -0.025 -0.003
2009 7 +0.411 +0.212 +0.610 +0.427
2009 8 +0.229 +0.282 +0.177 +0.456
2009 9 +0.424 +0.554 +0.295 +0.516
The global-average lower tropospheric temperature anomaly in September 2009 rebounded again, from +0.23 deg. C in August to +0.42 deg. C in September. The tropics and Northern Hemisphere continue to dominate the signal.
NOTE: For those who are monitoring the daily progress of global-average temperatures here, we are still working on switching from NOAA-15 to Aqua AMSU, which will provide more accurate tracking on a daily basis. We will be including both our lower troposphere (LT) and mid-tropospheric (MT) pre-processing of the data. We have added the global sea surface temperature anomalies from the AMSR-E instrument on board the NASA Aqua satellite, computed from files at Remote Sensing Systems, although we are still not done adjusting the display range of those data.
===
RSS: update
RSS for September 2009 is: +0.48 °C
The rank is #2 out of 31 Septembers of data.
Source: RSS (Remote Sensing Systems, Santa Rosa)
RSS data here (RSS Data Version 3.2)
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Well if this trend continues, there won’t be any global cooling celebration that’s for sure.
Oceans continue to lose heat
Compare::
http://weather.unisys.com/archive/sst/sst_anom-090906.gif
http://weather.unisys.com/surface/sst_anom.html
NOAA’s AO index forecasts make it look like that cold air is not going to be bottled up in the Arctic for now (one run even puts the AO index off the bottom of their forecast chart and all show it going lower than last June)
http://www.cpc.noaa.gov/products/precip/CWlink/daily_ao_index/ao_index_ensm.shtml
the deepest solar minimum in a century is showing its teeth…
Richard (17:11:26) :
Nasif Nahle (13:54:42)
I just read your “HEAT STORED BY GREENHOUSE GASES”
Except that Nasif strenuously claims that Heat cannot be stored…
Phil (12:29:25) :
so the question is, how high does it need to get before people here get converted to AGW?
I’m kind of with Wade on this one. Rising temperatures by themselves will never convince me. Honest science would. Haven’t seen it yet.
I think the question you are really asking is what will it take for us to jump on the IPCC / Copenhagen bandwagon? My answer: nothing. The proposed solutions are exponentially worse than the problems they are purported to be solving. AGW is nothing but a political gambit. Like Dr. Pielke, Sr., I would be very surprised if human activity had no effect, so the issue for me is not so much whether AGW is occuring, rather does it justify the anti-progress, anti-human policies being so frantically pushed? The Copenhagen Treaty is pernicious evil.
Leif Svalgaard (17:49:16) :
“the deepest solar minimum in a century is showing its teeth…”
OK, I’ll be the bunny this time…. that’s even more cryptic than usual and I was under the impression that you did not attribute fluctuating temperatures to changes or cycles in solar activity. Can you elaborate a little and correct my misapprehension? (And please be gentle…. I’m a sociologist, not a physicist. Knowing better is not part of my job description.)
Adam from Kansas (17:38:09) :
Oceans continue to lose heat
NOAA’s AO index forecasts make it look like that cold air is not going to be bottled up in the Arctic for now (one run even puts the AO index off the bottom of their forecast chart and all show it going lower than last June)
Wow that is cold weather for the US and canada (West and central) coming.
Leif Svalgaard (17:49:16) : the deepest solar minimum in a century is showing its teeth…
I thought you said it wouldnt make a difference?
tHeCakeIzaLie (17:30:57) : Well if this trend continues, there won’t be any global cooling celebration that’s for sure.
No because there is nothing to celebrate about if the Earth cools, except that it will expose the AGW lie.
Robert E. Phelan (18:10:22) :
Leif Svalgaard (17:49:16) :
“the deepest solar minimum in a century is showing its teeth…”
OK, I’ll be the bunny this time
Richard (18:11:07) :
I thought you said it wouldn’t make a difference?
Being a little bit sarcastic here. I know that is out of character but I couldn’t resist. How many times have we not heard people proclaim that we are cooling because of the lack of sunspots. Now, they will, of course, say that a few months of heat is not climate, but then by the same token a few months of cooling ain’t climate either.
I dunno, I’m simply not buying the numbers. It’s cold, we’re short GDU’s. Pretty much the entire U.S. and Canada are cold and short of GDU’s.
The U.K. is cold.
Where is all this warming?
Oh, it’s in the Arctic and Siberia?
Let’s see, air currents and ocean currents shift so that really, really, really cold air from the arctic slips southward, that gives us negative anomolies in most of the worlds growing regions, and negative anomolies in the Arctic.
WOULD SOMEONE PLEASE LOOK AT WHAT THE HELL IS GOING ON!
This isn’t Global warming. This is a weather pattern shift, and it don’t look good.
****************
Leif Svalgaard (17:59:21) :
Except that Nasif strenuously claims that Heat cannot be stored…
****************
Yep, that whole heat argument kind of gets under my skin. If we are going to call it internal energy when it is contained by a substance, should we call it internal energy flow when a hotter body is placed in contact with a colder body? It’s just more natural to call it heat.
At this time of year a rapid movement of mild air into the Arctic area actually accelerates energy loss to space.
It is not a good sign for the rest of the winter.
When the current burp of heat to space is over, ocean heat content will be the lowest its been since cooling began in 2003. Like someone alluded to earlier, the ARGO network is the best indicator of what’s really going on!
And am I getting this right, the heat dumping process by mild air being pulled poleward may actually mean Winter getting even colder than if the pole was extremely cold right now?
This batch of comments is not giving me a warm fuzzy for the coming winter.
Three weeks ago it hit 32 degrees C where I live in central Alberta, Canada. Many one day records were set. But for the last two weeks the daily high has been 10 degrees C below normal for this time of year, which is around 12 C. It got all the way up to 3 C today, briefly. It snowed most of the day and the ground is freezing. It may be ‘warmer’ in the arctic but there is a ton of arctic air here at the moment – the low for the next few days is expected to be around minus 12 C, and it may not get above freezing for three days. Normally we don’t get permanent snow until Halloween and hopefully we will get a few more days of warm weather in a week or so.
Weather. It’s what we talk about up here to pass the time. Climate change … not so much. Warmer would be nice. But I won’t hold my breath.
I’m not going to believe this until I have the modification and “correction” code in hand. Every bit of news I’ve seen is of surprising cold. There ought to have been a fair amount of “hot news” for this number to be valid.
Does anyone have any idea:
1) What they do to prevent reflected IR from cloud from causing a bogus higher reading.
2) What is done to “correct” the data.
3) What is done to “calibrate” the satellite and against what is it calibrated?
Some how this just smells wrong. Maybe it’s the forensics guy in me, but when you see something that does not fit what is to be expected, you go digging. That is where the “issue” is.
It would also be “nice” to see the actual maps of the temperature by region. Was someplace very very hot and everywhere else cooling off?
Leif Svalgaard (17:59:21) :
Nasif Nahle (13:54:42)
I just read your “HEAT STORED BY GREENHOUSE GASES”
“Except that Nasif strenuously claims that Heat cannot be stored…”
You maybe being a little fussy over here. Its like the arguments people have over Electricity – Coulombs, KwH, Current (Amps) etc.
He defines heat as the the energy that flows from a hot body to a cold one.
I see what you mean. He defines it as such but then USES it as the “quantity of heat” or heat energy. Well his analysis is correct, if we assume that when he says “heat” he means “heat” as the quantity of “heat energy”. But his definition in his link contradicts that. I think that is what he needs to correct. When he says “Heat Stored” what he means is “thermal energy” stored, by his definition, or “latent heat” or latent heat of transformation as we engineers would call it.
Leif Svalgaard (18:24:47) : “the deepest solar minimum in a century is showing its teeth…”
Richard (18:11:07) : I thought you said it wouldn’t make a difference?
“Being a little bit sarcastic here. ..”
Maybe but if we have been slightly heated it will take time to slightly cool down. So your sarcasm maybe out of place if we do cool. Only time will tell.
Pofarmer (18:37:03) :
Interestingly, the “warming” is mostly in places with the fewest thermometers. Even for satellites, the poles are poorly covered (if I’m correct). But the sat temps are the best we have.
I wouldn’t be bothered by the high frequency noise, which appears to be about 0.2C RMS. It was warmer a thousand years ago.
George E. Smith @16:16:40
the CO2 goes up more or less steadily on an annual basis, with a clearly seasonal cyclic variation that puts the lie to his suggestion that the CO2 remains there for centuries
My point exactly
Richard (17:11:26) :
Nasif Nahle (13:54:42) : Hi Adam… At 25º 48´ North latitude and 100º 19′ West longitude, we are undergoing very normal El Niño effects: rainy and hot days. We are not expecting a cold winter, except for two to seven cold days during the season. The two last weeks we have had mild temperatures with maximum temperatures of 32 °C – 35 °C by the last week.
Thats the meteorological station in Monterrey, Mexico? (I could have got it if I clicked your name, instead I did a google, silly me). I just read your “HEAT STORED BY GREENHOUSE GASES” – very interesting and informative. Beautiful simple analysis.
Hi Richard… Yes, it is the meteorological station in Monterrey, Mexico.
From an engineering perspective/ analysis that pretty much destroys the AGW hypothesis. And the irony of it is that so called “climate scientists” fall back on the mantra of “the PHYSICS of the last 100 years” to defend their theory. As though the classical thermodynamics is somehow synonymous with Anthropogenic Global Warming!
Absolutely, I agree. Those are observational and experimental real data consigned in every book on heat transfer science and thermodynamics. I cannot find a way for justifying AGWers’ ideology because they understand the laws of thermodynamics in a way opposed to the real knowledge. For example, some months ago I read an AGW argument saying that the natural (for not using “spontaneous”) flow of energy was possible from low energy density systems to high energy density systems. Other AGWers create energy from nothing, and so on. 🙂
For you guys who dont believe it. I think the numbers are ok. September was warm. October will be cold. Thats my hunch
I added the next sentence at the begining of the article:
The author recommends you to read his article “Heat” for disambiguation of the scientific concept.
The link “Heat” takes us to the next article:
http://www.biocab.org/Heat.html
Where I make the distinction between heat (energy in transit) and thermal energy (energy stored).
Can anybody here explain how natural events can cause the troposphere to be warming while the stratosphere is cooling? (Hint: increased greenhouse gases do this.)
Phil,
You will find few here that support you (I am one) but perhaps those that are silently reading these posts but not commenting will consider your thoughts. That is my hope. I realize that it is very unlikely I will convince the regulars here about AGW just as they know they will likely never convince me otherwise.
Leif Svalgaard (18:24:47) :
9 mos out of 12 is cooling, especially when the bulk of the records set are on the low end. 8-10 years of decline is a shift in climate. And that’s the fly in the ointment: The normal patterns get moved around. We both happen to be in one of those areas that are more inclined to be affected by changes (Baranyi http://fenyi.solarobs.unideb.hu/publ/Baranyi_et_al1998.pdf ).
Keep an eye peeled on what’s going on outside.
OceanTwo (13:38:22) :
Why ‘79 to ‘98 as an average base line?
The data begins in 79. The warmest year is 98.
Can’t guess any further.
The rank is #2 out of 31 Septembers of data.
So much for the claim that satellite data shows that September 2009 is the hottest September since satellite data has been kept.
p.s. I already know someone will come back with how 1998 has to be truncated. If 1998 must be truncated then please truncate all such cases from all temperature sets, not just 1998.
Richard (19:48:48) :
For you guys who dont believe it. I think the numbers are ok. September was warm. October will be cold. Thats my hunch
The earth is in a cooling trend. This spike in Sep 2009 is ‘weather’.
Scott Mandia (19:51:20) :
Because the trust the MSM had in reporting unbiased events has been badly broken. It will take far more than a blog to convince me that what is going on outside is not happening. The Media has managed to repeatedly declare where I live to be warming faster than anyone had imagined, when I can experience directly that it is not so.
Whatever they want to claim next as their AGW nugget is not going to erase my experience, nor my relations in various parts of the US who share the same direct experience.
Too many here has poor gardening results brought on by a very late summer and an early fall frost. When it was summer, it was summer, but it wasn’t timely nor was it record breaking or extended.
That’s just for starters, there were other things in nature that spelled not the normal. If this is warming, chain me to the wall.