NCDC data shows that the contiguous USA has not warmed in the past decade, summers are cooler, winters are getting colder

See update below: New comparison graph of US temperatures in 1999 to present added – quite an eye opener – Anthony

There’s been a lot of buzz and conflicting reports over what the BEST data actually says, especially about the last decade where we have dueling opinions on a “slowing down”, “leveling off”, “standstill”, or “slight rise” (depending on whose pronouncements you read) of global warming.

Here’s some media quotes that have been thrown about recently about the BEST preliminary data and preliminary results:

“‘We see no evidence of it [global warming] having slowed down,’ he told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme. There was, he added, ‘no levelling off’.” – Dr. Richard Muller

In The Sunday Mail Prof Curry said, the project’s research data show there has been no increase in world temperatures since the end of the Nineties:

‘There is no scientific basis for saying that warming hasn’t stopped,’ she said. ‘To say that there is detracts from the credibility of the data, which is very unfortunate.’ – Dr. Judith Curry in The Sunday Mail

Climatologist Dr. Pat Michaels in an essay at The GWPF wrote:

“The last ten years of the BEST data indeed show no statistically significant warming trend, no matter how you slice and dice them”. He adds: “Both records are in reasonable agreement about the length of time without a significant warming trend. In the CRU record it is 15.0 years. In the University of Alabama MSU it is 13.9, and in the Remote Sensing Systems version of the MSU it is 15.6 years. “

In the middle of all those quotes being bandied about, I get an email from Burt Rutan (yes THAT Burt Rutan) with a PDF slideshow titled Winter Trends in the United States in the Last Decade citing NCDC’s “climate at a glance” data. This is using the USHCN2 data, which we are told is the “best”, no pun intended. It had this interesting map of the USA for Winter Temperatures (December-February) by climate region on the first slide:

Hmmm, that’s a bit of a surprise for the steepness of those trend numbers. So I decided to expand and enhance that slide show by combining trend graphs and the map together, while also looking at other data (summer, annual). Here’s a breakdown for CONUS by region for Winter, Summer, and Annual comparisons. Click each image to enlarge to full size to view the graphs.

Winter temperatures and trends °F, 2001-2011. Note that every region has a negative trend:

Summer temperatures and trends °F, 2001-2011. Note that 5 of 9 regions have a negative summertime trend:

And finally here is the Annual yearly mean temperature trend for the last decade. Since 2011 is not yet complete for annual data (though is for Winter and Summer data), I’ve plotted the last decade available, from 2000-2010:

Only 1 of 9 regions has a positive decadal trend for the Annual mean temperature, the Northeast.

This data is from USHCN2, from the National Climatic Data Center (NCDC). Note that I have not adjusted it or even self plotted it in any way. The output graphs and trend numbers are from NCDC’s publicly available “Climate At A Glance” database interface, and these can be fully replicated by anyone easily simply by going here and choosing “regions”:

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/cag3/cag3.html

I find the fact that summer temperatures were negative in five of 9 regions interesting. But most importantly, the trend for the CONUS for the past 10 years is not flat, but cooling.

The trend line for the contiguous lower 48 states looks like this for the same period when we plot the Annual mean temperature data for 2001-2010 (we can’t plot 2011 yet since the year isn’t complete):

And if we back it up a year, to 2000, so that we get ten full years, we get this:

So according the the National Climatic Data Center, it seems clear that for at least the last 10 years, there has been a cooling trend in the Annual mean temperature of the contiguous United States. Pat Michaels in his GWPF essay talks about 1996 :

A significant trend since these periods began is not going to emerge anytime soon. MSU temperatures are plummeting and are now below where they were at this time of the year in the 2008 La Nina. NOAA is predicting an extreme La Nina low in 2012. If the 1976-98 warming trend is re-established in 2013, post-1996 warming would not become significant until 2021.

So when you run the NCDC “climate at a glance” plotter from 1996 for the USA on Annual mean temperature data for the contiguous United States for 15 years of data, you get this, flatness:

Warming, for the USA seems pretty “stalled” to me in the last 10-15 years. Bear in mind that BEST uses the same data source for the USA, the USCHN2 data. Granted, this isn’t a standard 30 year climatology period we are examining, but the question about the last 10 years is still valid. “Aerosol masking” has been the reason given by the Team. Blame China.

For the inevitable whining and claims of cherry picking that will come in comments, here’s the complete data set from NCDC plotted from 1895. I added the 1934 reference line in blue:

Interestingly, we’ve had only two years that exceeded 1934 for Annual mean temperature in the United States and they were El Niño related. 1998 and 2006 both had El Niño events.

While the United States is not the world, it does have some of the best weather data available, no pun intended. Given the NCDC data for CONUS, it certainly seems to me that warming has stalled for the United States in the last decade.

UPDATE: 11/06/2011 8AM PST

When I wrote the post above, I had concerns that the 1998 and 2006 peaks might not have actually exceeded 1934. I didn’t have the energy to explore the issue last night. This morning looking anew, I recalled the GISS Y2K debacle and recovered the graphs from Hansen’s 1999 press release. This was originally part of “Lights Out Upstairs” a guest post by Steve McIntyre on my old original blog. Just look at how much warmer 1934 was in 1999 than it is now. Much of this can be attributed to NCDC’s USHCN2 adjustments.

=============================================================

Steve wrote then:

In the NASA press release in 1999 , Hansen was very strongly for 1934. He said then:

The U.S. has warmed during the past century, but the warming hardly exceeds year-to-year variability.Indeed, in the U.S. the warmest decade was the 1930s and the warmest year was 1934.

This was illustrated with the following depiction of US temperature history, showing that 1934 was almost 0.6 deg C warmer than 1998.

From a Hansen 1999 News Release: http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/briefs/hansen_07/fig1x.gif

However within only two years, this relationship had changed dramatically. In Hansen et al 2001 (referred to in the Lights On letter), 1934 and 1998 were in a virtual dead heat with 1934 in a slight lead. Hansen et al 2001 said

The U.S. annual (January-December) mean temperature is slightly warmer in 1934 than in 1998 in the GISS analysis (Plate 6)… the difference between 1934 and 1998 mean temperatures is a few hundredths of a degree.

From Hansen et al 2001 Plate 2. Note the change in relationship between 1934 and 1998.

Between 2001 and 2007, for some reason, as noted above, the ranks changed slightly with 1998 creeping into a slight lead.

The main reason for the changes were the incorporation of an additional layer of USHCN adjustments by Karl et al overlaying the time-of-observation adjustments already incorporated into Hansen et al 1999. Indeed, the validity and statistical justification of these USHCN adjustments is an important outstanding issue.

============================================================

I’ve prepared a before and after graph using the CONUS values from GISS in 1999 and in 2011 (today).

GISS writes now of the bottom figure:

Annual Mean Temperature Change in the United States

Annual and five-year running mean surface air temperature in the contiguous 48 United States (1.6% of the Earth’s surface) relative to the 1951-1980 mean. [This is an update of Figure 6 in Hansen et al. (1999).]

Also available as PDF, or Postscript. Also available are tabular data.

So clearly, the two graphs are linked, and 1998 and 1934 have swapped positions for the “warmest year”. 1934 went down by about 0.3°C while 1998 went up by about 0.4°C for a total of about 0.7°C.

And they wonder why we don’t trust the surface temperature data.

In fairness, most of this is the fault of NCDC’s Karl, Menne, and Peterson, who have applied new adjustments in the form of USHCN2 (for US data) and GHCN3 (to global data). These adjustments are the primary source of this revisionism. As Steve McIntyre often says: “You have to watch the pea under the thimble with these guys”.

============================================================

UPDATE2: 10:30AM PST 11/07/2011 – Dr. Pat Michaels writes in with an update.

Anthony–

The post on Muller is a little long in the tooth but I do need to correct something.

The comment was that I said NOAA was predicting an “extreme” La Nina in 2012.  That was true when I wrote it, but since then the October 31 forecast has come out and I used that in my most recent posting on this at the Cato site:

http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=13827

Here’s the relevant portion from the text:

We are currently experiencing another — for now — moderate La Niña, or the cold phase of El Niño. Satellite temperatures, as of this writing, have dropped below where they were in the previous La Niña of 2008, so 2011 isn’t going to be particularly warm compared to the average of the last 15 years.

In addition, the latest forecast from the Department of Commerce’s Climate Prediction Center is for the current La Niña to become stronger and persist through at least the first half of 2012:

La Niña forecast, October 31, 2011. La Niña conditions exist when the temperature anomaly is below -0.5°C. The ensemble mean of the current forecast (dashed line) is for colder conditions than now to persist for at least the first half of next year.

Consequently, 2012, like 2011, is not likely to be particularly warm when compared to the last 15 years.

The climate data they don't want you to find — free, to your inbox.
Join readers who get 5–8 new articles daily — no algorithms, no shadow bans.
0 0 votes
Article Rating
224 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Dave Springer
November 6, 2011 5:09 am

Could someone handy with charting software plot the number of compact fluorescent light bulbs sold in the U.S. on top of the annual temperature in Anthony’s plot?
Correlation is not causation but it can be entertaining nonetheless.

Gail Combs
November 6, 2011 5:12 am

~FR says:
November 5, 2011 at 8:37 pm
Isn’t the issue here exactly *which* warming we are talking about?
If I am not mistaken, there is a real warming trend since the LIA, and a stall of a decade or so does not necessarily mean that we have reached the top of this alternation….
___________________________-
And there has been a REAL COOLING trend since the beginning of the Holocene.
Temperature is the red line. The present is on the left and there is a gradual decline in temperature: http://rogerfromnewzealand.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/holocene_delta_t_and_delta_co2_full2.jpg
The Vostok ice core shows a similar slight cooling trend (present on the right) http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_cHhMa7ARDDg/SsVwqCgB-LI/AAAAAAAABKo/U92CnYMmeSU/s1600-h/Vostok-400Kd.jpg
Greenland Ice core: http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_C5VMt0Sqis0/TR5KfItHnmI/AAAAAAAAGCo/rTZUWkAX1Jo/s1600/10000%2Byear%2Btemp%2Bchart.JPG

Gator
November 6, 2011 5:21 am

Relying on double fudged data gives false impressions…
http://c3headlines.typepad.com/.a/6a010536b58035970c0147e267018f970b-pi

rbateman
November 6, 2011 5:24 am

So, the 2011-12 La Nina is predicted to be a long trudge.
There is no doubt about the progress of it so far in NW Calif.
We just received our 2nd earliest snowfall in our town’s history, about 1/2 “. The earliest being Nov 3rd, 2003, which is right around the time of SC23 2nd Max.

Kelvin Vaughan
November 6, 2011 5:34 am

According to my heating oil bill index we are in an ice age!

November 6, 2011 5:38 am

The annual temperatures in Oslo, Norway (Blindern-series), shows the same. It’s getting colder, and like Tony B wrote about CET-temperatures, they are dropping like a stone.
1997-2010 annual:
http://klimaforskning.com/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=237.0;attach=787;image
2000-2010 annual:
http://klimaforskning.com/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=237.0;attach=789;image
Take a look at what the BEST (Bogus Erroneous Stupid Temperatures) have done with the Blindern Oslo series. Annual temperatures in °C compared with Meteorologisk Institutt (Norwegian Met):
http://klimaforskning.com/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=202.0;attach=696;image

Dave Springer
November 6, 2011 5:39 am

richard verney says:
November 6, 2011 at 4:44 am
“It is undoubtedly the case that warming is very variable and whether warming and the effects thereof is a good or bad thing will very much depend upon where one happens to live.”
Piffle. There are no credible documented detrimental effects from the amount of warming that took place from 1970-2000 and plenty of beneficial ones. It’s all future shock scenarios about what happens if temperature doesn’t stop going up. There are few if any actual complaints that it’s too warm. Cooling on the other hand, that’s where you get the real complaints and they’re immediate. Crops getting severely damaged by late spring or early fall frosts, crops that will no longer grow well at all because there aren’t enough warm days, not enough snow moving equipment because of 30 years of mild winters, power outtages and people freezing to death, winter cold/flu season taking a rising death toll on the very old and very young, and a whole lot more. Ski resorts in areas with marginal cold and snowfall are the only ones that got hurt AFAIK.
And let’s not forget me down in sub-tropical south-central Texas with water pipes & tanks freezing and bursting that had never frozen before because it hadn’t got so cold for so long, the cold Pacific ocean (La Nina) causing a drought that’s about to start breaking 20th century records for severity, electric demand skyrocketing beyond capacity in the winter because with so little need for indoor heating (before now) everyone uses inefficient electrical heating. The February 2011 rolling blackouts in Texas were caused by frozen water pipes at two coal-fired power plants which had to shut down which in turn shut down electric booster pumps on natural gas pipelines which caused 11 gas-fired power plants to drastically reduce output for lack of fuel.
This is all not-at-all surprising for anyone who’s lived long enough to recall what the cooler climate of 1940-1970 was like compared to the warmer climate of 1970-2000. I’ve been saying for many years people become spoiled by the mild winters of recent decades are in for a real sobering experience when the temperature pendulum starts swinging back the other way. It sucks already it’s hardly even started.
So who the f**k is actually saying “gosh I’m glad it’s getting cooler now instead of warmer”. Anyone? Anyone? Bueller? Anyone?

Bruce Cobb
November 6, 2011 5:41 am

LazyTeenager says:
November 6, 2011 at 12:40 am
Trying to establish long term trends from 10, year periods looks pretty dangerous to me especially considering the amount of random variation visible to anyone with eyes in these graphs.
That’s funny, I didn’t see a word anywhere about trying to establish a long term trend, and yet, despite “random” variation, a negative trend for the past decade can be clearly seen. It must take very special filtering goggles to both not see what is plain to all, yet at the same time see what is invisible.

Gail Combs
November 6, 2011 5:44 am

John F. Hultquist says:
November 5, 2011 at 10:17 pm
Hexe F., Gail C., and Anthony
RE: tomatoes as climate proxies
I live in central Washington State near Ellensburg…..
I am in North Carolina and we have had two cool springs here too.
In Sanford, the middle of the State, I count by July tenth 43 days over ninety F for 2004 vs 26 days for 2010, and four days of 98F in 2010 vs nine days of 98F in 2004.
Central North Carolina (Sanford)Monthly temps over 90F for.2004.&.2010
April 2010 (1)………..April 2004 (6)
1day – 91F……………..2 days – 91F
………………………………4 days – 93F
In 2011 the April highs ranged from 55F to 86F we did not see temps over 90F (91F) until May23th!!! It was more like New England than the south.
May 2010 (4)………………May 2004 (17)
4day – 91F……………..6 days – 91F
…………………………….6 days – 93F
…………………………… 2 days – 95F
…………………………….1 days – 96F
…………………………….2 days – 98F
Then we got a FREEZE that killed the tomatoes in October!!! We normally get snow maybe once every five years. That is why I moved here. No snow but not too hot.
At this rate they are going to have to redraw the USDA Plant Hardiness Zone Map

Gail Combs
November 6, 2011 5:52 am

RockyRoad says:
November 5, 2011 at 11:26 pm
John F. Hultquist says:
November 5, 2011 at 10:17 pm
As an alternative, individually wrap each of those dark green tomatoes in a quarter sheet of newspaper…..
_____________________________
Did that up north (MA) and it works great. They still taste better than the commercial cardboard tomatoes although not as good as vine ripe.

Editor
November 6, 2011 5:59 am

The US winter cooling trend shows up very clearly in winter heating degree days and it correlates inversely with the NAO.

Editor
November 6, 2011 6:01 am

I should have said that the winter heating degree days correlates inversely with the NAO. The cooling trend correlates positively with the NAO.

Dave Springer
November 6, 2011 6:03 am

Two days ago I woke up to find the morning low temperature was 27F. It was the first freeze here since last winter. This morning the low was 67F. Talk about contrast.

Editor
November 6, 2011 6:11 am

I would question whether even 30 years is long enough to detect long term climatic trends, particularly on a regional basis, when PDO and AMO cycles can last 50-60 years.
It is the insistence on looking at 30 year trends that allows Warmistas to measure trends from the colder 1960’s and 1970’s as Katharine Hayhoe has done with Texas Winter temperatures.
http://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2011/10/12/questions-for-katharine/

Molon Labe
November 6, 2011 6:19 am

In many plots above, your “Average Temperature” lines fall entirely below the “Actual Temperature”.
WUWT?

November 6, 2011 6:20 am

This is absolutely in line with trends in the NAO (North Atlantic Oscillation) index, driver of the climatic oscillations in the temperate zone and the northern latitudes of the North Hemisphere. The NAO has been on a down slope since 1995.
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/NAOn.htm
According to my calculations for the NAP-index (I devised for the N. Atlantic, see my links) and which leads the NAO by up to a decade, the current cooling process was predictable and is likely continue for some time to come.
Future is ‘cool’ !
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/CET-NV.htm

JPeden
November 6, 2011 6:31 am

Denis of Perth, Australia says:
November 6, 2011 at 1:23 am
if the problem is carbon dioxide….what is the amount when we all die…..
No worries, mate. If we simply take evasive action according to the Alarmists’ “science”, we worker slaves will all be dead long before that. Our World Communist Masters will have also either died of starvation, killed each other off – for the children or in the interests of peace, equality, justice, or something – or will have to commit suicide themselves anyway, because of those “suspicious”, thus “bourgeois”, thoughts that just keep popping into their own heads as well. Problem solved!

John Costello
November 6, 2011 6:34 am

have not been able to grow peppers for the last four years (9 miles n of Boston)–last year half their growth was in a two week periods in August.

Bill Illis
November 6, 2011 6:36 am

One new problem with your tomato crops is Late Blight – the Irish Potato Famine fungus – which has made a big comeback in the past three years due to the cooler, wetter, cloudier weather. Because it is more widespread, even the bedding plants bought at your local supplier might be carrying it. But it wouldn’t have spread so far without the weather conditions.
It hits tomatoes, potatoes, eggplant, celery and can wipe out a crop in a few days. The spores can stay around for a few years and if your garden got hit in the last two years, you need to apply fungicides/copper dust now and a few times early in the spring again.

November 6, 2011 6:38 am

G’day, this might be a faq, but why do we get to excuse 1998 and 2006 as being just because of El Niño? I’ve been looking a bit at this scepticism stuff a bit this weekend, and I’ve seen that happen a few times (most significantly in the graph explaining sunspots are the cause, not people, which somehow tries to remove the effect).
This year and last are La Nina years. Should we excuse the lower temperatures just because of that?
El Niño and La Niña are part of the data. How can we excuse them?

Chris D.
November 6, 2011 6:41 am

The Pat Michaels quote prompted me to dredge this one up:
http://rogerpielkejr.blogspot.com/2009/07/noaa-explains-global-temperature.html
with the post’s last sentence being of particular interest. Is it time to hold NOAA’s feet to the fire yet?

Gail Combs
November 6, 2011 6:41 am

Ibrahim says:
November 6, 2011 at 12:16 am
In many states of the US there has been no significant warming since the beginning of the last century or since the nineteen thirties……
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/cag3/cag3.html
__________________________________
If you look at the map. the states in the USA interior are those showing “Cooling” while those along the coast show the warming trends.
Frank Lancer has done some work also and found the coastal areas follow sea surface temp while inland locations do not.
We already know that oceans have temperature oscillations and that is a lot of what is being pick up as a “Warming trend”
Frank’s Site:http://hidethedecline.eu/pages/posts/ruti-global-land-temperatures-1880-2010-part-1-244.php
A more readable version: http://joannenova.com.au/2011/10/messages-from-the-global-raw-rural-data-warnings-gotchas-and-tree-ring-divergence-explained/#comment-625436
If you remove the influence of the ocean oscillations you may then get the overall cooling trend as shown by the interior of the USA. The PDO and AMO seem to be heading into the cooling part of their cycles. (Bob Tisdale would have a heck of a lot better handle on that then I would)
PDO 23 year cycle: http://www.enterstageright.com/archive/articles/0508/0508globalcooling.htm
Article alleges the PDO was not discovered until 1996???
Bob Tisdale on PDO: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/06/30/yet-even-more-discussions-about-the-pacific-decadal-oscillation-pdo/
2009 WUWT: The Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation – not quite cool yet. http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/07/14/the-atlantic-multidecadal-oscillation-not-quite-cool-yet/
Bob Tisdale on PDO & AMO http://bobtisdale.wordpress.com/2011/06/08/on-the-amopdo-dataset/
I think we will be seeing much more desperation on the part of the Warmists. As can be seen here at WUWT we have people talking to each other from all over the world and the excuse it is “warming elsewhere” does not hold up for long in the mind of the public, especially when people in Australia, San Francisco, North Carolina, Canada, the UK and Oregon are all complaining about the cold weather.

November 6, 2011 6:45 am

Denis of Perth, Australia says:
November 6, 2011 at 1:23 am
i have one question……and i am starting to ask this every web site i can……how much is too much carbon dioxide?……
humans live in alaska….and marble bar (australia)……so do not tell me about temperature ever again…..
if the problem is carbon dioxide….what is the amount when we all die…..

Your question has been answered by others above.
However, the numbers given do not take into account the probability that if the atmospheric CO2 level increases gradually over centuries, we may slowly adapt to the change. Implying that a toxic level today might not be toxic in the future.
Don’t forget the positive aspects of increased CO2. We are still well below what some consider the optimum atmospheric CO2 level.

November 6, 2011 6:45 am

-What are the confidence intervals on these trends? Are they statistically significant?
-Can you comment on the use of short time periods to assess trends? I would be cautious given things like (http://www.skepticalscience.com/pics/SkepticsvRealistsv3.gif), but maybe there’s something I’m missing?
Cheers

jack morrow
November 6, 2011 6:47 am

Gail Combs says Nov 5 8:07pm
Thanks Gail for the info. Too bad about half the population can’t even read this much less understand what it says.