From Dr. Roy Spencer:
UAH Update for January 2011: Global Temperatures in Freefall
…although this, too, shall pass, when La Nina goes away.
LA NINA FINALLY BEING FELT IN TROPOSPHERIC TEMPERATURES
January 2011 experienced a precipitous drop in lower tropospheric temperatures over the tropics, Northern Hemisphere, and Southern Hemisphere. This was not unexpected, since global average sea surface temperatures have been falling for many months, with a head start as is usually the case with La Nina.
YR MON GLOBE NH SH TROPICS
2010 1 0.542 0.675 0.410 0.635
2010 2 0.510 0.553 0.466 0.759
2010 3 0.554 0.665 0.443 0.721
2010 4 0.400 0.606 0.193 0.633
2010 5 0.454 0.642 0.265 0.706
2010 6 0.385 0.482 0.287 0.485
2010 7 0.419 0.558 0.280 0.370
2010 8 0.441 0.579 0.304 0.321
2010 9 0.477 0.410 0.545 0.237
2010 10 0.306 0.257 0.356 0.106
2010 11 0.273 0.372 0.173 -0.117
2010 12 0.181 0.217 0.145 -0.222
2011 1 -0.009 -0.055 0.038 -0.369
This is shown in the following plot (note the shorter period of record, and different zero-baseline):
SO WHY ALL THE SNOWSTORMS?
While we would like to think our own personal experience of the snowiest winter ever in our entire, Methuselah-ian lifespan has some sort of cosmic — or even just global — significance, I would like to offer this plot of global oceanic precipitation variations from the same instrument that measured the above sea surface temperatures (AMSR-E on NASA’s Aqua satellite):
Note that precipitation amounts over the global-average oceans vary by only a few percent. What this means is that when one area gets unusually large amounts of precipitation, another area must get less.
Precipitation is always associated with rising air, and so a large vigorous precipitation system in one location means surrounding regions must have enhanced sinking air (with no precipitation).
In the winter, of course, the relatively warmer oceans next to cold continental air masses leads to snowstorm development in coastal areas. If the cold air mass over the midwest and eastern U.S. is not dislodged by warmer Pacific air flowing in from the west, then the warm oceanic air from the Gulf of Mexico and western Atlantic keeps flowing up and over the cold dome of air, producing more snow and rain. The “storm track” and jet stream location follows that boundary between the cold and warm air masses.
The Temperature of 2010:
http://thegwpf.org/the-observatory/2360-the-temperature-of-2010.html
Unbelievable!
Richard Sharpe says (February 2, 2011 at 3:21 pm): “Further pedant alert. A noun is feminine or masculine, not female or male.”
No butch nouns? 🙂
The planet is stable. It’s the alarmists that are not.
Geoff. Noticed blank sun again today. As the sun follows a cycle if we start to get a prolonged downturn then does that mean solar maximum is over? Also how does the quiet sun and the declining SST affect LaNina? Interesting times.
twawki says:
February 3, 2011 at 4:27 pm
Geoff. Noticed blank sun again today. As the sun follows a cycle if we start to get a prolonged downturn then does that mean solar maximum is over? Also how does the quiet sun and the declining SST affect LaNina? Interesting times.
Still a long way to solar maximum I think, but the question is how much higher will it be compared to now. This graph compares SC24 with SC23 and shows the greater proportion of spotless days. Note how the sustained spotless days compare with SC23.
I think there are 2 major solar effects occurring now. In the north we have had the highest strongly negative AO that is altering jetstream patterns that encourage southern movement of polar air. The polar vortex and stratosphere ozone and temps are reacting to the lower EUV levels which is influencing the AO. In the south we have had the highest POSITIVE reading of the AAO which assists the building of the La Nina as we have observed in the past. I am not sure as yet why this index was so highly positive.
Trivial Pursuit Dept.
Q1. From Dec 2010 to Jan 2011 the global temp anomaly fell from 0.181 to -0.009, a total of -0.190°C. When was the last one month drop (or rise) of that magnitude?
Q2. The NH temp anomaly fell from 0.217 to -0.055. a total of -0.272°C. Same question.
Q3. If NH temps continue to fall at a rate of -0.272°C per month, how many months will it be before Chicago is buried under 2km of ice?
Note: Q3 is just for fun, Algore style.
Q3;
After the first 0.1 km or so, who cares?
I don’t want to be an alarmist, but has anyone noticed how far the magnetic North Pole has traveled since 1967?
If the pole moves between 14-17 miles a year at the pole, that distance translates into greater electromagnetic variances further south.
The CAGW claque patently ignored Solar activity as a culprit in the world’s weather paterns, ie: sun spots. But sun spot activity interacts with our magnetoshpere, and the magnetic North Pole is certainly part of that phenomenon.
I only mention this because it might have some bearing on the huge jet stream shift we’ve been watching over the last 40 years.
Someone please tell me why no one will draw a trend line through the UAH graph? Oh, I know why, silly me. It’s because there’s an upward trend. One slightly below average month and the sceptics claim that global warming has ended. Yeah, right.
6000 years ago it was much warmer than now. In fact, the archaeological digs in the Orkney Islands (North Sea) confirm that palm trees could have grown there 6000 years ago. It was that hot.
The last ice age ended 12,000 years ago.
This means that, half way between the end of the ice age and now, it got colder.
We still haven’t gotten back to where it was at 6000 years ago.
Are we going to get that hot again?
Yes. Of course. Give or take a few mini-ice ages along the way.
But, according to the CAGW claque, the natural upward trend is man-made.
What bunk.
This whole mess started when NASA farmed out the weather forcasting to the Brits, the Brits didn’t have enough resources to handle the job and started cooking the books while using NASA money to pay for upgrades hoping no one would spot the fraud until they could actually get everything on line, then ALGORE came along and hijacked the cooked data to foist off his carbon credit scam.
By the way, as Vice President, ALGORE had direct oversight at NASA .. so tell me this wasn’t an in-house scam.
Anthony,
Doesn’t your “Widget” need updating?
REPLY: Yes, the script keep breaking. I’ll have to manually update it, thanks for the reminder-
Anthony
“Mark Nobes says:
February 5, 2011 at 11:02 am
Someone please tell me why no one will draw a trend line through the UAH graph? Oh, I know why, silly me. It’s because there’s an upward trend. One slightly below average month and the sceptics claim that global warming has ended. Yeah, right.”
Over the last 9 years there has been virtually no warming. See the graphs since 2002 at
http://hidethedecline.eu/pages/posts/status-on-global-temperature-trends-216.php
Those graphs were drawn without the January data.
And do not forget Phil Jones quote from last February at
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8511670.stm
“C – Do you agree that from January 2002 to the present there has been statistically significant global cooling?
No. This period is even shorter than 1995-2009. The trend this time is negative (-0.12C per decade), but this trend is not statistically significant. “
Nice, Werner. I wonder what Mark will have to say when confronted with facts? Probably go hide his decline.
Why yes JIT, there is a trend. There always has been and always will be. For the last few hundred years, it happens to be mainly upwards. The alarmists have tuned their models to reproduce that trend. Then, they set out on a campaign to hide the historical fact of that pre-existing trend so they could claim their models prove the trend is the result of man-made CO2. Arguing the pre-existing trend didn’t exist until man’s CO2 came along is where they were caught out in a lie (climate-gate).
Cheers.
“Mark Nobes says:
February 5, 2011 at 11:02 am
“Someone please tell me why no one will draw a trend line through the UAH graph? Oh, I know why, silly me. It’s because there’s an upward trend. One slightly below average month and the sceptics claim that global warming has ended. Yeah, right.”
Hi Mark, draw away, but do a few things first. as you plot your linear trend line please make certain you go from the 1940s peak to the 98/2000 area peak. I am completly aware you cannot go back to the 40s with UHA satellite graphs. However the surface ones are similar, so feel free to splice them to the UHA. (Just do not hide the splice (-; Also be certain not to use the past temperatures that were adjusted downwards. Now add some realistic UHI adjustments. Now account for volcanic cooling in appropriate areas. Please report back on your findings, with details of how you removed the lowered past and accounted for UHI. We are excited to see your results.
As I am typing this I am realizing that indeed it is true, most of climate change is human induced, just a small select group of humans.
From what I have read, greenhouse gases do not emit energy in the same bandwidth in which they absorb energy. Thus, emissions from CO2 are not absorbed by CO2. And, Earth’s outgoing energy is delayed, ever so slightly, but it does return to space. Also, 95% of the tropospheric warming effect in the troposphere is due to water vapor and around 5% for CO2. During the fuel crises in the 70s, there should have been a noticeable drop in ppm CO2 – there wasn’t. This tells me that the atmospheric increase in CO2 over the last several decades is, in fact, perfectly natural. Looking at this article: NOAA Confirms Recent Global Temperature Change Is Historically Small & Warming Is Decelerating, and their graph of Annual Global Temperature Change: Recent Warming Insignificant, I see no impact from CO2 to support any claims of unprecedented global warming.