May UAH Global Temperature Anomaly – holding steady

May 2010 UAH Global Temperature Update: +0.53 deg. C.

By Dr. Roy Spencer

UAH_LT_1979_thru_May_10

The global-average lower tropospheric temperature remains warm: +0.53 deg. C for May, 2010. The linear trend since 1979 is now +0.14 deg. C per decade.Tropics picked up a bit, but SSTs indicate El Nino has ended and we may be headed to La Nina. NOAA issued a La Nina Watch yesterday.

In the race for the hottest calendar year, 1998 still leads with the daily average for 1 Jan to 31 May being +0.65 C in 1998 compared with +0.59 C for 2010. (Note that these are not considered significantly different.) As of 31 May 2010, there have been 151 days in the year. From our calibrated daily data, we find that 1998 was warmer than 2010 on 96 of them.

As a reminder, three months ago we changed 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 added the NOAA-18 AMSU to the data processing in v5.3, 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.

YR MON GLOBE NH SH TROPICS

2009 1 0.251 0.472 0.030 -0.068

2009 2 0.247 0.564 -0.071 -0.045

2009 3 0.191 0.324 0.058 -0.159

2009 4 0.162 0.316 0.008 0.012

2009 5 0.140 0.161 0.119 -0.059

2009 6 0.043 -0.017 0.103 0.110

2009 7 0.429 0.189 0.668 0.506

2009 8 0.242 0.235 0.248 0.406

2009 9 0.505 0.597 0.413 0.594

2009 10 0.362 0.332 0.393 0.383

2009 11 0.498 0.453 0.543 0.479

2009 12 0.284 0.358 0.211 0.506

2010 1 0.648 0.860 0.436 0.681

2010 2 0.603 0.720 0.486 0.791

2010 3 0.653 0.850 0.455 0.726

2010 4 0.501 0.799 0.203 0.633

2010 5 0.534 0.775 0.293 0.710

[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 0.251 0.472 0.030 -0.068

2009 2 0.247 0.564 -0.071 -0.045

2009 3 0.191 0.324 0.058 -0.159

2009 4 0.162 0.316 0.008 0.012

2009 5 0.140 0.161 0.119 -0.059

2009 6 0.043 -0.017 0.103 0.110

2009 7 0.429 0.189 0.668 0.506

2009 8 0.242 0.235 0.248 0.406

2009 9 0.505 0.597 0.413 0.594

2009 10 0.362 0.332 0.393 0.383

2009 11 0.498 0.453 0.543 0.479

2009 12 0.284 0.358 0.211 0.506

2010 1 0.648 0.860 0.436 0.681

2010 2 0.603 0.720 0.486 0.791

2010 3 0.653 0.850 0.455 0.726

2010 4 0.501 0.799 0.203 0.633

2010 5 0.534 0.775 0.293 0.710

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

58 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Gail Combs
June 4, 2010 9:14 am

Dr Spencer, do you expect the lower tropospheric temperature to drop further from the peak earlier this year given El Nino has ended and we may be headed into a La Nina? Also what type of lag time would you expect between the SST temp drop and the lower tropospheric temperature drop.
I realize this is hand waving so I am only expecting a SWAG.

Günther Kirschbaum
June 4, 2010 9:15 am

Thank goodness this warming is almost done. A record year would not be good for the PR.

kim
June 4, 2010 9:22 am

Just past apogee.
=========

crosspatch
June 4, 2010 9:25 am

The atmospheric temperatures will likely lag the SSTs by several months if past behavior is any indication.

Gail Combs
June 4, 2010 9:35 am

crosspatch says:
June 4, 2010 at 9:25 am
The atmospheric temperatures will likely lag the SSTs by several months if past behavior is any indication.
_________________________________________________________________
Thank you for answering my question Crosspatch.

June 4, 2010 9:36 am

The preliminary May 2010 OI.v2 SST anomalies show that global SST anomalies dropped 0.062 deg C in May and that NINO3.4 SST anomalies dropped a whopping 0.72 deg C. Weekly NINO3.4 SST anomalies are below zero at -0.18 deg C.
http://bobtisdale.blogspot.com/2010/06/preliminary-may-2010-sst-anomaly-update.html
The official monthly data should be posted on the NOAA NOMADS website on Monday. I’ll update the ocean basins then.

Douglas DC
June 4, 2010 9:41 am

Cold wet rain here in NE Oregon- May’s been a bust. I’d say Nina’s here….

Henry chance
June 4, 2010 9:46 am

30 years of records? Not a significant sample size.

June 4, 2010 9:50 am

So the globe is warmer by 0.2 deg C than in 1988. I can live with that.

Jeff Kooistra
June 4, 2010 9:56 am

This has bothered me for some time: “PRT’s are individually calibrated in a laboratory before being installed in the instruments.”
So, exactly, how long have these things been aloft? How stable is the calibration over time? Who did the calibration in the first place? Who validated the use of these for space operations? Have any of them ever been brought back down and recalibrated?

June 4, 2010 9:57 am

– there is not much lag between SST and CRU/UAH record:
http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/uah/from:1998/plot/hadsst2gl/from:1998/plot/hadcrut3vgl/from:1998
With the end of 1998 Nino, all datasets fell down simultaneously, lagging the NINO index which peaked in 97/98.

rbateman
June 4, 2010 9:57 am

Does anyone know how to interpret the Unisys SST anomaly Normal/Inv. plots?
There is no information on the Unisys site for these SST contour plots.
The Normal Plot anomaly off of Paraguay does not make sense from the SST Data plots.
I have checked the SST data for end of May for all the years in the archive, but nothing seems to be abnormal to earn this area such a large anomaly.

Sun Spot
June 4, 2010 9:59 am

Henry: (at 09:46)
how many years constitutes a correct sample size (and give your reference) ?

rbateman
June 4, 2010 10:00 am

Douglas DC says:
June 4, 2010 at 9:41 am
NW Calif. – we are soaked here. They keep forecasting dry weather the past month, but it never gets here.

Editor
June 4, 2010 10:19 am

The Guardian posted a compilation of debunked Ice-melt alarmism. My comment:

The PIOMAS ice volume estimate cited in this article is known to be grossly in error. Ice volume is NOT the lowest since 1979. It is far above the low years of 07 and 08, and if editor John Vidal paid any attention to anything other than the known to be dishonest establishment sources like dirtbag Hansen, he would know it. He doesn’t even follow a skeptic clearinghouse like WUWT? Some “editor.” Propagandist fellow traveler is more like it.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/06/01/piomas-non-verification-ii/

As a matter of etiquette I shouldn’t call Hansen a dirtbag, but Vidal also linked to Hansen condemning “politicised media,” so I couldn’t help it.

geo
June 4, 2010 10:19 am

There is lag, but Nino peaked in January, so we’re already worked off some of that lag which is why after an ugly March number the April/May have been somewhat better.

Sun Spot
June 4, 2010 10:21 am
@Henry: (at 09:46)
An e-mail I received from professor "Stephen H. Schneider" in September 2008, say's 30 years is a significant sample size. He didn't like the e-mail I sent him showing that HadCRUT3 had showed no warming for a decade.
E-Mail reply from "Stephen H. Schneider"
Thanks for the comment. It is irrelevant what happens in a decade from a global climate point of view. Had we chosen the decade from 1992 to 2001 it would look like global warming is rising off the charts. WMO defines climate statistics over thirty year blocks, and that is "unequivocal" warming, as noted by IPCC. Read the Working Group 1 Report where all the data in various time blocks can be found. Cheers, SHS Stephen H. Schneider Melvin and Joan Lane Professor for Interdisciplinary Environmental Studies, Professor, Department of Biological Sciences and Senior Fellow, Woods Institute for the Environment Mailing address: Yang & Yamazaki Environment & Energy Building - MC 4205 473 Via Ortega Stanford University Stanford, CA 94305
mjk
June 4, 2010 11:40 am

A sceptic’s interpretation of this latest data from Dr Spencer: The graph, when viewed from right to left, clearly shows a downward trend in temperature over the 30 year period.
Keep up the good work.
MJK

RHS
June 4, 2010 11:48 am

A statistically significant sample size is dependant on the data and the sample size itself. Going from memory from a Design of Experiments course, I believe 25 – 30 is (barely) enough. The larger the sample size, the higher the level of confidence in the variability in the solution. If I’m not mistaken, the text we used stated something to the effect of:
A sample size of 25 – 30 maybe usable but larger sizes (preferably) in the 1000’s provides a better level of confidence based on the variability in the sample set.
Someone whose expertise in statistics should be able to provide a better answer.
Bueller, Bueller, anybody?

Anu
June 4, 2010 11:48 am

I prefer the RSS data:
http://www.remss.com/data/msu/monthly_time_series/RSS_Monthly_MSU_AMSU_Channel_TLT_Anomalies_Land_and_Ocean_v03_2.txt
Remote Sensing Systems (RSS) analysis of the same satellite data that UAH uses shows that May had a temperature anomaly of 0.588° C, not 0.53° C.
And a warming trend of 0.160° C/decade, not +0.14 deg. C per decade:
http://www.remss.com/msu/msu_data_description.html#msu_amsu_time_series
RSS was the organization which found the errors in data processing that UAH had been doing from 1989 to 2006 – the UAH analysis which kept showing “the GCMs are all wrong” for so long, despite repeated requests from other researchers to look closer and see if they were doing anything wrong:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satellite_temperature_measurements#Reconciliation_of_satellites.2C_radiosondes_and_climate_models
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_Change_Science_Program#Temperature_trends_in_the_lower_atmosphere_.28SAP_1.1.29
http://www.climatescience.gov/Library/sap/sap1-1/finalreport/sap1-1-final-execsum.pdf
Good thing UAH is not in Virginia – the AG might go after them for violating the Fraud Against Taxpayers Act.

LDLAS
June 4, 2010 11:51 am

Again:
There has been no significant warming from 1990 till the present.
The temperatures of 1991, 1992, 1993 and 1994 would have been the same or even higher then the temperatures in 1990 if Pinatubo wouldn’t have erupted (there was a long El Niño from end 1991 to in 1995).
Also El Chichon dimmed the impact of the big El Niño of 1982-1983 and probably had a cooling effect for a couple of years after that.
http://hadobs.metoffice.com/hadat/images/update_images/global_upper_air_thumb.png

crosspatch
June 4, 2010 12:03 pm

@Juraj V.
According to Dr. Roy Spencer:

Being a believer in natural, internal cycles in the climate system, I’m going to go out on a limb and predict that global-average SSTs will plunge over the next couple of months. Based upon past experience, it will take a month or two for our (UAH) tropospheric temperatures to then follow suit.

June 4, 2010 12:26 pm

Alec Rawls…
I’m sitting here laughing my you know what off…
A dirtbag is um er um
cough cough choke… er um
As Shakespeare once said so eloquently
A rose by any other name, is still a rose…
But in the case of Hansen the smell is more like fertilizer rather than a rose. 🙂

June 4, 2010 12:32 pm

[SNIP – I’ve told you before to tone it down. While I don’t agree with what Dr. Hansen and Dr. Mann says, I won’t have you turn their persona into Nazi comparisons. Either clean it up or stop commenting on my blog – next comment like that will earn you a ban. – Anthony]

FijiDave
June 4, 2010 1:09 pm

So what do we make of this? We have found that the (apparent) onset of La Nina has improved fishing conditions here in Fiji, and my records do show some correlation between the Southern Oscillation Index and our Catch Per Unit Effort (CPUE) for albacore – something that Willis, as an old fisherman may be interested in. If there is any interest, please do email.
Look at the ‘sea sub-surface’ tab http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/enso/
The map for the 5 days ending 24 May shows a large volume of cooler than normal water below the surface of the tropical Pacific, with anomalies more than 4°C cooler than normal for this time of the year. The central sub-surface has cooled a further 1°C from two weeks ago.

1 2 3