by Roy W. Spencer, Ph. D.
The global-average lower tropospheric temperature continues to be quite warm: +0.65 deg. C for March, 2010. This is about the same as January. Global average sea surface temperatures (not shown) remain high.
As a reminder, last month we change to Version 5.3 of our dataset, which accounts for the mismatch between the average seasonal cycle produced by the older MSU and the newer AMSU instruments. This affects the value of the individual monthly departures, but does not affect the year to year variations, and thus the overall trend remains the same as in Version 5.2.
ALSO…we have now added the NOAA-18 AMSU, which provides data since June of 2005. The local observation time of NOAA-18 (now close to 2 p.m., ascending node) is similar to that of NASA’s Aqua satellite (about 1:30 p.m.). The temperature anomalies listed above have changed somewhat as a result of adding NOAA-18.
[NOTE: These satellite measurements are not calibrated to surface thermometer data in any way, but instead use on-board redundant precision platinum resistance thermometers (PRTs) carried on the satellite radiometers. The PRT’s are individually calibrated in a laboratory before being installed in the instruments.]
YR MON GLOBE NH SH TROPICS 2009 1 0.252 0.472 0.031 -0.065 2009 2 0.247 0.569 -0.074 -0.044 2009 3 0.191 0.326 0.056 -0.158 2009 4 0.162 0.310 0.013 0.012 2009 5 0.140 0.160 0.120 -0.057 2009 6 0.044 -0.011 0.100 0.112 2009 7 0.429 0.194 0.665 0.507 2009 8 0.242 0.229 0.254 0.407 2009 9 0.504 0.590 0.417 0.592 2009 10 0.361 0.335 0.387 0.381 2009 11 0.479 0.458 0.536 0.478 2009 12 0.283 0.350 0.215 0.500 2010 1 0.649 0.861 0.437 0.684 2010 2 0.603 0.725 0.482 0.792 2010 3 0.653 0.853 0.454 0.726
El Nino
So other than el Nino and low sunspots, whats causing the near record temperatures?
Ho hum.
The El Nino is pumping energy into the troposphere whilst the low level of solar activity causes the atmosphere to contract which slows down energy loss to space.
A purely temporary combination and nothing to do with CO2.
A La Nina plus a more active solar surface would deal with the issue by releasing less energy to the air from the oceans and releasing energy a little faster to space.
I’d bet as long as El Nino is with us that this will continue.
Wait for it…….hottest month ever?!?!?!?
When it starts to go back down, I hope it “remembers” to come back up, as I don’t fancy living under 3 km. of ice…….
Looking forward to the global anomaly map… I wonder if its going to have the “great red spot” over Greenland again.
Since we’re on the subject… I’m curious, how many individual readings make up a monthly satellite temperature reading? And are the measurements distributed evenly over the coverage area?
Thanks!
Well Dr Spencer, one might almost argue that your last year or so of data looks like a re-run of the 1998 El Nino.
Of course if you published now; you could have your very own Hockey Stick.
George
I have been confused by this lately. I am currently staying in Berlin for a temporary job relocation, normal place of residence is Florida. I have family in the NE area. Everyone I speak with, on both continents, have commented on how unseasonably cold it has been. Almost the entire month of January was below freezing in Berlin, something they haven’t seen for decades. Where is the offseting warm temperature coming from?
ferrelhadley (13:28:22) :
So other than el Nino and low sunspots, whats causing the near record temperatures?
Does there have to be any other causation?
Satellite data is always exaggerated during ENSO events. GISS doesn’t show the big spike, and didn’t in 1998 either.
“Quite warm” indeed.
The heat certainly isn’t hiding in the UK.
Probably an ignorant question, but how long is the satellite record of surface / troposphere temperatures? I’m talking temperature records which have not been CRU’d or Hadley’d.
Yep, appears to be getting hotter and hotter: +0.65c.
I say appears. It must be borne in mind that the global temperature has a range of about 4c between January and July. January/February is the coolest half of the year, so even though the anomaly is +0.65c, we are still a few whole degrees below the absolute July temperature average. So it is by no means certain that 2010 will be the record year some are predicting.
The following site is handy for keeping up with El Nino/La Nina. Their one-curve display shows us a few days away from neutral conditions unless a surprise turnaround happens.
http://www.aviso.oceanobs.com/en/news/ocean-indicators/el-nino-bulletin/index.html
I’m always flabbergasted by idiotic comments of “this doesn’t make any sense because it’s cold where I am”, as though you are able to deduce global temperatures by looking out of your window.
It may be cold in Europe but it may also be much hotter than usual over the arctic or elsewhere, and even if it is cold in Europe it may be that it is actually still warmer than the long term average, you just don’t realize it.
But it will be interesting to see the tropospheric map, if one is published.
Its definitely Co2 guys LOL
4th warmest March on record here in Minnesota. Quite nice, actually.
El Nino is now in the range it could end pretty much any time in the next three months.
Bill R (13:43:52) wrote:
“I have been confused by this lately. I am currently staying in Berlin for a temporary job relocation, normal place of residence is Florida. I have family in the NE area. Everyone I speak with, on both continents, have commented on how unseasonably cold it has been. Almost the entire month of January was below freezing in Berlin, something they haven’t seen for decades. Where is the offseting warm temperature coming from?”
Bill, I can tell you that we’ve had a marvellously mild January through now in eastern Canada, and a temperature map shows a big red blob stretching from here northward through most of the Canadian arctic and across to Greenland. For whatever reason, the arctic air that usually hangs around the arctic escaped and went much farther south than usual, hence the record snow in DC, cold Florida, etc. I suspect ENSO. We’ll see.
IanM
Pinch of salt anyone?
Bill R (13:43:52) :
I have been confused by this lately…..Where is the offseting warm temperature coming from?
Bill, we certainly had some below average cold spells in the eastern US, esp during January, but the last 3 weeks have been unseasonably warm, quite warm the past week!
According to other blogs it’s feeling like the middle of Summer in the Northeastern quarter of the United States and up into Southeastern Canada.
Obviously this will be touted as proof of AGW and the big cold snaps down in the South during last Winter will be forgotten (by the media that is).
Meanwhile NOAA’s SST chart indicates a steady continued drop in SST’s even while El Nino is still going, WXmaps is currently showing a good sized splotch of negative anomalies forecast for a good chunk of Asia outside India and the Middle east and South America. Also seems that the cold anomalies covering a good chunk of the Northern Pacific reaching the California coast (negative PDO?) is making it easier for cold air to stay in place along the western coast of North America.
Meanwhile our position between the much cooler Western US and the fairly Warm Eastern US is making for some rollercoaster temperatures, we have 80’s again today and then things will dive back to around 60 and then bounce up (and it already did that once this month), depending it may only lead to another dive.
ferrelhadley (13:28:22) : You asked, “So other than el Nino and low sunspots, whats causing the near record temperatures?”
The upward step response of the mid-to-high latitudes of the Northern Hemisphere to the 1997/98 El Nino. It’s easier to see with the way the RSS TLT anomaly data are subdivided. (Note how there is little to no response in this dataset to the La Nina of 1998/99/00/01.)
http://i44.tinypic.com/65766c.png
There was a similar but smaller step after the 1986/87/88 El Nino as well, but the Mount Pinatubo eruption makes it difficult to see. Discussed it in the following post. The effect is tough to miss in the Hovmoller (time-latitude) plots:
http://bobtisdale.blogspot.com/2009/06/rss-msu-tlt-time-latitude-plots.html
That post also ran here at WUWT.
Regards
For those interested, I posted the update for March 2010 SST anomaly data today:
http://bobtisdale.blogspot.com/2010/04/march-2010-sst-anomaly-update.html
Why are sea surface and atmospheric temperatures combined to provide glogal “anomolies”? Seems to me to be like averaging apples and pears! Why do we tie ourselves in knots over temperature anomolies? We have the means to accurately measure atmospheric heat energy changes directly by satellites – which is actually what we need to know.
Bill R writes “. Where is the offseting warm temperature coming from?”
Well, Canada for one place. We, in Ottawa, have not just been breaking records. We had a daily temperature high in the first week of April which would have been above average at the height of summer.
Steve Goddard (13:45:28) : You wrote, “Satellite data is always exaggerated during ENSO events. GISS doesn’t show the big spike, and didn’t in 1998 either.”
I believe it’s the other way around. That is, the response of GISS data to ENSO events is understated by the 1200km smoothing.
as the song goes – “put them together and what do you get”
http://users.tpg.com.au/johnsay1/Stuff/eltemp.jpg
But who is going to believe in these temperatures any more? “They” are just preparing their next Mexican “Jamboree”, this time they are sure to reach their most desired goal: A global Climate Change Kommisar, perhaps AL THE MAGNIFICENT “GORDO” himself, unless there is a new Climate Gate v.2.0 or a nice 9.0 degrees richter scale earthquake with its epicenter located right on the spot.
Steve Goddard (13:45:28) :
“Satellite data is always exaggerated during ENSO events. GISS doesn’t show the big spike, and didn’t in 1998 either.”
Steve, are there any theories on why it is so? A running average could be an explanation?
Somethimes a running average is helpful.Gets you a curve that is readable. Without it one might just see a band of colour all over the creen.
Hey Bill R.
I am on the “edge” of that big anomaly over Baffin Island and northern Quebec. All the snow has melted and the flowers are sprouting, about 6 weeks ahead of normal. We had +24C on Saturday…..usually around plus 10 this time of year.
Sorry to be hogging the warmth…..I thought that there was plenty to go around (IPCC) 😉
The last time we had a very quiet sun for a length of time (1911-1913) the two following years (1914 and 1915) were very warm. Seems the same thing has happened again.
“It may be cold in Europe but it may also be much hotter than usual over the arctic”
which would explain the increase in sea ice area.
One thing that interests me is that the current warmth is clearly different from that of the medieval warm period. People in Europe right now do not think it is warm! Make of this comment what you will, but I think it is an interesting datum.
[NOTE: These satellite measurements are not calibrated to surface thermometer data in any way, but instead use on-board redundant precision platinum resistance thermometers (PRTs) carried on the satellite radiometers. The PRT’s are individually calibrated in a laboratory before being installed in the instruments.]
Has this been true since 1979, or were earlier satellites calibrated to ground data?
Stephen Wilde (13:32:04) :
The El Nino is pumping energy into the troposphere whilst the low level of solar activity causes the atmosphere to contract which slows down energy loss to space.
A purely temporary combination and nothing to do with CO2.
The atmosphere does not contract due to low levels of solar activity [which is actually going up], so does not enter into consideration. The thermosphere is extremely thin. All the air up there would form a layer 1 centimeter thick if taken to sea level pressure and temperature.
A dumb question: The satellite measurement is calibrated to on-board redundant platinum resistance thermometers (PRTs). What heat source do the PRTs measure, and how do they measure it? I must be missing something.
Confused
el nino continues to release ocean heat to atmosphere, which in turn releases heat to space
meanwhile, low solar activity and increased cloudiness (if you believe svensmark) means less heat going IN to the oceans.
so the radiator is set to high, and the recharger is set to trickle.
better buy a coat. they’re on sale this time of year.
Bob Tisdale (14:17:06) :
You can see the wild exaggerations in satellite data during the 1998 and 2010 El Ninos here.
http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/uah/from:1997/plot/gistemp/from:1997/offset:-.25
kwik (14:21:09) :
Satellite TLT data is measured at 14,000 feet. Perhaps El Nino events preferentially warm air at that elevation?
Probably an ignorant question, but how long is the satellite record of surface / troposphere temperatures? I’m talking temperature records which have not been CRU’d or Hadley’d.
It is impossible to know if these temperature readings have been “fiddled” or not.
Each analyst seems to get different results:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satellite_temperature_measurements
UAH used to give much a lower trend until they were brought back into line. Errors in satellite drift and switching between satellites in particular.
What no-one appears to be looking for are errors that correct back the other way (towards cooling). Once the results approximate that of earth based results they are considered correct.
Likewise radiosonde data has been “corrected” to match the land based record.
To say that the satellites are not calibrated to earth based thermometers is disingenuous. Their results are tricky to interpret, and there are plenty of ways that they can be tweaked to fit the desired pattern.
” [NOTE: These satellite measurements are not calibrated to surface thermometer data in any way, but instead use on-board redundant precision platinum resistance thermometers (PRTs) carried on the satellite radiometers. The PRT’s are individually calibrated in a laboratory before being installed in the instruments.] ”
That reads like an admission that there is no way of verifying the validity of measurements since the instruments were launched. Last month, Mike Borgelt and mikelorrey asked reasonable and pertinent questions about calibration that appeared not to have been answered. Yet they are fundamentally important.
Mike Borgelt (16:31:35) :
So where is the experimental data that says the PRTs remain in calibration after being exposed to the space environment (radiation, thermal cycling etc) for years?
mikelorrey (16:37:52) :
What radiation, ion, and thermal influences on the on-board platinum resistance thermometers could change the calibration over time? Furthermore, any resister is going to show drift in resistance over time, varying by a certain percentage. What are the tolerances and error rates on these thermometers and are identical units being constantly operated in vacuum/radiation chambers on Earth to monitor degradation?
Answers, please.
By the way, March was Australia’s coldest since 2003.
http://www.bom.gov.au/cgi-bin/climate/change/timeseries.cgi?graph=tmax&area=aus&season=03&ave_yr=A
Leif Svalgaard (15:41:23) : “…The thermosphere is extremely thin. All the air up there would form a layer 1 centimeter thick if taken to sea level pressure and temperature….”
Thanks, Leif. I’ve been trying to find an estimate of the total mass of the thermosphere for a long time.
I, for one, do not believe the global temperature, at any altitude, is known to the .001 of a degree. I seriously doubt it is known to even plus or minus 1 degree. Global temperature series, dating to the 1880s, with accuracy indicated of hundredths of a degree? Sorry, but i’m not buying it.
Stephen Wilde says:
That’s interesting. I could have sworn that a year or two ago, most people on this site were blaming the (relatively) cold global temperatures on the low level of solar activity. So now you’re blaming the high temperatures on the low level of solar activity?
Well, yes, I agree that short-term variations have nothing to do with CO2. However, the long-term trend that these short term variations are superimposed upon…that is another matter.
“”” Graham Dick (16:17:40) :
” [NOTE: These satellite measurements are not calibrated to surface thermometer data in any way, but instead use on-board redundant precision platinum resistance thermometers (PRTs) carried on the satellite radiometers. The PRT’s are individually calibrated in a laboratory before being installed in the instruments.] ”
That reads like an admission that there is no way of verifying the validity of measurements since the instruments were launched. Last month, Mike Borgelt and mikelorrey asked reasonable and pertinent questions about calibration that appeared not to have been answered. Yet they are fundamentally important. “””
Well I have a lot more confidence in the calibration accuracy and drift of those in situ PRTs than I do in any land based thermistor reading inside some owl box.
Other than certain Cosmic ray induced transmutations of a Platinum atom to something else, I would think those calibration thermometers in space, are about as stable a reference as anything that exists in climate science; well other than the time kept by atomic clocks. Funny thing you never hear about the satellite atomic clocks drifting, because of cosmetic transmutation of a Cesium atom or some other similar change.
I would not choose to die on that hill of unreliability of PRTs.
Senators question flawed NASA climate data,
surfacestations.org mentioned in letter!
http://www.climatechangefraud.com/climate-reports/6712-senators-question-flawed-nasa-climate-data
Steve Goddard (15:58:51) : You replied, “You can see the wild exaggerations in satellite data during the 1998 and 2010 El Ninos here.”
http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/uah/from:1997/plot/gistemp/from:1997/offset:-.25
Sorry, Steven. You’re correct. I’ve posted about the exaggeration of TLT anomalies before on other threads.
I had done some comparisons of CRUTEMP3 vs GISS LST with 250km and 1200km smoothing over the weekend and that’s where the GISS 1200km smoothing really shows.
http://i39.tinypic.com/fa0jkp.png
What is the humidity?
DaveE.
So what next. Will we see the satellite temperatures keep climbing for the next 10 years while the world freezes over? Who then will start to question the logic of using one measurement out of context? Isn’t it time to put a stop to the AGW fraud and the criminal activities of certain climate scientists who claim they know enough of the climate to predict it 50-100 years in advance?
Missingno (13:59:38) :
Yeah, it’s a real jungle up there in the Arctic.
It may be cold in the USA, it may be cold in Europe, it may be colder in Mongolia than ever known, it may be cold on the Ice Cap and that melt is dragging it’s feet, but by God it’s just gotta be screaming hot somewhere else.
Ok, where’s the hot spot with all the fun?
jorgekafkazar (17:17:00) :
Thanks, Leif. I’ve been trying to find an estimate of the total mass of the thermosphere for a long time.
A simple calculation: the pressure at a given altitude is the weight of the overlying atmosphere. At the base of the thermosphere, the pressure is 1/1000,000 of that at sea level, so if we take the troposphere [where 90% of the air is] as ‘the atmosphere’, then with a thickness of 10 km = 10*1000*100 = 1 million centimeter, one millionth of that is 1 centimeter.
Isn’t it interesting that when temperature measurements show an increase, lots of folks on this site question the data? When measurements show a decline, comments on this site generally (there are always exceptions) embrace the numbers and exhibit little skepticism.
Go to the “true believer” sites and you will witness reversed behavior. That observation speaks volumes about the “tribal” nature of AGW and the widespread subjectivity of the human race. Pure “truth seekers” are few and far between.
“Missingno (13:59:38) : I’m always flabbergasted by idiotic comments of “this doesn’t make any sense because it’s cold where I am”, as though you are able to deduce global temperatures by looking out of your window. ”
My idiotic comment for today, in honor of Missingno, thank you very much. I hope that it doesn’t end up like 1998. 1998 was hot, very hot and dry here in Florida. A large part of the state was on fire in May and June. So far it’s been cool and moist. We have had regular rain since January that we didn’t have in 1998. I’m not sure how this el-nino compares to 1998 everywhere else, but so far we seem to be ok. (I know, it’s just weather.)
A lot of the agricultural meteorologists are thinking that we may have a very hot dry summer down south. The thinking is that this will be a repeat of the Summers of 1983 and 1998.
A lot of our confusion about experienced heat/cold and the anomaly data comes because climate science ignores the fact that temperatures are not conserved. Temperatures are not like irrepressible fluids either.
It is a false expectation to project that anomalies will conserve, which is what the question “where is all the heating going”. Temperature anomaly changes do not represent the changes of heating except in a convoluted non linear distorted manner.
Example:
An anomaly change in the arctic of 15C, from 233K to 248K
a) melts no ice
b) represents a change in watts/m^2 radiated 214-167=47watts/m^2
An anomaly change in Canada, where we were just told that it was 24C, from
24C (297K) to 9C(282K) gives 441-359=82watts/m^2
A fifteen degree anomaly in Canada has a different energy content than a 15 degree anomaly in the arctic. When the averaging happens between positive and negative anomalies the results are, if not nonsense, highly distorted.
It is energy that is conserved and creates the local temperatures not the anomalies of temperatures that create heat content.
Another blowout record high month for the UAH anomaly… The previous March record was 0.53 in 1998, and the only other March anomalies over 0.40 were in 2004 and 2007. These were measured before the changes in the UAH anomaly calculation to try and smooth out the rather weird annual cycle.
Since Jan 2010 was about 0.72 in the old system, and this is “about the same”, then March 2010 apparently was over 0.70 using the old system, and this simply blows out the previous March 98 record of 0.53.
So January and March blew out the previous UAH records for those months, and in the last nine months, six has been either the hottest or 2nd hottest for those months. Even with the really BIG Adjustments to the UAH data set (much bigger than any adjustments to the GISS data), January, February, and March have set a record pace. Since Spencer is now essentially shifting the annual cycle, this means there is a “baked in temperature rise” for May and June.
Clearly, either June or July will see the highest 13 month running average in the UAH… So 2010 will see the hottest “year” in the data.
PJB (14:24:51) :
Hey Bill R.
I am on the “edge” of that big anomaly over Baffin Island and northern Quebec. All the snow has melted and the flowers are sprouting, about 6 weeks ahead of normal. We had +24C on Saturday…..usually around plus 10 this time of year.
Sorry to be hogging the warmth…..I thought that there was plenty to go around (IPCC) 😉
Scotland had the coldest December and January since 1914, and the coldest February since 1963. The first two 2 weeks of March were cold, since then it has been average. We still have snowdrops in flower, and I have yet to see a dafodill this year. In England they are saying the Spring is 3 weeks later than average. But it is all just weather 😉
Sorry, re-posted with end italics tag in right place:
PJB (14:24:51) :
Hey Bill R.
I am on the “edge” of that big anomaly over Baffin Island and northern Quebec. All the snow has melted and the flowers are sprouting, about 6 weeks ahead of normal. We had +24C on Saturday…..usually around plus 10 this time of year.
Sorry to be hogging the warmth…..I thought that there was plenty to go around (IPCC) 😉
Scotland had the coldest December and January since 1914, and the coldest February since 1963. The first two 2 weeks of March were cold, since then it has been average. We still have snowdrops in flower, and I have yet to see a dafodill this year. In England they are saying the Spring is 3 weeks later than average. But it is all just weather 😉
Okay, I give up.
No source code = unverifiable claim.
So the old march record from 1998 (0.53 °C above 1979-1998 average) was broken. With version 5.2 the march 2010 deviation would have been 0.70. The new version fits better to the calculations of RSS. For March both are exactly the same (0.65 °C).
So February’s .613 has declined to .603 under the new new system? Hide the decline indeed. Glass House anyone?
REPLY: Big difference, and you are waaaayy off base. This was announced beforehand, and announced again when actually implemented. Unlike CRU that hid data and email and its director Jones that sought to destroy emails that would be divulged as a part of an FOI request, UAH took criticisms that I brought to their attention from WUWT, decided there was a problem, and did something about it. They did it all in the open. – Anthony
I also (as Paul K2) think that the quick succession of new versions makes the whole unmanageable. How can we compare two months (e.g. March 2010 and March 1998) when we know only the new version v5.3 since the year 2009?
I noticed following adjustments for the month January 2010:
– original value: +0.724
– WUWT article of February 2010: two values are in the run (v5.2: 0.721; v5.3: 0.630);
– This present thread gives a brand-new value for January 2010: 0.649!
How can we compare the two mentioned months when for the calculation of the new value the data of NOAA-18 AMSU are only read in since June of 2005?
What is the name of this new version since this month?
Clean up that mess! It’s driving me up the wall!!
I ask you to make us the following tables
– v5.2 from Jan. 1979 until now;
– v5.3 from Jan. 1979 until now;
– v5.2 adjusted with the data of NOAA-18 since June 2005;
– v5.3 adjusted with the data of NOAA-18 since June 2005;
You have a great job tracking the surface temperature from satellite data. I hope you will succeed checking your results with direct measurements on earth.
The “twin peaks” are much like 1998. Expect an amazing plunge to follow, like in 1998?
In other ways this El Nino was quite different from 1998. It was centered far out in the Pacific, rather than along the South American coast. In some senses it was not so much the “driver” as the “driven.”
It will be interesting to see if this El Nino’s heat translates to northern latitudes as much as 1998. I’ll be watching Bob Tisdale’s graphs, to see if there is as much of a “step change.” I doubt there will be. This El Nino is a different critter, influenced by a different phase of the PDO. It should be called an “El Bill,” after Bill Gray, who predicted the switch in PDO and a downturn in temperatures thirty years ago.
Question, how do scientists discern the difference between a static temperature reading at a point in space and time, and where that energy has come from and where it is going?
Or do the satellites making measurements, actually tell you both?
I look at that spike and it is as if it makes a “whoohsing” sound of something going somewhere. Please excuse my infantile questions, I’m just a curious layman.
anna v (22:24:26) :
“When the averaging happens between positive and negative anomalies the results are, if not nonsense, highly distorted.”
This is very interesting, and I can almost follow it.
“It is energy that is conserved and creates the local temperatures not the anomalies of temperatures that create heat content.”
But aren’t anomalies just a different starting point in a temperature scale, therefore, are temperatures, just with a different number due to the choice of a different starting point (different zero, as in ºF and ºC and K)? And aren’t temperatures a measure of heat content, hence heat, hence thermal energy?
Summing up, aren’t then temperature anomalies a measure of thermal energy?
(I think I’ll regret getting into this.)
For those who question Pt resistance thermometers, they are the most stable resistance thermometers available. Being a Noble Metal, Pt doesn’t oxidize as easily at other metals, or carbon (from which most resistors used on the ground are made). The radiation induced changes are predictable, and a lot of research has gone in to finding out what the changes are, as they are used throughout the world’s space programs.
You calibrate to a known reference, to check for drift in the sensors. Having the reference on the satellite, rather than relying on a ground based reference reduces errors.
Personally I take all the temperatures high and low with a pinch of salt. Natural variations and patterns within yep, but talking temperature changes globally – pointless.
Claude Harvey (19:33:58) : When the very positive Global Temperature Anomaly is depenedant on the northern hemisphere being +0.853 when most (not all) of the Northern hemisphere is experiencing Record Low Temperatures it makes those used to dealing with “adjusted” Land Temperatures worry about the Algorithms used by NASA to calculates these values.
They are after all not Temperature Measurements, they are “brightness” measurements that require a lot of “calculations” to get them to thermal temperatures.
Thank god it’s getting warmer. I hope it keeps going up, warmer is better. It will be a glorious day when coconut palms can survive year round in Canada.
[snip – no valid email address – see policy page]
Re: Josualdo (Apr 6 04:43),
Taking an average of a temperature for a few years and using it as a base is not the same as having an absolute temperature scale , as the Kelvin scale is. The Celsius and Fahrenheit scales are absolutely defined, with no ambiguities. Averages depend on start and end points and can be all over the place as far as connection with energy content goes.
Summing up, aren’t then temperature anomalies a measure of thermal energy?
No, is the short answer. I posted on this on another thread:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/04/05/march-global-sea-surface-temperatures/#comment-361280
@docmartyn
“which would explain the increase in sea ice area.”
Actually, air temp has little effect on sea ice. it’s the ocean temps that regulate ice due to much higher thermal conductivity.
anna v (10:30:00) :
Thanks for your answer. I’ve been reading your comments at the other post.
I would disagree with you on this and that, but these are really not important. For instance, Kelvin is a unit, not a scale. The zero Kelvin value happens to be at -273.15 ºC (in the centigrade temperature scale). I know this is freakish nitpicking when you first see it, and it’s not a subject useful to pursue. Never mind, given that I think you meant any temperature scale.
I assume your exception with average temperatures is that goalposts can be changed. Otherwise, the “average temperature from xxxx to yyyy”, provided it is well defined, is equivalent to a given value for temperature (a given point in a temperature scale). Actually, it is nothing but a rationale to chose a value in the fixed temperature scale. Or am I missing something crucial?
Regarding energy as measured by temperature, I suppose we’re talking of thermal energy only, not kynetic, potential chemical, etc…? Obviously, temperatures don’t measure anything other than the heat form of energy.
I think that the synoptic weather patterns this past year have been pretty fascinating. We saw glimpses of the negative AO as early as last summer, and the flip-flop of temps over the NH this winter isn’t something you see too often.
If the pattern holds for the next several months, we should see a pretty active Hurricane Season. Add it the cooling that will bring with an expected ENSO Neutral- La Nina evolution and next year temps should drop to near “average”.
In the mean time we can all be entertained by the resumption of the Alarmists-AGW nonsense.
Would it be possible to see where inclusion of NOAA-18 was announced and the possible changes it brings to the measurements. The search box only brings up this post.
Re: Josualdo (Apr 6 11:19),
The temperature scale is fixed absolutely by the decision to use the boiling point of water at 1 atmosphere pressure as 100 and the triple phase of water ( ice,water,steam) as the 0. That is the Celsius scale. The units of Fahrenheit are related with a mathematical formula with this, and the Kelvin came when it was determined that there should be an absolute 0 of temperature, which was extrapolated to -273C. ( due to quantum mechanics never really reachable).
There is no mathematical formula that would relate an average temperature in general, to this absolute scale as to make it a substitute temperature scale.
Yes, it heat is thermal energy which is part of the energy in a system and that is what I am discussing over at the other thread when talking of budgets.
Recent global warming is being credited to El Nino but what is causing the El Nino to be more effective in raising global tempeartures nowadays than in the time before 1998?
What about:
Recent warming = El Nino + sun + …+ greenhouse gasses
El Nino + sun [=flat] alone would yield a sawtooth trend that is plus-minus zero and would undulate about temperatures significantly lower. But the sawtooth curve is going up, which is the greenhouse forcing superimposed onto it. This explains the long-term updwards trend.
The “Friends of Science” in Calgary claim it is only the sun (friendsofscience.org). But one of their scientific advisors, C. de Freitas, the second author of the famed Mclean et al. 2009 paper, claims, it is largely El Nino (SOI). Ooops!
“Thank god it’s getting warmer. I hope it keeps going up, warmer is better. It will be a glorious day when coconut palms can survive year round in Canada.”
Wow, I hope that was a cynical joke.
O glorious day when the pine beetle will have converted Canada’s forests into carbon sources, when all of the world’s coral reefs will have bleached, when parts of China will have become an uninhabitable desert, when salt water invades half of Bangladesh several times a year, when 5% of the world’s population is on the run and half of the world’s species are threatened with extinction. Yay! I guess we’ll all be having mojitoes on Hudson Beach, 30 years from now. Lookin’ forward to that…
It’s not the first time I read such unworried comments from people who say they’re from Florida. I wonder how that’s possible, bearing in mind that Florida is one of the USA’s most vulnerable areas to climate change, with it being on top of porous limestone and all…
Surely the alarm bells should be starting to ring by now – another elNino, but from a higher baseline and a long term temperature trend that is stubbornly refusing to correspond to recent changes in the sun or warnings of a new ice age. Of course temps will also down again, but probably not as far as last time. We have changed the atmosphere so much that it is forcing the earth to store more energy than it used to and it will continue to do so long after every contributor to this website has passed on. Why is it so hard to accept what is becoming increasingly obvious? It’s not alarmist, it’s what is actually happening.