Roy Spencer's UAH report for March

Considering how much disruption, expense, and hassle has flowed from the fudging of data, it needs to be reclassified legally as a high crime, with extreme sanction. Once a fudger, never trust-worthy again, and better disposed of. I have a little list, there’ll none of them be missed …

From Albert on April 4, 2012 at 4:33 pm:

sunshinehours1, you’re confusing winters in the US with the decadal average temperature for the whole world. And Gail Combs, you’re confusing your own personal experience of cold with the decadal average temperature for the whole world.

You’re going to have to explain what you mean by “whole world”. Northern hemisphere and Southern hemisphere winters are offset a half year. How do you look at global temperatures and pick out winters?
Albert said on April 4, 2012 at 11:28 am:

“The start date of 1979 is at the end of a decade so cold people were worrying about another ice age. It sure is a good thing we’ve warmed up a little since then.”
Haha, not really. Some people might have speculated that another ice age was possible. But the decade was not cold. In the instrumental record of GISTEMP, it was the second warmest decade of all decades up to that point.

NOAA-NCDC datasets, available near the bottom here. Using Land and Sea combined, decades defined from start of xxx0 to end of yyy9. When using monthly figures to derive a yearly amount, in a spreadsheet, I “adjusted” to compensate for the varying number of days in the month, figure * days in the month / days in the year, then summed those numbers for the yearly figure. Oh, and NCDC reported to four decimal places, go figure, so I’m using four as well.
Monthly Northern Hemisphere anomalies
ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/anomalies/monthly.land_ocean.00N.90N.df_1901-2000mean.dat
Decade start year – °C anomaly
1910 -0.2995
1900 -0.2707
1890 -0.2508
1880 -0.1936
1920 -0.1262
1970 -0.0417
1950 0.0032
1960 0.0336
1930 0.0440
1940 0.0791
1980 0.1523
1990 0.3777
2000 0.6300
Northern Hemisphere, from 1880 (record start) to 1979, 1930-9, 1940-9, 1950-9, and 1960-9 were all warmer than 1970-9. Thus 1970-9 was not the second warmest decade on record in the Northern Hemisphere at that point. Heck, it was colder than the preceding four decades!
Monthly Southern Hemisphere anomalies
ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/anomalies/monthly.land_ocean.90S.00N.df_1901-2000mean.dat
Decade start year – °C anomaly
1900 -0.3037
1910 -0.2738
1920 -0.2240
1890 -0.2091
1930 -0.1163
1880 -0.0954
1950 -0.0430
1940 0.0141
1960 0.0389
1970 0.1579
1980 0.3015
1990 0.3953
2000 0.4854
1970-9, warmest Southern Hemisphere decade at that point.
Annual Global anomalies
ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/anomalies/annual.land_ocean.90S.90N.df_1901-2000mean.dat
Decade start year – °C anomaly
1900 -0.2917
1910 -0.2868
1890 -0.2362
1920 -0.1727
1880 -0.1532
1930 -0.0291
1950 -0.0175
1960 0.0350
1970 0.0503
1940 0.0593
1980 0.2199
1990 0.3825
2000 0.5571
1970-9, second warmest decade for the globe at that point.
So in the Northern Hemisphere, where there were more people who lived in more-developed countries naturally taking more interest in Northern Hemisphere temperatures, 1979 ended the coldest decade of the last half century. No wonder people were worried about a coming “ice age”. You have to add in the Southern Hemisphere to get “second warmest”.
To toss it out there, using the separate Annual Global land and ocean datasets, on land the 1970’s were beat by both the 1930’s and 1940’s, for the ocean the 1970’s were warmest.
By Monthlies, NH Land, again the 1970’s were beat by both the 1930’s and 1940’s. NH Ocean, 1970’s were the coldest of the half century, beaten by 1930’s, 1940’s, 1950’s, and 1960’s.
SH Land, 1970’s second warmest, beat by 1960’s. SH Ocean, 1970’s warmest.
So in the Northern Hemisphere, the oceans were getting colder, overall it was colder, scientists and others were worried it was all going to get colder, perhaps with a return of continental glaciations. If it wasn’t for the Southern Hemisphere ocean temperatures pulling up the global averages, the 1970’s would be known as a rather cool time that justified the worries of everything getting colder.
Of course I’m working on “hindsight” here, using current records that have worked in relatively recent Sea Surface Temperature reconstructions into the historical record. Way back then, what was actually known about those SH SST’s and if they even had the records to know the 1970’s really were that warm, is another topic. And how much one can trust such reconstructions given the dearth of historical measurements, is yet another.

If the global temperature is rising from February to March (’12) this does not mean that Greenland must be green again in July. If the global temperature is decreasing from February to March (’11) this does not mean a new Ice Age is coming to our doors. People look precise what is morality wrong as playing throw dice in a pub in a state but no one of the experts have noticed that the cubes have six dots on each of the six planes, so that there is no morality needed, just fun.
Science is to study the whole, the essence of nature. People do not look on the frequencies but only on the highest temperatures or on the lowest on their digital thermometer, as it is a winner game. As eclipses are not coming from eating dragons on the ecliptic, heat oscillations are not coming from gas dragons or ENSO dragons; ENOS makes no heat in Watt. There is no chaos dragon in science, it would mean that nature has no order, but that is impossible. Studying the frequencies in the solar system from millennia to month it is in proper harmony with the global heat flow, measured and given to us by Dr. Roy Spencer. This holds also for the next millennia for free.
http://www.volker-doormann.org/images/uah_temp_4_rghi11.gif
Thanks.
V

Ed, ‘Mr.’ Jones says:
April 5, 2012 at 10:59 pm
What is the smooth, long-period oscillation line representing? I can’t find a label.
Thx.
Dr. Roy Spencer says: “”The 3rd order polynomial fit to the data (courtesy of Excel) is for entertainment purposes only, and should not be construed as having any predictive value whatsoever.”