Bishop Hill via correspondent Gras Albert noted this event early today:
![acqua[1]](http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/acqua1.jpg?quality=83)
I looked through the entire satellite record, and couldn’t find any similar event. That meant it was either unique, or indicative of a technology failure like we witnessed with NSIDC when one of their sensor channels gave out. I asked Dr. Roy Spencer if he thought this was real, and he responded with an update, seen below:
Aqua AMSU ch. 5 Bites the Dust
March 25th, 2013By Dr. Roy Spencer
Many people have noted on the satellite temperatures webpage the plunge in temperatures as recorded by AMSU channel 5 on the Aqua satellite. Since it looked pretty suspicious, I decided to investigate.
The following plot shows 3 satellites’ global AMSU5 measurements (Aqua, NOAA-15, and NOAA-18) that I computed this morning from the raw orbit files. The dates run from Feb. 1 through yesterday, March 24:
Clearly, Aqua AMSU ch 5 is now “out to lunch”. The reason why the plunge in Aqua temperatures in the above plot is so much stronger than what is displayed on the daily update website is that the latter shows running 3-day averages, and is only updated through March 23.
We knew that this channel has been slowly failing for a long time, which is why we have not been using it in our monthly updates. We will discuss the possibility of switching to the NOAA satellites on the website, although since the site is NASA-funded, they are reluctant to spend resources on NOAA satellite data. But, given the popularity of the page, we will work something out even if we have to make our own web page.
@-Bob B
“the Eath’s global temperatures have been flat for more than a decade. That is just the sort of thing not predicted by climate change.”
Actually they have risen slightly over the last decade, but the expected rise from CO2 forcings of around 0.14degC is swamped by very large ENSO variation nearly an order of magnitude bigger. That is an effect which is absolutely predicted by climate change science. It has been an oft repeated mantra that short term variation will obscure the small long term trend. When Hansen predicted warming in the late 80s he was quite explicity that it would be after 2000 before the warming would be apparent above the shor-term variation.
That energy is continuing to accumulate is confirmed by the recent findings of increasing ocean heat content, the sea level rise, the loss of land based ice, the shrinking spring snow cover, ongoing droughts, extreme storms……
izen, extreme storms and ongoing droughts are created by weather patterns, not by “accumulated energy”. Energy does not “accumulate” except in the ocean, and now we know that’s mostly the deep ocean where that accumulation is simply irrelevant (warms very cold water very slightly). The energy of the earth’s atmosphere fluctuates greatly in local areas and for the planet as a whole. Weather is mainly a cause of those energy fluctuations (far exceeding any by CO2) and not an effect.
Izen, you are joking right?? Hansen’s 1988 prediction is way beyond falsified for scenario A. Only the tin foil hat AGW alarmists still treat that with any trust. But it’s actually funny you are almost admitting the natural variations are way above what the CO2 signature is suppose to be? History has shown us that of course, that the natural variability is large.
The Ocean heat content since modern measurement systems were deployed is also no where near the modeled values.
http://bobtisdale.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/01b-argo-era-model-data.png
Betapug says:
Hmmm…. wonder who funds NOAA and NASA?
Unfortunately, the answer is, the Federal Reserve, by buying bonds with IOU’s.
Rob says:
March 26, 2013 at 6:35 am
The “Year to Date” CET negative anomaly will, within several weeks, almost certainly surpass anything seen since the 1880′s. More importantly, the Northern Hemisphere cold is widespread and severe. It will be interesting to see how the Instrumental vs. Satellite data depict this in coming months
————————————————-
Yes, to see if the spread between the two changes will be informative. Izen, there is no increase in weird weather, be it hurricanes, droughts tornados etc. CAGW is now so distorted that they have predicted anything that may happen. More snow, less snow, bigger frogs, smaller frogs, CAGW does it all.
Izen,
The lack of global warming for nearly 2-decades violates every tenant of greenhouse theory. Clearly, another factor or factors must be at work. Also, a decrease in temperature gradient between the poles and tropics must result is less meridional flow, and less climate variability.
The AGW alarmist have, out of desperation, attempted to confuse the public on this.