by Roy W. Spencer, Ph. D.
Here’s the global average sea surface temperature (SST) update from AMSR-E on NASA’s Aqua satellite, updated through yesterday, July 7, 2011:
The anomalies are relative the existing period of record, which is since June 2002.
As can be seen, the SSTs have not quite recovered from the coolness of the recent La Nina.
Something else I track is the ocean cloud water anomalies, also from AMSR-E, which I have calibrated in terms of anomalies in reflected sunlight based upon Aqua CERES data:
Why I watch this is it often predicts future SST behavior. For instance, the circled portion in 2010 shows a period of enhanced reflection of sunlight (thus reduced solar input into the ocean), and this corresponded to strong cooling of SSTs during 2010 as seen in the first graph.
So, the recent new enhancement of cloudiness (smaller circle) suggests a fall of SST in the next month or so. After that, it generally takes another month or so before ocean changes are transferred to the global oceanic atmosphere through enhanced or decreased convective overturning and precipitation.
==============================================================
See also this story on the sun: Solar activity report: the sun is still in a funk
Erl, I am always left instructed when finished reading your posts.
Pamela,
Thanks, and it’s always nice to know who you are talking to and its a real bonus if that person has a proper name.
I should have mentioned that depressed preicipitable water is also evidence of the absence of the ‘water vapour feedback mechanism’ beloved of greenhouse theory.
Depressed precipitable water represents a failure of evaporation to keep up with surface warming trends indicating declining cloud cover which reinforces the warming trend. The ‘system condition’ that produced the trend ceased to apply about 2003. The system is now in recovery mode as atmospheric moisture levels increase. Roy’s global oceanic reflected sunlight data confirms the point.
Since 2003 we have a conjunction of increased CO2 in the atmosphere and increased water vapour in the atmosphere……but the Earth cools, directly contradicting greenhouse theory. The Earth itself demonstrates the physics behind the working of the climate system and also that the parameters change over time.
What is responsible for the change in the parameters? Why should evaporation lag and then increase? The answer lies in the interaction of the mesosphere and the stratosphere over the poles.
Is anyone in the IPCC taking any notice of any of this? They can’t think of anything that would cause the warming other than the activities of man. They should look harder. This represents a poverty of the imagination. Nay, it represents incompetence.
If people continue to suggest that increased CO2 in the atmosphere warms the planet….as does Andrew Bolt in the carbon tax thread there will be uncertainty. The voters are susceptible to scare campaigns. Looking at the Prime Minister of Australia announcing a carbon tax, I see a brave and resolute person acting according to her convictions. It’s very, very sad.
Erl Happ says:
July 10, 2011 at 7:15 pm
“Is anyone in the IPCC taking any notice of any of this? They can’t think of anything that would cause the warming other than the activities of man. They should look harder. This represents a poverty of the imagination. Nay, it represents incompetence.”
Nay, its “the continuation of policy by other means.”
Leif Svalgaard says:
July 10, 2011 at 7:57 am
Would a mobile Neutron Monitor be feasible?
I am made aware that Geiger Counters measure some of the background radiation coming in from space. You cannot buy them or thier kits now that Fukushima went meltdown.
rbateman says:
July 10, 2011 at 8:50 pm
Would a mobile Neutron Monitor be feasible?
Depends on what you mean by ‘mobile’. Practically, I would say no.
http://neutronm.bartol.udel.edu/stations/naincon/construct.html
Leif Svalgaard says:
July 9, 2011 at 5:24 pm
Bob Barker says:
July 9, 2011 at 4:14 pm
SORCE TSI has not been updated since 2 June due to technical problems. Is there any more information about that situation?
Their website says: Weekly Status reports have been removed to comply with ITAR restrictions.
In case you wonder what ITAR is: http://www.pmddtc.state.gov/regulations_laws/itar_official.html
In short: the information is classified [for ‘non-US persons’]. Now speculate why that would be so…
Maybe someone upstairs has finally realised the sun is a lot more important to short term climate variation (hence military activity) than you’ve been trying to make us all believe.
Adrian Scaife of the Met office recently:
“We now believe that [the solar cycle] accounts for 50 per cent of the variability from year to year”
tallbloke says:
July 11, 2011 at 5:54 am
“We now believe that [the solar cycle] accounts for 50 per cent of the variability from year to year”
And that statement is obviously wrong. Amazing that you can be taken in by such nonsense.
Snake oil will always purchased by at least one person, convinced that the concoction can cure what ails you, even though the science behind the elixer has not caught up to proving its unique curative powers.
Meanwhile, out here on the Left coast, it appears that the Cold Fronts may already be knocking on our door. I say already instead of still, because it appears that the Pacific High has briefly moved into its “Summer” position, however, the long term forecast seems to indicate that it is already under assault from the NNW. If the storm door opens in August, we’ll have the earrrrrrrrrrrliest rainy season everrrrrrrrrrr!
Unprecedented.
One CWA to the north, they have thundershowers over the high country. One more yet to the north and outright cold advection is prog’ed.
Well sheee-it fahr, cowboys and cowgirls… that could be a graph of July lake level for Lake Travis in Texas. Lake level is highly dependent on ENSO which largely determines our rainfall for any given year. Travis is an artificial lake used for flood control, municipal and agricultural use, hydro generation, and recreation. I live on its shore. By the time July rolls around the effects of the current ENSO cycle become evident in lake level being above or below average.
“”””” Leif Svalgaard says:
July 10, 2011 at 5:21 pm
Mark T says:
July 10, 2011 at 4:32 pm
“The word does not have any negative connotations.”
They use it precisely because it does have negative connotations even though none are technically intended.
No, they don’t. This is accepted technical language and does not have negative connotations. You [and many others] are the one that makes it negative. “””””
Well in everyday “street” language, “anomaly” of course means something that is out of kilter; at variance with what it is supposed to be; which could have a negative connotation; but not necessarily.
But when used a a scientific, technical term, which Leif asserts here; then it would have a well understood meaning to those “of ordinary sklill in the art” In other worts it is technical jargon of the climate set, and those in that field know exactly what they mean by it.
It is not conceptually different from a concept often used in process control situations, uch as in the control room of some chemical processing plant. Monitors could display the absolute values of different process variables such at Temperatures, pressur4es concentrations or the likie..
Problem is nobody could tell if everything was hunky dorey or not.
So one would typically display not the variables, but the deviation from the set point, so that a correcvtly running process would be designated by a flat line set of process variations from nominal. The process engineers could immediately tell if something is out of whack, by seeing which look shows a discrepancy from nominal. “Control by exception” in a sense.
Anomalies are simply that; current variances from some established or expected level.
I’m sure the precise meaning as used in climatology, is written down somewhere; but it need not have any negative connotation, even though the street use of the same word might have.
As to using “Geiger” counters to monitor neutrons; good luck on that.
Sub critical(proportional) gas counters have been used as neutron detectors; but usually have such low detection efficiency, since they normally operate by the detection of a “knock-on” proton, by the charged particle track it leaves.
Geiger counters are non-linear regenerative detectors, that operate in a yes -no detection mode, and give no account of the particle energy; and are more suitable for charged particle detectors. They of course can detect gamma rays, as a result of electronor positron emission events.
I once built a “tissue equivalent” neutron monitor, which was a proportional gas counter that contained organic materials so that it reacted in a way proportional to expected tissue damage, as a function of neutron energy. it was quite good for anything from thermal neutrons, up to the 14 MeV range, which you can get from deuteron-deuteron collisions.
Leif Svalgaard says:
July 11, 2011 at 6:16 am
tallbloke says:
July 11, 2011 at 5:54 am
“We now believe that [the solar cycle] accounts for 50 per cent of the variability from year to year”
And that statement is obviously wrong. Amazing that you can be taken in by such nonsense.
I’d like to hear Adrian Scaife enlarge on the statement before I decided what to make of his thinking.
I’m a bit astonished that no-one seems to be concerned that the most important climate metric is now classified information. What’s your thinking on the matter Leif?
FYI – NWS Monterey CWA:
MODELS HAVE BEEN CONSISTENT WITH BRINGING AN EMBEDDED SHORTWAVE TROUGH THROUGH THE REGION TOMORROW. AS A RESULT…850 MB TEMPS ARE FORECAST TO DROP CLOSE TO 10-11C (IMPRESSIVE FOR JULY).