UAH Global Temperature Report: 2012 was 9th warmest

By Phillip Gentry, UAH

Globally, 2012 was ninth warmest of the past 34 years; In the U.S., 2012 sets a new record high temperature Global climate trend since Nov. 16, 1978: +0.14 C per decade December temperatures (preliminary)

2012 LT Anomaly

Global composite temp.: +0.20 C (about 0.36 degrees Fahrenheit) above 30-year averagefor December.

DECEMBER 2012

Northern Hemisphere: +0.14 C (about 0.25 degrees Fahrenheit) above 30-year average for December.

Southern Hemisphere: +0.26 C (about 0.47 degrees Fahrenheit) above 30-year average for December.

Tropics: +0.13 C (about 0.23 degrees Fahrenheit) above 30-year average for December.

November temperatures (revised):

Global Composite: +0.28 C above 30-year average

Northern Hemisphere: +0.30 C above 30-year average

Southern Hemisphere: +0.27 C above 30-year average

Tropics: +0.17 C above 30-year average

(All temperature anomalies are based on a 30-year average (1981-2010) for the month reported.)

Notes on data released Jan. 3, 2013:

tlt_update_bar-3

Globally, 2012 was the ninth warmest year among the past 34, with an annual global average temperature that was 0.161 C (about 0.29 degrees Fahrenheit) warmer than the 30-year baseline average, according to Dr. John Christy, a professor of atmospheric science and director of the Earth System Science Center at The University of Alabama in Huntsville. 2012 was about three one-hundredths of a degree C warmer than 2011, but was 0.23 C cooler than 2010.

Eleven of the 12 warmest years in the satellite temperature record have been been since 2001. From 2001 to the present only 2008 was cooler than the long-term norm for the globe. Despite that string of warmer-than-normal years, there has been no measurable warming trend since about 1998. The long-term warming trend reported in the satellite data is calculated using data beginning on Nov. 16, 1978.

1979 through 2012

Warmest to coolest

1.  1998    0.419

2.  2010   0.394

3.  2005   0.260

4.  2002   0.218

5.  2009   0.218

6.  2007   0.202

7.  2003   0.187

8.  2006   0.186

9.  2012   0.161

10.  2011   0.130

11.  2004   0.108

12.  2001   0.107

13.  1991   0.020

14.  1987   0.013

15.  1995   0.013

16.  1988   0.012

17.  1980  -0.008

18.  2008  -0.009

19.  1990  -0.022

20.  1981  -0.045

21.  1997  -0.049

22.  1999  -0.056

23.  1983  -0.061

24.  2000  -0.061

25.  1996  -0.076

26.  1994  -0.108

27.  1979  -0.170

28.  1989  -0.207

29.  1986  -0.244

30.  1993  -0.245

31.  1982  -0.250

32.  1992  -0.289

33.  1985  -0.309

34.  1984  -0.353

(Degrees C above or below the long-term norm.)

While 2012 was only the ninth warmest year globally, it was the warmest year on record for both the contiguous 48 U.S. states and for the continental U.S., including Alaska. For the U.S., 2012 started with one of the three warmest Januaries in the 34-year record, saw a record-setting March heat wave, and stayed warm enough for the rest of the year to set a record.

Compared to seasonal norms, March 2012 was the warmest month on record in the 48 contiguous U.S. states. Temperatures over the U.S. averaged 2.82 C (almost 5.1° Fahrenheit) warmer than normal in March; the warmest spot on the globe that month was in northern Iowa. The annual average temperature over the conterminous 48 states in 2012 was 0.555 C (about 0.99 degrees F) warmer than seasonal norms.

Compared to seasonal norms, the coolest area on the globe throughout 2012 was central Mongolia, where temperatures averaged about 1.39 C (about 2.5 degrees Fahrenheit) cooler than seasonal norms. The warmest area was north of central Russia in the Kara Sea, where temperatures averaged 2.53 C (about 4.55 degrees Fahrenheit) warmer than seasonal norms for 2012.

Compared to seasonal norms, over the past month the coldest area on the globe was eastern Mongolia, where temperatures were as much as 4.55 C (about 8.19 degrees Fahrenheit) cooler than seasonal norms. The “warmest” area was off the coast of the Antarctic near South America, where temperatures averaged 3.79 C (about 6.82 degrees Fahrenheit) warmer than seasonal norms for December.

Archived color maps of local temperature anomalies are available on-line at:

http://nsstc.uah.edu/climate/

The processed temperature data is available on-line at:

vortex.nsstc.uah.edu/data/msu/t2lt/uahncdc.lt

As part of an ongoing joint project between UAHuntsville, NOAA and NASA, John Christy, a professor of atmospheric science and director of the Earth System Science Center (ESSC) at The University of Alabama in Huntsville, and Dr. Roy Spencer, an ESSC principal scientist, use data gathered by advanced microwave sounding units on NOAA and NASA satellites to get accurate temperature readings for almost all regions of the Earth. This includes remote desert, ocean and rain forest areas where reliable climate data are not otherwise available.

The satellite-based instruments measure the temperature of the atmosphere from the surface up to an altitude of about eight kilometers above sea level. Once the monthly temperature data is collected and processed, it is placed in a “public” computer file for immediate access by atmospheric scientists in the U.S. and abroad.

Neither Christy nor Spencer receives any research support or funding from oil, coal or industrial companies or organizations, or from any private or special interest groups. All of their climate research funding comes from federal and state grants or contracts.

— 30 —

Advertisements

  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of

And as I always provide here on those monthly TLT update posts, here’s a link to the preliminary global and NINO3.4 sea surface temperature update for December 2012:
http://bobtisdale.wordpress.com/2012/12/31/preliminary-december-2012-sea-surface-temperature-anomaly-update/
Happy New Year to all.

kelly

With the third graph, if you were to flip it end for end so that the date 2012 would be in the upper LEFT hand corner would the “rate” of warming be the same ? what would it look like if the graph were extended back a few more years ?

tadchem

“December temperatures (preliminary)”?
Apparently they know they will be revised later. If these figures are like the weekly US Unemployment figures, they are pre-skewed for political advantage and will be readjusted later (when not so many people are watching).

beesaman

0.161 deg C! I’m melting, I’m melting! Hang on, no I’m not…
I’ll just take my pullover off, dang! Now I’m too cold. It’s hard adjusting to these wild temperature fluctuations… (Sarc obviously, well maybe not to Alarmists)

How does UAH account for snow cover?

Arfur Bryant

[“By the end of 2012 the stupid meme of “global warming” stopping will be over.
Some things to note: several ‘skeptics” have stupidly forecast cooling
it [sic] should be interesting to watch them respond as the sun goes quiet and the temps go up.”]
(Steven Mosher, July 6, 2012)
Uh Uhhh! Sorry Steven, wrong guess, would you like to go for double jeopardy where the scores can really change? (With apologies to Bruce Willis…)

“9th warmest of the past 34 years”
So?????

Patrick B

What good are any of these numbers without error bars/analysis? Put in error bars and then tell me whether you can say anything about “rank”.

outtheback

It would be interesting to see how this current 30 year average compares with the average of 1920 to 1950.

8th warmest of the last 10 years.

Werner Brozek

2012 in Perspective so far on Six Data Sets
This has three parts for a number of data sets:
1. Here I give the ranking of various data sets assuming the present ranking stays that way for the rest of the year.
2. Here I give the longest time the slope is flat for a number of data sets.
3. Here I give the longest time for which the warming is NOT significant at the 95% level.
1. Below, I am giving the latest monthly anomalies in order from January on. The bolded one is the highest for the year so far. I am treating all months equally and adding all anomalies and then dividing by the total number of months. This should not make a difference to the relative ranking at the end of the year unless there is a virtual tie between two years. After I give the average anomaly so far, I say where the year would rank if the anomaly were to stay that way for the rest of the year. I also show the warmest year on each data set along with the warmest month ever recorded on each data set. Then I show the previous year’s anomaly and rank.
The 2011 rankings for GISS, Hadcrut3, Hadsst2, and Hadcrut4 can be deduced at the following respectively:
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata_v3/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt
http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/temperature/hadcrut3gl.txt
http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/temperature/hadsst2gl.txt
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/hadobs/hadcrut4/data/current/time_series/HadCRUT.4.1.1.0.annual_ns_avg.txt
The present rankings for UAH were calculated from the revised data due to the new version 5.5. This data can be found at the WFT site.
The rankings for RSS to the end of 2011 can be found at http://motls.blogspot.ca/2012/01/rss-amsu-2011-was-12th-warmest-year-out.html (Others may also be found at http://motls.blogspot.ca/#uds-search-results)
With the UAH anomaly for December at 0.202, the average for the twelve months of the year is (-0.134 -0.135 + 0.051 + 0.232 + 0.179 + 0.235 + 0.130 + 0.208 + 0.339 + 0.333 + 0.282 + 0.202)/12 = 0.16. This would rank 9th. 1998 was the warmest at 0.42. The highest ever monthly anomaly was in April of 1998 when it reached 0.66. The anomaly in 2011 was 0.132 and it will come in 10th.
With the GISS anomaly for November at 0.68, the average for the first eleven months of the year is (0.32 + 0.37 + 0.45 + 0.54 + 0.67 + 0.56 + 0.46 + 0.58 + 0.62 + 0.68 + 0.68)/11 = 0.54. This would rank 9th if it stayed this way. 2010 was the warmest at 0.63. The highest ever monthly anomalies were in March of 2002 and January of 2007 when it reached 0.89. The anomaly in 2011 was 0.514 and it will come in 10th assuming 2012 comes in 9th or warmer.
With the Hadcrut3 anomaly for November at 0.480, the average for the first eleven months of the year is (0.217 + 0.194 + 0.305 + 0.481 + 0.473 + 0.477 + 0.445 + 0.512+ 0.514 + 0.491 + 0.480)/11 = 0.417. This would rank 9th if it stayed this way. 1998 was the warmest at 0.548. The highest ever monthly anomaly was in February of 1998 when it reached 0.756. One has to back to the 1940s to find the previous time that a Hadcrut3 record was not beaten in 10 years or less. The anomaly in 2011 was 0.340 and it will come in 13th.
With the Hadsst2 anomaly for October at 0.428, the average for the first ten months of the year is (0.203 + 0.230 + 0.241 + 0.292 + 0.339 + 0.351 + 0.385 + 0.440 + 0.449 + 0.428)/10 = 0.336. This would rank 9th if it stayed this way. 1998 was the warmest at 0.451. The highest ever monthly anomaly was in August of 1998 when it reached 0.555. The anomaly in 2011 was 0.273 and it will come in 13th.
With the RSS anomaly for November at 0.195, the average for the first eleven months of the year is (-0.060 -0.123 + 0.071 + 0.330 + 0.231 + 0.337 + 0.290 + 0.255 + 0.383 + 0.294 + 0.195)/11 = 0.200. This would rank 11th if it stayed this way. 1998 was the warmest at 0.55. The highest ever monthly anomaly was in April of 1998 when it reached 0.857. The anomaly in 2011 was 0.147 and it will come in 13th.
With the Hadcrut4 anomaly for November at 0.512, the average for the first eleven months of the year is (0.288 + 0.208 + 0.339 + 0.525 + 0.531 + 0.506 + 0.470 + 0.532 + 0.515 + 0.524 + 0.512)/11 = 0.45. This would rank 9th if it stayed this way. 2010 was the warmest at 0.54. The highest ever monthly anomaly was in January of 2007 when it reached 0.818. The anomaly in 2011 was 0.399 and it will come in 13th.
If you would like to see the above month to month changes illustrated graphically, see:
http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/wti/from:2012/plot/gistemp/from:2012/plot/uah/from:2012/plot/rss/from:2012/plot/hadsst2gl/from:2012/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:2012/plot/hadcrut3gl/from:2012
2. For the part below, I went from the latest date that data is available on WFT to the furthest date in the past where the slope is a least slightly negative. So if the slope from September is 4 x 10^-4 but it is – 4 x 10^-4 from October, I give the time from October so no one can accuse me of being less than honest if I say the slope is flat from a certain month.
On all data sets, the different times for a slope that is at least very slightly negative ranges from 8 years and 2 months to 15 years and 11 months.
1. UAH: since October 2004 or 8 years, 3 months (goes to December)
2. GISS: since May 2001 or 11 years, 7 months (goes to November)
3. Combination of 4 global temperatures: since December 2000 or 11 years, 9 months (goes to August)
4. HadCrut3: since May 1997 or 15 years, 7 months (goes to November)
5. Sea surface temperatures: since March 1997 or 15 years, 8 months (goes to October)
6. RSS: since January 1997 or 16 years (goes to December) (December is not out yet, but there is no way that it will not be negative to December when it comes.)
RSS is 192/204 or 94% of the way to Santer’s 17 years.
7. Hadcrut4: since December 2000 or an even 12 years (goes to November.)
See the graph below to show it all.
http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut3gl/from:1997.33/trend/plot/gistemp/from:2001.33/trend/plot/rss/from:1997.0/trend/plot/wti/from:2000.9/trend/plot/hadsst2gl/from:1997.1/trend/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:2000.9/trend/plot/uah/from:2004.75/trend
3. For the part below, I went to the following site and determined the longest time that the slope is less than the 95% uncertainty range for various data sets. This indicates for how long the warming is not significant at the 95% level. http://www.skepticalscience.com/trend.php
If you wish to verify any such as RSS for yourself, put in 1990 for the start date; put in 2013 for the end date; click the RSS button; then click “calculate”. The second number needs to be larger than the first number in order to have the possibility for a slope of 0.
For RSS the warming is NOT significant for 23 years.
For RSS: +0.130 +/-0.136 C/decade at the two sigma level from 1990
For UAH, the warming is NOT significant for 19 years.
For UAH: 0.143 +/- 0.173 C/decade at the two sigma level from 1994
For Hacrut3, the warming is NOT significant for 19 years.
For Hadcrut3: 0.098 +/- 0.113 C/decade at the two sigma level from 1994
For Hacrut4, the warming is NOT significant for 18 years.
For Hadcrut4: 0.098 +/- 0.111 C/decade at the two sigma level from 1995
For GISS, the warming is NOT significant for 17 years.
For GISS: 0.113 +/- 0.122 C/decade at the two sigma level from 1996

RHS

Based on yesterday’s Alaska story and the graph which it included, I beg to differ with the following statement:
While 2012 was only the ninth warmest year globally, it was the warmest year on record for both the contiguous 48 U.S. states and for the continental U.S., including Alaska.
The graph http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/alaska_temps.png?w=960&h=666
clearly shows Alaska wasn’t that warm last year compared to many recent years.

Pieter F.

No mention of the cold records last January, including the one that missed the all-time record low for the USA because the measuring device froze?

oldfossil

Out of curiosity, where does the claim come from that there has been no warming in the last 16 years, when the charts on this site’s own Global Temperature Page all show increases from 1996 to 2012?

Are all of these data within two sigmas of the mean? One sigma? Without knowing these parameters, I would guess that none of the 34 years averages are statistically different from the mean.
How about the deltas? Are the anomalies significantly different?

The temperature anomaly known as the ‘Arctic amplification’, as depicted in first illustration has an uncanny resemblance to the distribution of the Earth’s magnetic field
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/GTSD.jpg
Is this a pure coincidence. Possible but unlikely?
Common cause Natural variability?
I would suggest so: http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/NV.htm

Flint

I’m sorry but maybe I’m missing something – why is this temperature comparison limited to the last 34 years? Is it because satellite temperature data have only been available globally for the past 3 decades or so? Can the satellite data be compared to surface measurements so that a trend (or lack there of) can be observed over a longer period of time?

bubbagyro

Mr. Brozek:
Thanks for the analysis. You were answering at the same time I was querying.
G

Pull My Finger

2012 is the warmest year since 2011!

Werner Brozek

Matthew W says:
January 3, 2013 at 9:57 am
“9th warmest of the past 34 years”
So?????

And with 2011 coming in at 10th place and 2008 coming in at 18th place, three of the last five years were not in the top 8. That indicates to me that any warming that may be occurring for whatever reason is certainly NOT catastrophic!

Chris R.

To oldfossil:
The increases are not enough to be statistically significant.

Stevo

Rob Dawg says:
January 3, 2013 at 10:06 am
8th warmest of the last 10 years
Does not that make it the 3rd coldest in the last ten years ???

MarkW

Flint says:
January 3, 2013 at 10:38 am

The problem is that the surface measurements are so bad and so spotty, they you can’t compare today’s surface measurements with those of 30 or more years ago.

WTF

Still below the 15’C that used to be ‘0’ when Hansen started his crusade.

Dale

There was a report in the Herald-Sun yesterday from the Aussie BOM stating that 2002-2012 in Australia was the 5th warmest 10 year period on record and that 2012 wasn’t that warm here. Do you think I can find that article now? Nope, probably removed for being inconvenient.

D Böehm

Stevo says:
“Does not that make it the 3rd coldest in the last ten years ???”
I have often wondered why even scientific skeptics insist on labeling the coldest years of the decade as ‘the 8th warmest of the last 10 years.’ ‘The 3rd coolest’ makes more sense.
As Werner Brozek shows, there has not been any acceleration of global warming. The long term global warming trend has remained at ≈0.35ºC per century. Recently, global warming has stalled.
Despite the rise in harmless, beneficial CO2, the global warming trend since the end of the LIA has remained the same. Therefore, CO2 has had no measurable effect. RIP AGW.

“should be interesting to watch them respond as the sun goes quiet and the temps ”
Uh Uhhh! Sorry Steven, wrong guess, would you like to go for double jeopardy where the scores can really change? (With apologies to Bruce Willis…)
###########################################
Sorry, look at sun spots we are coming close to a max, so the sun has yet to go quiet. See max is when the hump is high and decline is in the valley. We are at least 5 years away from the min.
get it? max is high. min is low. and if we get a long period of quiet ( what I was actually referring to ) then you will really see the solar nuts heads explode.

James Ard

I don’t know Mosher’s real angle, but most of the evidence is pointing to very little human contribution to warming. But as more and more proof comes out, he’s digging his hole deeper and deeper. Is it something personal a “solar nut” said to him?

john robertson

It would aid my comprehension of these anomalies if the actual value in degrees C, of the 30yr mean, was somewhere in the text.I click on the source, can’t locate this number.
Am I looking right at it and not seeing?
I am beginning to regard these anomalies as anoma-lies , as in a deliberate ruse, an information free distraction.
A real number attached to the estimated mean, the error range of this monthly guess, would do wonders for my evaluation of the deviations significance.
Only in government are people expected to nod and agree when they do not understand.
Sorry but anomalies are not information, without the mean being stated.
From what I have gleaned over the Xmas break, from WUWT August 2012 archive, from Richard Courtney 2010 Brief to UK govt, prompted by The Chiefio, Do Temps have a mean?, these discussions of warming and its significance may be pointless bafflegab.
So say it isn’t so and show a statistically ignorant fellow where this number lies.

Is one picture worth more than a thousand words
from the latest IPCC report?
Maybe yes, maybe not
but still it tells a lot .
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/AGT.htm

more soylent green!

@Steven Mosher says: January 3, 2013 at 11:41 am
Why should anybody be comforted that your prediction on the sun was wrong. How does this give us more confidence on your predictions for the climate?

Arfur Bryant

Steven Mosher says: January 3, 2013 at 11:41 am
James Ard says: January 3, 2013 at 11:53 am
Steven, James is right, STOP DIGGING!
James, Steven’s problem is that he constantly bases his argument and pejoratives on the assumption that the admitted radiative properties of a trace gas will have a significant effect on ‘global temperature’. You’ll notice that most of his comments are either about the future according to his world view, or about models. ‘Real’ evidence appears to elude him and yet he tries to hide behind appeals to his own authority. Not entirely what the ‘scientific method’ is all about…

drbob

and so, where does 2012 rank in the Holocene ? … about 8,000th hottest ?

RockyRoad

Is this the best their temperature fudging can do? Or have they become so obvious in their “adjustments” they don’t dare push it any further?

RockyRoad

Steven Mosher says:
January 3, 2013 at 11:41 am


get it? max is high. min is low. and if we get a long period of quiet ( what I was actually referring to ) then you will really see the solar nuts heads explode.

Nobody’s heads are going to explode, Steven–unless you’re directing the next ghastly ad for 350.org or something.
“Get it?” (Just quoting you)
(badabing!)

Gail Combs

James Ard says:
January 3, 2013 at 11:53 am
I don’t know Mosher’s real angle, but most of the evidence is pointing to very little human contribution to warming. But as more and more proof comes out, he’s digging his hole deeper and deeper. Is it something personal a “solar nut” said to him?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
If you believe that CO2 is the climate control knob, the IPPC chart of components of radiative forcing has CO2 and CH4 as the main controllers of the temperature, then you can not give solar any room at the table.
Those who think the sun has some effect on the climate are quite willing to agree there is no single control knob and that water vapor, clouds, oceans and atmospheric effects also play a part.
If you are going to defend the IPCC’s position then you are going to defendthe position that the sun has very little effect on the climate about the same order of magnitude as aircraft contrails.

Please see: AGW Bombshell? A new paper shows statistical tests for global warming fails to find statistically significantly anthropogenic forcing… for perspective. HO HUM…so the 40’s were bitter cold, the 20’s were WARM (anecdotally), so were the 1880’s. SIGNIFICANCE…

RERT

Steve Mosher –
Yes, sunspots are nearing a maximum. A glance at Hadcrut3 with the sunspot record will show you that temperature tend towards low when sunspots are low, though the effect isn’t strong. When sunspots are low, TSI is low, so the lack of direct heating is consistent with the temperature correlation. Also, when sunspots are low, Galactic cosmic ray flux is high because the sun is quiet and the low Solar Field doesn’t shield the planet as much. The cloud seeding effect on albedo makes that also consistent with low temperature on sunspot lows. If we get a long period of quiet, it will be cold (like the Maunder minimum).
Can you explain what you are getting at, if it differs from this?

holbrook

500 million years ago we had 15 times today’s levels of CO2…around 5,700ppm+. Did we burn up or green up? We greened up. As CO2’s ability to create heat diminishes as you stack it up it is clear we do not have an issue, so will the AGW crowd please put away your 34 year old playstations and learn to put things in perspective. Whatever is going on is nothing to do with Carbon Dioxide. It makes plants grow and they can’t get enough of the stuff…lovely jubbly as we say in the UK…yum yum…..got anymore CO2?…as the tomato said.

James Ard

If I’m not mistaken RERT, Mosher thinks the runaway warming from increasing co2 will outweigh any miniscule effects your weak sun may have on temperatures. Proving once and for all that the IPCC has been telling us the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

james griffin

drbob has hit the nail on the head…..2012 is the 8,000th warmest in the Holocene. And thats just this Holocene!

d

Globally, 2012 was ninth warmest of the past 34 years – This means in plain English = It is a Global Cooling trend!!!!

TimTheToolMan

Ouch Mosher writes “get it? max is high. min is low. and if we get a long period of quiet ( what I was actually referring to ) then you will really see the solar nuts heads explode.”
But obviously isn’t aware that a “quiet” sun has been measured to produce much less UV but more Visible. Thats right Mosher, a quiet sun actually heats up the earth at ground level with more energy in the visible ranges…or at least thats the conclusion of Haigh et al
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v467/n7316/full/nature09426.html
So if the sun goes “quiet” and the earth heats up then thats what I’d expect. I’d also expect the stratosphere to cool with any reduced UV, falsely giving the appearance of the “CO2 fingerprint” at work.
Now we dont have enough data to be sure of this by any stretch, but its important to be aware of all the effects that have been measured (ie real data) occurring in our climate.

The current solar high is pretty damn low, Steven, in case you had not noticed!

more soylent green!

TimTheToolMan says:
January 3, 2013 at 1:37 pm
Ouch Mosher writes “get it? max is high. min is low. and if we get a long period of quiet ( what I was actually referring to ) then you will really see the solar nuts heads explode.”
But obviously isn’t aware that a “quiet” sun has been measured to produce much less UV but more Visible. Thats right Mosher, a quiet sun actually heats up the earth at ground level with more energy in the visible ranges…or at least thats the conclusion of Haigh et al
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v467/n7316/full/nature09426.html
So if the sun goes “quiet” and the earth heats up then thats what I’d expect. I’d also expect the stratosphere to cool with any reduced UV, falsely giving the appearance of the “CO2 fingerprint” at work.
Now we dont have enough data to be sure of this by any stretch, but its important to be aware of all the effects that have been measured (ie real data) occurring in our climate.

But that’s not how my models work!
Since the models don’t work this way, this cannot be true.
/snark

oldfossil

Chris R. says:
January 3, 2013 at 10:56 am
To oldfossil:
The increases are not enough to be statistically significant.
Thanks Chris R. for attempting to answer the awkward question in my post, but “statistically [in]significant” isn’t a very satisfying explanation to a skeptic’s skeptic like myself.
In the absence of other replies, may I assume that “16 years of no warming” is just another urban legend that has gained currency through frequent repetition?

D Böehm

oldfossil,
Sixteen years of no global warming is factual. That is what creates such consternation among the alarmist crowd: not only has there been no acceleration of global warming, but for the past 16 years global warming has stopped.
It is hard to argue that AGW matters under these circumstances.

RossP

Werner Brozek @ 10.20. Thank you for that analysis. In point 3 you say you went to a site to calculate the figures but did not actually say what the site was. Could you please give us a link to the site. Thanks.

Werner Brozek

Ross: See
http://www.skepticalscience.com/trend.php
If you wish to verify any such as RSS for yourself, put in 1990 for the start date; put in 2013 for the end date; click the RSS button; then click “calculate”. The second number needs to be larger than the first number in order to have the possibility for a slope of 0.
For RSS the warming is NOT significant for 23 years.
For RSS: +0.130 +/-0.136 C/decade at the two sigma level from 1990

BruceC

It’s there RossP, just above the ‘If you wish to verify’ statement. RSS Trend: 0.130 ±0.132 °C/decade (2σ).
Using their own graph, NO warming for 23 years.
Hehe.