UAH v5.6 Global Temperature Update for Nov. 2013: +0.19 deg. C
by Roy W. Spencer, Ph. D.
The Version 5.6 global average lower tropospheric temperature (LT) anomaly for November, 2013 is +0.19 deg. C, down from +0.29 deg. C in October (click for full size version):
The global, hemispheric, and tropical LT anomalies from the 30-year (1981-2010) average for the last 11 months are:
YR MON GLOBAL NH SH TROPICS
2013 01 +0.496 +0.512 +0.481 +0.387
2013 02 +0.203 +0.372 +0.033 +0.195
2013 03 +0.200 +0.333 +0.067 +0.243
2013 04 +0.114 +0.128 +0.101 +0.165
2013 05 +0.082 +0.180 -0.015 +0.112
2013 06 +0.295 +0.335 +0.255 +0.220
2013 07 +0.173 +0.134 +0.211 +0.074
2013 08 +0.158 +0.111 +0.206 +0.009
2013 09 +0.365 +0.339 +0.390 +0.189
2013 10 +0.290 +0.331 +0.250 +0.031
2013 11 +0.193 +0.159 +0.227 +0.018
Popular monthly data files (these might take a few extra days to update):
uahncdc_lt_5.6.txt (Lower Troposphere)
uahncdc_mt_5.6.txt (Mid-Troposphere)
uahncdc_ls_5.6.txt (Lower Stratosphere)
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
it seems to me that ‘the pause’ we have now is no different [except for level] from the pause we had 1979-1996….
Yeah maybe this pause will break the previous pause record……
Temperature change since June 1991 before the Pinatubo eruption impacted temperatures or 22.5 years ago: -0.09C
Why does the CO2 induced warming seem to be so slow to act?
The Earth is doing what the Earth does. It does not obey human-made theories and human-made computer simulations. The answer is 42.
Isvalgaard – Perhaps, but what we don’t know is which way it will go after the pause.
Bill Illis, AGW is hiding deep in the ocean plotting our doom. No one took him seriously when he was so slow to warm the atmosphere so he sits in the cold deep, bitterly waiting for the day he can wreak havoc on puny humans. Trenberth told me so.
The pause may be no different in a strictly mathematical sense to the pause 1979 – 1996, but there have been 17 additional years during which the effects of catastrophic feedback could have made their mark. How many more-or-less consecutive pauses do there need to be before concluding there will be no catastrophe?
The preliminary November sea surface temperature update is here:
http://bobtisdale.wordpress.com/2013/12/02/preliminary-november-2013-sea-surface-temperature-sst-update/
Looking at the plot, we have a relatively flat anomaly then a step change and a flat anomaly. I find it hard to put those data into a theory of CO2 induced warming. Looks like something else is going on. But, I’m a simple-minded chemist, so I don’t understand climatology.
True, on this level, compared to the previous “pause” it does not appear particularly unusual. However, all of the major temperature sets are essentially affinely similar over this period. For those whose records go back longer, there is a definite difference.
I would not be surprised to find out that global warming was arrested back in 1996 and has been held in custody ever since.
Bill Illis, what does 42 mean? Remember you have to make allowances for we dummies.
Also “‘the pause’ we have now” has more co2 in the atmosphere. Some weather watchers claim that it may cool, some say it will warm, time will tell.
Neville: see the following: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phrases_from_The_Hitchhiker%27s_Guide_to_the_Galaxy#Answer_to_the_Ultimate_Question_of_Life.2C_the_Universe.2C_and_Everything_.2842.29
TNist thanks for that. BTW can we read too much into the present global ice extent compared to mean of 1981 to 2010.
Sorry here’s that link. http://sunshinehours.wordpress.com/2013/12/03/global-sea-ice-update-dec-3-2013/
Leif, “it seems to me that ‘the pause’ we have now is no different [except for level] from the pause we had 1979-1996….”
So with your reasoning, i.e. a pause from 79-96 and also 99-13, leaves only 1998 with a warming excursion. Hmmm – wonder why we even call it a pause?
lsvalgaard says:
December 3, 2013 at 4:41 pm
it seems to me that ‘the pause’ we have now is no different [except for level] from the pause we had 1979-1996….
When you put the 2 “pauses” together, the entire period of catastrophic man-made global warming is condensed to what, 5 years?
I really think we should stop calling it the pause and call it what it is…cooling. The US and Canada are freezing. It has even hit the Bahamas. It is 77 in the daytime, 70 at night. I am not complaining but Bahamians are
I know the Warmists aren’t funny, but occasionally one of them comes up with an unintended gem.
….
‘Outgoing New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg told reporters that evidence showing the need for addressing climate change is getting stronger by the day.
“We cannot take our foot off the gas,” he said.’
I make the 30-year trend 0.153 C per decade, the 25-year is 0.146, the 20-year is 0.098, the 15-year is 0.081, the 10-year trend is minus 0.035 C per decade and 5-years is lower still. If global warming is supposed to accelerate out of control, why is the real world doing the opposite? 20 years of data now suggests warming of 1 degree or less this century.
Why are there no error bars ? Surely there are adequate weather balloon etc observational data available to “calibrate” the observation & standard deviation of these satellite values. Is this all data from ONE instrument in ONE satellite ?
Is the signal (rough range +- .6 degrees C) actually distinguishable from the noise ?
This is not likely the case in historical surface station data. Are these data from the same source as those that reported 400+ degree temps in Lake Michigan ? I kind of doubt the certainty of accuracy to .01 degree C displayed in this graph.
Why do we do this kabuki climate theater regardless of the “side” we are on ?
Neville asked: Bill Illis, what does 42 mean?
Neville, it comes from “A Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Universe”. It’s the answer that a computer came to (after many years???) as the answer to the Meaning of Life (IIRC).
IanM
Neville asks about “42”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hitchhiker%27s_Guide_to_the_Galaxy
Bart says: “True, on this level, compared to the previous “pause” it does not appear particularly unusual. However, all of the major temperature sets are essentially affinely similar over this period…”
The wft compilation emphasizes again the importance of the Elephant-in-the-room, the 1998 El Niño. The mother of all wiggles. Any model that can’t fully explain that big a blip is relevant to global climate.
0.19C for November 2013… Ka-ching!
Great! Any value below 0.2C works to bring the anomaly trend down, which has basically flatlined since 1997.
The warmunists are praying to the CO2 gods for an El Nino event to provide a blip to propagandize, however, the PDO entered its 30-year cool cycle from 2008, so any El Nino blip will be lower compared to El Ninos during 30-yr PDO warm cycles and will be followed by colder than average La Ninas..
All joy for the warmunists will be fleeting from here.
How long can this CAGW charade keep going.
CO2 Climate Sensitivity below 2C just isn’t scary and if current OBSERVED trends continue, a CS of less than 1C looks more likely…. Boring.
In a 2009 report, the UN projected it would cost the world economy about $76 TRILLION over the next 40 years to keep CS below 2C with: CO2 taxes, 3rd-World wealth redistribution schemes, wind/solar alternative energy projects/subsidies, CO2 sequestration projects, etc….
How about we spend $ZERO over the next 40 years and live with a CS of less than 1C, which, ironically, would be a net benefit to the Earth in terms of CO2 fertilization, increased crop yields, extended growing seasons, milder winters, lower heating bills, healthier forests, lower food costs, more precipitation, etc…. That’s mo’ bedda.
The CAGW hypothesis is becoming a train wreck.