WUWT Readers may remember in 2006 Al Gore announcing on national television one morning that:
The earth has a fever…
He of course was pushing his book, An Inconvenient Truth as the cure. Now, almost six years later, other symptoms have been reported, including spots, which might be from Chicken Little Pox.
Dr. Clive Best writes in with his findings on The Earth running hot and cold !
He writes: (updated 3/8 to fix some typos and clarify the time period for the map)
There has been quite a debate over at WUWT regarding temperature measurements and temperature anomalies. The AGW crew argue that only anomalies can be relied on to track global warming. These anomalies calculated at each individual weather station are the deltas between the measured temperatures and the mean temperatures over a fixed period – just for that station. The anomalies from ~4000 stations all over the globe are then combined to give one global anomaly, yielding the familiar graph we know and love which shows ~0.6 deg.C rise since 1850. Looking in more detail however we discover that some parts of the world are not warming at all and some are even cooling.
Thus motivated I went off in search of the “hot stations” and the “cold stations” from the Hadley/CRU provided station data.
Here we define “hot stations” as those yielding an average anomaly increase since 1990 > 0.4 degrees. “Cold stations” are defined simply as those with an average anomaly < 0.1 degrees. since 1990. Had/CRU anomalies are relative to the period 1960-1989 so they all measure warming/cooling relative to that baseline.
The map above shows in red the “hot stations” and in blue the “cold stations”. In both cases the larger the point the stronger the warming/cooling. This is an active flash map so you can zoom in by dragging a rectangle, and view the data by clicking on any station, (zoom out by clicking anywhere else).
It immediately becomes obvious that the bulk of observed warming is concentrated in the Northern Hemisphere : Eastern Europe, Russia, central Asia, India, China, Japan, Middle East, North Africa. These are all areas of rapid population increase, development and industrialisation. There is essentially no warming at all in the Southern Hemisphere. Bolivia, Peru, Paraguay and Argentina all appear to be cooling. Even Australia and Zealand are static or cooling.
More at The Earth running hot and cold !
– Clive Best
===============================================================
Hmmm, UHI Much? Maybe there’s a solution:
From the Uranus, 2007
Don’t understand “more cowbell” as it relates to fever? Read this.
Watch the SNL video here (low quality) and a high quality excerpt from NBC here.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Here in Eastern Australia it is the Earth’s runny nose that is giving us problems.
http://www.australianclimatemadness.com/2012/03/flannery-out-of-his-depth-as-flooding-rains-return/
Hmmm…. “Since before 1960” and “after 1960…” I’m not entirely sure that I agree that data from these two time periods are comparable.
Did you find the stations covering the oceans (+70% of the Earth)? The poles? Oh, never mind.
Nice data cut. and Great Sarc. I would think EVERYONE knows Bruce Dickinson. Maybe not. I can picture Gore leading a parade of hippy cow bellers.
I forgot to mention that Al Gore is a hypocrite and a liar. He has at least 2 large houses (one of which has 6 fire places) near the ocean front. I could go on about how his family got rich on Oxidental Oil but I will stop her for now. (He has the ‘carbon footprint’ of King Kong).
I think that both red and blue should be “after” 1960. I hope Anthony clarifies.
REPLY: Pretty sure that’s a typo, checking with Clive – A
From the article:
“The map above shows all stations with an anomaly increase before 1960 greater than 0.4 deg.C in red. The blue points show all those stations with cooling or zero change since 1960.”
Why is the positive anomaly of 0.39 considered cooling? Or am I reading things incorrectly? If this is the case, then I would have to call this a bit deceptive. If not, my bad.
Cheers
JE
Well, according to this report, the sun just sneezed:
http://news.yahoo.com/solar-storm-headed-toward-earth-may-disrupt-power-162508973.html
I loved this bit:
“But for now, scientists are waiting to see what happens Thursday when the charged particles hit Earth at 4 million mph (6.4 million kph).”
There, see, I knew all along that CERN were right and Einstein was wrong 😉
Another triumph for the alarmist mentality and the MSM.
P.S. I think we need to approve some grants to study whether sunspots and/or solar storms are caused by excessive CO2 levels.
damn….it’s from that guy in Europe selling light bulbs as heaters……….
http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/image/0011/earthlights2_dmsp_big.jpg
Two points:
1. I look at the red in NE Asia, and I wonder just how good the pre-1960 data was.
2. Just because there is red in so many NH locations doesn’t mean at all that the cause is CO2.
Would be interesting if someone could overlay that with a map showing population concentrations.
All the Reds are very Blue in the last month.
http://img3.imageshack.us/img3/5851/februarylandtemps.jpg
And the lower troposphere anomalies for February are much lower than the climate model projections so the Earth does not have a fever. It is now getting to a point where a call can be made that the theory is wrong.
http://img827.imageshack.us/img827/8535/ipccforecastsobsfeb2012.png
Anybody else notice the “HADCRUT v4 will fix those deniers/skeptics” meme starting to circulate in the blog comments?
Clearly this type of analysis is just v3ry wrong (/sarc)
Mike Smith says:
March 7, 2012 at 4:48 pm
“P.S. I think we need to approve some grants to study whether sunspots and/or solar storms are caused by excessive CO2 levels.
”
Why of course they are! CO2 is the magic gas and it can do ANYTHING! It can even peel an orange! Heh!
Excellent! I asked about this somewhere about 6 months ago, and got the reply that a ‘warming’ and a ‘cooling’ station could be sited virtually next door to one another (is that microclimate or ‘differential GISS adjustment’?).
So it seemed likely that there were ‘hot spots’ and ‘cold spots’ over the continents. Just blinking at the map, it looks like the warming is concentrated in Eurasia, and has left the ROW well alone.
Not so sure about your explanation though. Parts of E.Europe and Russia are in population decline, and ‘rapid industrialisation’ in this area masks a switch from Soviet-style heavy industry to more consumer-orientated light industry and services.
Also, S. America is still an area of comparatively rapid population and industrial growth, yet is a ‘cold spot’.
There just seems to be something about the N. Hemisphere vs the South, and the Arctic vs. the Antarctic. I’d love to see a simple, comprehensive explanation of this.
John, I think that the stations with warming between .01 and .39 degrees C are excluded. I think some clarification is needed.
if it were uhi then uha and rss would not match the land trend as they both do.
When I read this yesterday, I started clicking on the closer dots, the first I checked was the Monclova Mexico then the Saltillo Mexico sites, very close, yet one red and one blue, then to Google maps, with terrain. Less than 100 miles, both on western sides of a mountain range. I have a hard time believing one is cooling and the other warming, without something like UHI affecting the data, if it were “climate” wouldn’t both be affected?
DAS
John Eggert says:
March 7, 2012 at 4:47 pm
Why is the positive anomaly of 0.39 considered cooling? Or am I reading things incorrectly?
It seems to me that anything between 0.01 and 0.40 is simply not shown by any dot. So ‘slight’ warming is not shown.
Guess what? The earth has a fever, and the only prescription is more government!
Are these figures before or after GISS adjustments?
We all know that GISS data adjustments/manipulations/torturing are essential for any temperature chart/trend/anomaly to be approved by the Team.
And without Team approval where would bad science be?
Is this true or B.S.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2111618/The-new-Atlantis-Entire-Pacific-nation-plans-relocate-rising-sea-level.html.
Enlightenment would be appreciated,
Thank You.
But Mosh said there is no UHI…
davidmhoffer says:
March 7, 2012 at 5:00 pm
Would be interesting if someone could overlay that with a map showing population concentrations.
====================================
David, look here……
http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/image/0011/earthlights2_dmsp_big.jpg
Something I have wondered in relation to UHI is about the spotting of thermometers that goes beyond UHI. I was reading a study about agriculture because gardening is a hobby of mine and was reading about how temperatures can vary by up to 5 degrees (F) and up to 10 in some cases depending on where you plant the crops and the floor beneath them.
This is all old research, and if this is the case, I would think this is a much larger systematic bias then UHI since most thermometers are sited in similar conditions, IE either at airports or for instance around parking lots or grassy fields or perhaps at people’s homes.
I have rarely seen one that is in a hilly location etc or around trees and those that are I would suspect are the outliers that are just thrown out for instance on weather underground as being 10 or more degrees off at times from other thermometers.
Just a hunch, but a systematic bias such as this would be more expected in industrialized countries where the town grows up around a station and the station is never moved. Perhaps its a version of UHI, but the ground is flattened over time to build the city etc, and unlike UHI and direct effects such as A/C vents, its much harder to point a finger at…..