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:
Consequently, 2012, like 2011, is not likely to be particularly warm when compared to the last 15 years.
In reply to Gail Comb’s Link & to jack morrow’s comment.
jack morrow says:
November 5, 2011 at 8:07 pm
It does not matter as long as the progressives are in control of the world economies and the political structures. They will continue their barrage of climate control policies. The only way to stop this is by the vote.
The European debit crisis is a paradigm change. It becomes apparent that socialism does not work when one runs out of other people’s money to spend. A cabal is advocating spending trillions of dollars of other people’s money to increase the cost of electricity and manufacturing in the developed countries which will result in western countries being less competitive resulting increase job loss. The wind farms and the conversion of food to biofuel will not significant reduce CO2 emissions. China is constructing two coal plants per week.
Greenhouses inject CO2 into the “greenhouse” to increase yield and reduce growing times. Plants eat CO2. Increasing CO2 will and is causing the biosphere to expand.
The solar magnetic cycle was at its highest activity and longest activity during the last half of the twentieth century. The period of 20th century warming correlated with a reduction in low level planetary clouds and an increase in high level planetary clouds both of which causes warming and both of which are caused by solar magnetic cycle changes.
The solar cycle has changed. The planet was started to cool which is not surprising as there is the paleoclimatic record cycles of warming and cooling that correlate with cosmogenic isotope changes which are caused by solar magnetic cycle changes.
http://www.osdpd.noaa.gov/data/sst/anomaly/2011/anomnight.11.3.2011.gif
Hi Gail Comb,
This is a scary link. The bureaucrats live in fantasy world of endless debate and meetings to produce more rules and regulations. It does not matter to the bureaucracy what is debated or what rules are produced as they are paid regardless of outcome.
http://theglobaljournal.net/article/view/56/
A quote from the above link.
What are the specific challenges of global governance, and what are the first obstacles to overcome?
Because legitimacy depends on closeness between the individual and the decision-making body, the second specific challenge of global governance is its inherent distance, which causes the so-called “democratic deficit” and lack of accountability. In sum, it means fighting the widespread perception that international decisionmaking is too remote, lacking in responsibility, and not directly accountable.
A couple of quotes from Margaret Thatcher that are applicable.
“The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people’s money [to spend].”
Socialists cry “Power to the people”, and raise the clenched fist as they say it. We all know what they really mean—power over people, power to the State.
n.b. – translation in the parlance of “the physics”: Problem solved “before it’s too late!”
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…..
______________________
The best place to check is under “Green houses” as in growing plants.
“….while concentrations of 5000 ppm can pose health dangers to those working….”
(over 2000 ppm can be toxic to plants)
http://books.google.com/books?id=eEy9ftsCqtoC&pg=PA63&lpg=PA63&dq=CO2+green+house+tomatoes+5000+ppm&source=bl&ots=dr_QBcg7pJ&sig=vOCfjFGP-Ome4uFnQboBL6XeKYQ&hl=en&ei=F5G2TviwHKu_2QWfhPjMDQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CBsQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false
Or check under mines:
“….threshold in mine-safety regulations is 5000 ppm of carbon dioxide….”
http://intranet.wcastl.org/sites/wsmith/upload/4914610a2dea4.PDF
Oh btw, that’s an honest question; I’m not a believer or a denier, or even a sceptic, I’m just ignorant.
I think I figured it out!
Hansen living in NYC, I bet he doesn’t garden, therefore he can continue to live in denial (snicker)
Here in the south side of Houston I had a bumper crop of okra this year. Four seeds and a continuous supply of okra once the blooms started. Had to cut the okra every day or so. Slowed down now…cooler weather and shorter days. Probably time to cut down the plants and wait til next year.
Might try tomatoes next year.
My self-confidence is reaffirmed — those numbers are generally what my gut instincts say w/o looking at numbers here in the mid-Atlantic states. Coldest times were the late 70s w/the brutal winters. Warmest were the “El Nino” years of the 90s to early 00s w/the mild winters. Winters have generally cooled down since ~2002 & summers temps pretty steady. The only things truly remarkable during this period were the record wet years of 1996 & 2003, very dry yrs in 1988 & 2002 and near or record single-snowstorms in 1993,1996, 2003 & 2010.
The highest temp in near 8 yrs here (rural) has been 98F (several times) and the lowest -8F (next morning after the 36″ 2010 snowstorm).
mrrabbit says:
November 5, 2011 at 10:57 pm
That sounds so weird here in New England. In Keene NH (SW corner) shoppers lock their cars during zucchini season lest they come back and find a bag of zucchinis in the passenger seat.
Extra tomatoes (in years there are extra tomatoes) don’t make it further than the neighbors.
Maybe this article should be part of the EPA lawsuit.
http://junkscience.com/2011/11/03/judges-for-endangerment-litigation-identified-epa-to-win/
Jumping in on the Tomato bit: I did not grow tomatoes this year, In the three going on four years of my return to Ne Oregon, I have had one, yes one successful planting-that was an Heirloom cherry tomato. I bragged to my wife as to the Tomato growing in NE Oregon, Unlike Coos Bay,
where you have a easier time growing fungus, Well, our climate seems to favor cool nights,
something not good for tomato maturity. In the 80’d and 90’s we had hot weather 100F for days in a row- we in La Grande, haven’t had one 100F day since 2009. at least in the south part of
La Grande, the Airport is a different story. out in the flat, valley it is both warmer and colder.
We have a noticeable UHE here as due to the Hospital, two big(for the area) schools and
the University all have big physical plants. within .5 miles of the town center. That and a U.P.
Rail yard for more area that can hold heat, and the local reactivated sawmill…
So much for Prof. Curry who was celebrated a reborn skeptic but now has reemerged as a reborn
warmist.
I guess, the only positive trend, summers east of the Mississippi, are where the jet stream funnels the warm air up from the Gulf…….
It looks like the crystal balls the warmers have been using for predictions are about to freeze off the brass monkey.
But their attaching everything under the sun to a global issue needing global solutions indicates the purpose of their efforts.
Pssst, over here, hey buddy, wanna get rich?
Go long on long underwear futures . . . you’ll make a killing!
Re: green tomatoes
Thanks Anthony and mods for not snipping this veggie stuff. I’ve done all the green tomato things – have the T-shirt. Locally was a good apple year and we got lots of free apples. We’ve been drying and freezing several types. And apples (some) keep well in the dark cold garage, often to February or March.
Didn’t mean to slight the actual post. This was a good one. Interesting comments also.
One other climate “proxy” that I’m familiar with is cloudiness.
According to one that spends a lot of time outside, they have increased their coverage. Ground-based astronomy has had a decreasing yield for the last 10 years, in my recollection.
I’m absolutely sure that cloud cover reduces the temperature during the day. At night, I never felt any warming when I had to pack my telescope and go home.
Temperatures in the US are certainly down over the last decade and particularly in the last few years. Temperatures were down about 1.5C from 2000 to 2009 but are back up about 0.5C since then. The trendline is -0.38C per decade.
http://img521.imageshack.us/img521/4138/usanom20002011.png
I’m not sure you can use the ENSO as the explanation because different parts of the US are affected in an opposite manner by the ENSO.
The US south and south-east, for example, is warmer and dryer during a La Nina while the rest of the country is usually colder and wetter during a La Nina. So, the affect of the ENSO depends on how strong the relative impact is regionally.
The ENSO actually has a negative correlation to the “US-as-a-whole” temperature, but will be strongly negative with the south/south-east and strongly positive with the north-west and upper mid-west.
The AMO has more of a direct one-for-one link to US weather.
Excellent piece Anthony. Thanks!
Lazy Teenager:
The long term trend of CONUS, for 100 years, is no warming nor cooling. There have been variations within that period, however, the trend is flat.
Is that long enough for you?
Cooling in the US explains what is happening to the US empire. Same thing happened to the Romans.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2057930/Did-Romans-leave-London-grim-British-weather.html
Earlier this year, scientists revealed how climate change could have been responsible for bringing down the Roman Empire. Researchers studied ancient tree growth rings to show links between climate change and major events in human history such as migrations, plagues and the rise and fall of empires. They discovered that periods of warm, wet weather coincided with period of prosperity, while droughts or varying conditions occurred at times of political upheaval such as the demise of the Roman Empire.
To match the environmental record with the historical one, researchers looked at more than 7,200 tree fossils from the past 2,500 years. The study, published in the journal Science, said: ‘Increased climate variability from AD 250 to 600 coincided with the demise of the Western Roman Empire and the turmoil of the Migration Period. ‘Distinct drying in the third century paralleled a period of serious crisis in the western Roman Empire marked by barbarian invasion, political turmoil and economic dislocation in several provinces in Gaul.’
I have been mentioning this for the past couple of years in the comments here. Too bad this story didn’t wait a week till October 2011 was in the database. That should happen in the next week or so.
While CONUS certainly isn’t the entire globe, it is a pretty darn good sample of 1/4 of it (Northern half of the Western Hemisphere). It is pretty hard to have “global” warming while roughly 1/4 of the globe is cooling at this rate.
ferd berple says: November 6, 2011 at 8:54 am
Interesting article, Ferd, but although they may have a very large collection of specimens, they are drawing unwarranted conclusions. What is needed is a comparison with skeletons from the same period in different parts of the Empire: North Africa, Palestine, Illiria, Gaul, Spain and Rome itself. The empire had a high volume of trade (Rome’s grain mostly came from North Africa, if I recall correctly) and the diseases noted in the article could have been the result of general life style choices or economic decline. I’ve always been pretty sure that climate played a role in there somewhere, but they are drawing conclusions about climate change with a really inadequate methodology. And keep in mind that they were gauging climate from tree-rings. I’m getting really jaded, I know, but the mention of tree-rings for anything these days causes me to flop over into deep suspicion mode.
But NCDC does allow a “most recent 12 months” plot. It can be kinda hidden, you might have to scroll down the pick list as it is the last item on the list. That will show temperatures from October through September of all years through this year. (October’s temperatures will be in the database in a few days and the most recent 12 month will change to an annual period of November to October (instead of January through December for the full ‘annual’)
Pat Michaels was said above to say: “NOAA is predicting an extreme La Nina low in 2012.”
However, http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/analysis_monitoring/enso_advisory/ensodisc.html
says: “Thus, at this time, a weak or moderate strength La Niña is most likely during the Northern Hemisphere winter.” They do mention the CFS.v2 forecast being for a strong La Nina
and the CFS forecast being for a moderate one. This does not sound like NOAA predicting an extreme La Nina.
Hence the name of our group “Minnesotans For Global Warming”