UAH Global Temperature for October, down significantly

If the Global Average Sea Temperature goes down, it is safe to assume that the whole planet is cooling down (negative slope) since the ocean surface represents 70.8%. Obviously the IPCC models don’t show that at all.

I am sure that you will enjoy this article
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1225577/RICHARD-LITTLEJOHN-When-twin-religions-global-warming-shopping-collide-.html
I particularly like his description of the woman who doesn’t want anyone to have a security light on at night because then we will all drown from AGW as being from the ‘Monster Raving Green Party’.
Richard Littlejohn is a right wing popular commentator who especially targets political stupidity.

“As usual, the linear trend lines in the previous two figures should not be construed as having any predictive power whatsoever — they are for entertainment purposes only.” Actually, it is pretty meaningless, period. So why insist on superimposing it then?
Dr. Spencer, why are you comparing this month’s SSTs with those of last month’s when the annual global SSTs for the AMSU satellite is bimodal? That is, there is (a peak in March, probably reflecting the austral peak in SSTs) and another (lower) peak in late August (reflecting boreal peak in SSTs). Saying oceans cooled/warmed from last month to this month is not entirely correct procedure. Should one not be asking how does this October compare with others on the record? Or how does the mean SST for the year 2008 compare with that for 2006? What is the trend in annual anomalies (then again, any trends, even trends in annual values, determined from such a small sample size are not at all statistically significant)? It would be great if you could add these options to your AMSU website, rather than only being able to say that today the global SST (or near surface layer) is 0.x F warmer/cooler than last year. Thanks for considering.

I notice that temps go down starting around the first of the year, for the last 8 years, and for several earlier years as well, including El Nino year 1998, and also 1999. Something to do with the Earth’s rotation or orbit, if memory serves. Go for nine?

“Climate talks end in acrimony as UN and EU accuse US of endangering deal”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/nov/06/developing-nations-copenhagen-walkout
And from Al Gore “Civil unrest has a role in stopping climate change, says Gore”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/nov/06/gore-copenhagen-climate-civil-disobedience
Could mean trouble.

I think “significant” is a strong word to use for the decrease from September.

After seeing Lindzen presentation yesterday, I was wondering what is the error range on those measurements. Lindzen was displaying them with a pink fuzz on the graphics and said that it is statistically insignificant when the errors are in the same range.
Comments?

Ray, you misunderstood my post. Yes, of course, October’s anomaly was calculated form the mean global SST for all Octobers considered in the baseline. My issue is with comparing the anomaly in Sept. with that in October, for example. Or today’s temperature with that observed on the same day last year. Hence my suggestions.

Let’s all chant: “Go El Nino!”
At least that would soften the blow. Each sawtooth takes the overall signal a bit lower. The peaks are deceiving, the overall trend is down.

imapopulist (10:45:14) :
Why has Ch05 recently been indicating temperatures at record highs? Could you explain the apparent discrepancy with the above charts?
If you select years 2003-2009, you see that October 2009 is on the higher average of all of them, comparable with October 2006. However, the satellite which curves we see on AMSU page is different than that, from which the actual anomaly is calculated, so those charts are informative only. Because of continuous satellite drift, you see that even October 2006 curve looks lower, the real 2006 anomaly was higher than 2009.
One thing puzzles me on these data is, that first half of the year is usually closer to average and autumn is always higher.

I was interested in Dr Svalgaard’s observations on an earlier post – The Sun’s magnetic funk continues – about the Carrington Event, when a CME led to unusually widespread aurorae. I went back to my local paper for 1859 to see if they had been observed here – approx 54N in England – which would be very unusual. Sure enough there was a description from an Observatory at Beeston in Derbyshire. Much to my amazement the very next article in the paper was about climate change. What was interesting about the article which is reprodced below was how a relatively limited series of observations on rainfall plus some anecdotal evidence was used to support a deeply held belief in the historical reality of Noah’s Flood. On the other hand there was no suggestion that everyone should rush off to church and beg the Lord to save them from drought instead it was viewed as “the normal condition, of the globe.” Times do change apparently.
DIMINUTION OF RAIN – STARTLING SPECULATIONS. – In the quarterly return of the Registrar General ending with June it is stated that “the deficiency in the fall of rain from the beginning of the year is 1¾ inch. The deficiency in the year 1854, 1855, 1856, 1857, 1858 amounted to the average fall of one year, viz., 25 inches. From a careful examination of the fall of rain (year by year} from the year 1815, it would seem that the annual fall is becoming smaller, and that there is but little probability that the large deficiency will be made up by excess in future years.” Should this statement, made by Mr. Glaisher and adopted by the Registrar General in a document issued by authority, be confirmed, it will constitute one of the most important discoveries ever made by meteorologists. In all countries traces of dried-up streams are met with; but within the historical period there are few or no examples of new rivers coming into existence. The Dnieper at Kiev is drying up. The redoubted plains of Troy can with difficulty be recognised or traced, because the rivers mentioned by Homer, whose descriptive topography is not doubted, either cannot be found or they are now such insignificant streams as to fall far below the descriptions of the poet. About the mouths of the Nile the water is becoming shallower while there is reason to believe that the volume of its waters has been within the period of history sensibly diminished. The Baltic is decreasing. The Adriatic derives its name from a town that is now 18 miles from the shore and was once a flourishing seaport. North America is sensibly draining. The rivers are slowly wearing away the rock, and occupying a lower bed. America on the Pacific Ocean is notoriously rising, or the ocean
which surrounds it is sinking. The Deluge is a very early event in the history of mankind; and it is consistent alike with sacred and profane history to suppose that ever since that period, as well as immediately after the first few days when the dove found a resting-place, the waters of the earth have gradually dried up. If it be a fact, then, that the quantity of rain which falls has been continually diminishing through a period of 44 years, the slow and gradual diminution of rain must be considered as the normal condition, of the globe. Most of the changes which geology traces on the crust of the globe have been in progress for many ages, and, from the light which the diminution of rain reflects on many theological phenomena, we were induced, at starting, to describe it as one of the most momentous discoveries, should it be confirmed, that observation has ever made.
From a Correspondent of the Illustrated London News.

I’m not saying anything until good ol’ El Nino does its job! And it’s not looking too bad so far by the way…
http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/enso/monitoring/soi30.png
The Next La Nina could be very interesting…

I see nothing alarming whatsoever in the data, nothing at all to justify economy-crippling carbon cap and trade legislation, and nothing that shows a correlation between increasing human CO2 emissions and atmospheric temperature. Has Climate “Czar” Carol Browner seen this, I wonder? Would she care? Why the hell do we have people called “Czars” dictating U.S. policy, and why is there no Senate oversight of these “Czars?”

Ray (10:03:46) : “If the Global Average Sea Temperature goes down, it is safe to assume that the whole planet is cooling down (negative slope) since the ocean surface represents 70.8%. Obviously the IPCC models don’t show that at all.”
Not really. SSTs are used because satellites can measure SSTs accurately, not because SSTs are a measure of global warming or cooling.
SSTs are not the same as Ocean Heat Content, which does measure whether the Earth’s climate is warming or cooling.
SSTs are best viewed as a measure of the heat flow from the oceans into the atmosphere (and from there into space). SSTs on their own say nothing about whether the climate is warming or cooling. Only in relation to OHC do they tell us whether warming or cooling is occuring.
Increasing SSTs relative to OHC means the climate is cooling.
Decreasing SSTs relative to OHC mean the climate is warming.
And no, I didn’t get those the wrong way round.

This is clearly a fraud by all you powerful minority with vested interests, as a means to hold the world to ransom. After all Kevin Rudd says so:
”
Sydney, Nov 6 (AFP) Powerful climate change skeptics were “holding the world to ransom”, Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd said today as he warned of fear campaigns designed to derail global talks.
Rudd said naysayers were active in every country as the world approached the United Nations’ climate summit in Copenhagen in December.
“They are a minority. They are powerful. And invariably they are driven by vested interests,” he said.
Rudd said it was difficult to move towards a global agreement in the face of those who denied climate change was caused by human activity, those who refused to act on the evidence, or who wanted other countries to act first.
“As we approach Copenhagen, these three groups of climate skeptics are quite literally holding the world to ransom,” he told policy think-tank the Lowy Institute in Sydney.
“

We’re currently having the July/August pressure dome pattern resulting in an Indian Summer and I just heard the Ice Cream Truck nearby, something that didn’t happen during October.
Meanwhile on the other side of the world, Intellicast shows the traditional cold pool over Siberia is set to expand a bit in the east as it slowly pushes into China, the trade-off is above freezing air going northward near Moscow.
Australia is showing very hot conditions while South America is not showing anything like that, Africa is showing heat in the usual hot locations, Europe is not hot, but not super cold either.

I noticed this post on climate sanity:
http://climatesanity.wordpress.com/page/2/
The suggestion is that global sea level rise rate (mm/yr) gives a sneak preview of global temperature (but from a correlation from only 10 years data). The prediction implicit in the right end of the graph, that global temps will follow sea level change rate downward, seems to be happening for now.
Could d/dt sea level indicate movements of heat in the ocean?

Alan Haile (10:28:48) : “Richard Littlejohn is a right wing popular commentator who especially targets political stupidity.”
Cushy job, given the target-rich environment.

I know this is a ‘weather is not climate’, but snow cover over the top 100m of Mt Benson, Nanaimo, Vancouver Island BC was observed this morning.
Warming? Where?

Hi Ron de Haan,
I don’t think I’d want to send that image to Hopenhagen — it makes the next 100 years look really bad. No one is going to get excited about forecasts beyond 100 years in the AGW camp.

rbateman (16:27:44) :
What gets me is that here you have all these positive anomalies, yet so many more record lows are being set as compared to record highs.
Winter comes earlier, spring is later.
Are anomalies the best tool we have for examining global climate?
The “record lows” appear to be limited to the US (i.e. 2% of the earth’s surface). There haven’t been any record lows in the Arctic recently (see polar temperature link). Europe has been mostly above average. The same goes for South America and much of Asia.
What do you suggest we use to examine global climate. Anecdotes from random US posters, perhaps?

rbateman (16:27:44) :
“What gets me is that here you have all these positive anomalies, yet so many more record lows are being set as compared to record highs.
Winter comes earlier, spring is later.
Are anomalies the best tool we have for examining global climate?”
Your right to question this! Global average temperature (and anomalies to some LTA) convey no useful information about climate trends.
The only meaningful measure is change to total climate system dynamic energy level. Unfortunately, at the moment, it is not possible to get an accurate enough measure of changes in system energy, due to the chaotic nature of the systems which effect them.

Re: SST plots
Can anyone confirm that Roy’s AMSR-E SST data is the same as the sea surface readings at
http://discover.itsc.uah.edu/amsutemps/execute.csh?amsutemps
Using all data available as the base period (i.e. 2002-2009) I get the following (approximate) anomalies for the most recent months
Jul +0.16
Aug +0.11
Sep +0.06
Oct +0.04
These values seem to match up pretty well with the monthly SST plot above
(plot 2 of 3). However, my numbers disagree with the 3-day plot (plot 3 of 3). Roy seems to have negative anomalies in late Oct/early Nov whereas my calculations give positive anomalies. I do, though, get negative anomalies between 29th Sep and 4th Oct.
I was hoping to find a reason for the apparent discrepancy between Bob Tisdale’s plots and Roy’s as commented upon by Leone. I think Bob is probably correct, i.e. the fall in SST from the peak in July has stopped and SST are starting to rise again.

John Finn: You wrote, “I think Bob is probably correct, i.e. the fall in SST from the peak in July has stopped and SST are starting to rise again.”
The latest weekly data is showing the downturn similar to Dr. Spencer’s as noted above to Leone