While there’s been a lot of attention given to the recent NOAA and NASA press releases stating that 2010 was tied for the warmest year globally, it didn’t meet that criteria in the USA by a significant margin according the the data directly available to the public from the NOAA National Climatic Data Center. (NCDC)
Here’s the graph of USA mean annual temperature from 1895-2010 produced by NCDC’s interactive climate database and graph generator, which you can operate yourself here: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/cag3/na.html
Note the rank highlighted in yellow. The pulldown menu gives you an idea of what was the warmest year in the USA from this data, arrows added:
Here’s the partial table output (you can use their online selector to output your own table) sorted by rank from NCDC web page. 1998 leads, followed by 2006, and then 1934. 2010 is quite a ways down, ranking 94th out of 116.
Climate At A Glance
Year to Date (Jan – Dec) Temperature
Contiguous United States
Year |
Temperature(deg F) |
RankBased on the Time Period Selected (1895-2010)* |
RankBased on the Period of Record (1895-2010)* |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1998 | 55.08 | 116 | 116 |
| 2006 | 55.04 | 115 | 115 |
| 1934 | 54.83 | 114 | 114 |
| 1999 | 54.67 | 113 | 113 |
| 1921 | 54.53 | 112 | 112 |
| 2001 | 54.41 | 111 | 111 |
| 2007 | 54.38 | 110 | 110 |
| 2005 | 54.36 | 109 | 109 |
| 1990 | 54.29 | 108 | 108 |
| 1931 | 54.29 | 108 | 108 |
| 1953 | 54.16 | 106 | 106 |
| 1987 | 54.11 | 105 | 105 |
| 1954 | 54.11 | 105 | 105 |
| 1986 | 54.09 | 103 | 103 |
| 2003 | 54.02 | 102 | 102 |
| 1939 | 54.01 | 101 | 101 |
| 2000 | 54.00 | 100 | 100 |
| 2002 | 53.94 | 99 | 99 |
| 1938 | 53.94 | 99 | 99 |
| 1991 | 53.90 | 97 | 97 |
| 1981 | 53.90 | 97 | 97 |
| 2004 | 53.84 | 95 | 95 |
| 2010 | 53.76 | 94 | 94 |
| 1933 | 53.74 | 93 | 93 |
| 1946 | 53.72 | 92 | 92 |
| 1994 | 53.64 | 91 | 91 |
| 1900 | 53.53 | 90 | 90 |
*Highest temperature rank denotes the hottest year for the period.
Lowest temperature rank denotes the coldest year for the period.
Data used to calculate Contiguous United States mean temperatures are from the USHCN version 2 data set.
Of course there is no mention of the USA temperature ranking in the recent press release from NOAA. The only mention of the USA in that PR that comes close is this:
In the contiguous United States, 2010 was the 14th consecutive year with an annual temperature above the long-term average. Since 1895, the temperature across the nation has increased at an average rate of approximately 0.12 F per decade.
There’s no mention of the 2010 ranking for the USA temperature at all, nor any mention of the fact that 2010 was not nearly as warm as 1998, or 1934. I find that more than a little odd for an agency whose mission is to serve the American people with accurate and representative climate data.
They couldn’t find room for a sentence or two to mention the USA historical temperature rank for 2010? Apparently not.
Since this is about the climate in the U.S. it should be mentioned that there is a large net migration from the north to the south in the U.S. People desire warmer climates not colder. Actions speak louder than words. While the climate boffins are trying to convince us that warming is bad people are actually relocating from colder regions to warmer ones.
The bottom line for me isn’t whether or not the globe is warming but rather whether or not warming is desireable. All the evidence points to warming being desireable. Cold sucks.
Why no option for a polynomial trend line, I wonder?
A fairly obvious 60-year cycle in evidence there once more, with the most recent cycle at a slightly higher (perhaps 0.5F) level than the last one. I dare say that, between them, higher TSI in the second half of the 20th century and proven UHI contamination of surface readings can easily cover off that 0.5F.
The contribution of anthropogenic (lovely word – so similar to pathogenic and carcinogenic in its imagery) emissions to the upward trend would appear, in the US at least, to be equivalent to that of Bigfoot flatulence…
From the same site:
Annual 1901 – 2000 Average = 52.79 degF
Annual 1998 – 2010 Trend = -0.94 degF / Decade
Oh it’s getting warmer in the USA……
RR Kampen says:
January 14, 2011 at 6:25 am
Sure. Canadian Archipel, much of the Arctic; Antarctic Peninsula; region from Red Sea to Caspian Sea. To name but land areas.
So that’s 1% of the surface stations then!
Temperature is not measured to +/- 0.01 deg F. In the early records of the USHCN temperature data are reported to nearest whole degree F with an implied measurement error of +/- 1 deg F. Thus all of the temperature data below 1999 should be 54 deg F.
Since measurement error is +/- 1 deg F, it is not possible to determine which is the hottest year. More importantly, the data show there has been no warming in the US since 1895!
Since these so-called climate scientists do not know how to measure temperature and use the data properly, I have concluded these guys really don’t know what they are doing and can be ignored. No experimentalist would ever make these mistakes.
I going print out the table, make an amended table, and send these with my comments to Premier Stephen Harper.
You yanks should do this for the entire record and send hard copy of the data and your comments to your members of the Congress and to your state and local politticians.
I have always said that temperature measurements are not that accurate and if data are rounded off to nearest whole degree, global warming vanishes.
As an old boss of mine used to say to me quite frequently… “don’t confuse me with facts.”
But as for the last year, it’s interesting how they carbon crowd can say that we’ve had record heating when many worldwide events say otherwise. Granted, a stationary high pressure area in Russia accounted for extremely high temperatures for a time last summer… and undoubtedly these temperatures were then extrapolated 1200km into the Arctic and used to help defend this new record anomaly. But what about the record cold temps in South America last July? How about the snow falling in Australia as summer was starting? Now the US is in a deep freeze as well as Europe for well over a month. Sorry… I don’t by this record or near-record crap.
I won’t say off with their heads! I do say drag them before Issa’s House committee and have them testify under oath. They could probably sell tickets and pay down the debt! I for one would love to see these guys squirm as they are exposed for their charlatan behavior.
ValoSnah
But the news that last year was the joint warmest ever recorded doesn’t fit comfortably with the political ideology of most who frequent this website.
The topic of this post almost gets to the more important question. It’s not whether the US was not as hot, but which regions last year produced the preponderance of the abnormal warmth. Via this post, we know it wasn’t the US. I don’t recall Europe being overly hot. The Russian heat wave certainly added to the anomaly. The question is – how much of the extra heat is attributed to regions where the equipment is not well maintained, and the extra heat is more a result from one of the many “corrections”?
Remember that the NASA / NOAA claim to be the warmest year is not in line with the other three data sets, which say it’s a pinch lower.
latitude
And it was, globally.
Thanks to RRKampen and his warmist friends for coming onto these threads and providing comic relief. Your naivite and religious fervor for the AGW nonsense always provokes a hearty laugh. Anthony, is there some way to highlight these posts with a color so they’ll be easier to find? I’m always interested in the actual scientific discussion here, but sometimes you just need a chuckle (or maybe even a guffaw).
The Met Office sorted list for Central England (CET) has 2010 ranked 98th overall when ranked from coldest to warmist
http://hadobs.metoffice.com/hadcet/mly_cet_mean_sort.txt
When you look at actual data against the 61-90 WMO recommended anomaly it looks as if the anomaly is designed to deceive…
Remember, 2010 has 76 years of population/cityr/UHI growth over 1934.
Without a doubt 1934 is the wamest year and the 1930s are the warmest decade.
Only through maniuplation and bogus papers setting UHI at .03C or some such stupid value is 1934 not the warmest year.
Michael
It is indeed desperate, but what can you expect from a site such as this? They have to desperately grab hold of what few remaining nuggets of truth can be twisted to appear to back up their increasingly way-out world view.
That could be the strapline of this website, Dave.
[Reply: If you don’t like it here you are free to move on. ~dbs, mod.]
Louise says:
January 14, 2011 at 6:19 am
“I can’t understand the table – why is the hottest year (1998) ranked as 116th? Surely it should be ranked 1st and so 2010 would be 23rd of 116 not, as you said, “ranking 94th out of 116″?
This must be a spoof of Louise Gray of the UK Daily Telegraph! Even she could not be this stupid…..anyway – good spoof, keep it up and thanks for making me chuckle.
Regards
Michael
Roger Otip says:
January 14, 2011 at 8:03 am
ValoSnah
“Isn’t the global temperature more interresting than the US segment?”
“But the news that last year was the joint warmest ever recorded doesn’t fit comfortably with the political ideology of most who frequent this website.”
“Joint warmest with 1998 with 1998 and 2010 both being El Nina shows that despite 12 years of CO2 increase we have had 12 years of no change temp wise Globally.”
And that’s being generous, as the GISS data is the warmest temp record of them all.
I bet if you drilled into the data you could possibly find a particular station for which 2010 was one of the coldest years on record, this would instantly prove that the idea of global warming is all a big scam!
It’s only by cherry picking the globle as a whole that you can show there’s a warming trend! Don’t they know it’s only the US temperature that matters?!?
Hey guys, as for the greatly under-instrumented Canadian Arctic. I have a serious question regarding the “warmest ever” claims. Does it matter at all that most of the “way above average” temperatures occurred in sub zero conditions?
Here
http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/plots/meanTarchive/meanT_2010.png
the DMI shows 2010 arctic temps, and they were pretty much above average for the entire “cold” period, Jan to April, Sept to Dec, but the “warm” period was almost entirely below average.
Does this have any significance in how we can analyze the results?
Thanks for your time.
BillyBob says:
January 14, 2011 at 8:18 am
Remember, 2010 has 76 years of population/cityr/UHI growth over 1934.
Without a doubt 1934 is the wamest year and the 1930s are the warmest decade.
Only through maniuplation and bogus papers setting UHI at .03C or some such stupid value is 1934 not the warmest year.
Exactly, the likes of Roger Otip and Michael crack me up because they “have to desperately grab hold of what few remaining nuggets of truth can be twisted to appear to back up their increasingly way-out world view”.
Roger Otip says:
January 14, 2011 at 8:03 am
ValoSnah
Isn’t the global temperature more interresting than the US segment?
“But the news that last year was the joint warmest ever recorded doesn’t fit comfortably with the political ideology of most who frequent this website.”
Surely by now we all know that the burden of proof is on the Warmista to show that the “average global temperature,” as calculated by James Hansen and his followers, is not a total and complete fiction. We, meaning everybody, have some grip on average temperatures in the USA, though I do not believe for one minute that readings to tenths of a degree are meaningful, but a “global average temperature” is not reasonably tethered to actual measurements that might be used in criticism of the final, calculated result.
It was claimed that 2010 was Canada’s hottest year.
I broke down temperature means by month across the country. Least cold would be more accurate than hottest. Here’s my results for any curious Canadians.
http://daviditron.wordpress.com/2011/01/14/canadian-monthly-temperature-anomalies-2010/
Is it beyond the wit of man to actually measure temperatures in all the regions that are currently subject to “adjustment” and “extrapolation”? We managed to leave “weather stations” on the moon 40 years ago! Perhaps some of the “save the polar bear expeditions” could do something useful and leave weather stations on their travels that could be cheaply and easily monitored by satellite? And can we please standardise on weather stations that are outside of cities, and not at airports?
I am neither a warmist nor a denier – but a scientist – and therefore a sceptic by definition!
It would be interesting to learn which countries had one of their warmest ever years, which did not and which had one of their coldest.
The UK had the coldest December since records began. January and February were also much colder than average, with unusually heavy snowfalls in the South. Much of the summer failed to materialise but I believe that Hadcrut managed to show that 2010 was a warm year in the UK despite CET records.
According to the Norwegian MET Office, the average temperature for the country as a whole was 1 deg C below normal. This makes it the 10th coldest year on record for a series that goes back to the year 1900. You have to go back to 1941 to find a colder year. The coldest year in the series was 1915.
What is interesting in the comments they give, is that a number of costal stations more or less surrounded by sea records 0.6 deg C below the normal, something that suggest lower sea temperatures. Also the western coastline had an average of 1.2 deg C below normal making it the 3rd coldest for this region. This part of the country is usually rather mild due to the Gulf current.
They also state that the only stations showing higher than normal temperatures for the year were the arctic stations without breaking out the details. I guess the Longyearbyen airport must be one of them.
Mainland Norway runs from about 58 deg North up to about 72.
Details in Norwegian at http://met.no/?module=Articles;action=Article.publicShow;ID=7567
December monthly temperatures since 1928 show no trend.
Also, GISS shows rising temps, contrary to all other metrics.