2013 was 4th warmest year in the satellite era
From University of Alabama, Hunstville.
Global climate trend since Nov. 16, 1978: +0.14 C per decade
December temperatures (preliminary)
Global composite temp.: +0.27 C (about 0.49 degrees Fahrenheit) above 30-year average for December.
Northern Hemisphere: +0.27 C (about 0.49 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: +0.06 C (about 0.11 degrees Fahrenheit) above 30-year average for December.
November temperatures (revised):
Global Composite: +0.19 C above 30-year average
Northern Hemisphere: +0.16 C above 30-year average
Southern Hemisphere: +0.23 C above 30-year average
Tropics: +0.02 C above 30-year average
(All temperature anomalies are based on a 30-year average (1981-2010) for the month reported.)
Global map for December:
For the year:
Notes on data released Jan. 3, 2014:
2013 was the fourth warmest year in the satellite era, trailing only 1998, 2010 and 2005, 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. The warmest areas during the year were over the North Pacific and the Antarctic, where temperatures for the year averaged more than 1.4 C (more than 2.5 degrees Fahrenheit) warmer than normal. There were small areas of cooler than normal temperatures scattered about the globe, including one area over central Canada where temperatures were 0.6 C (about 1.1 degrees Fahrenheit) cooler than the 30-year norm.
Global average temperature
(Departures from 30-year norm, degrees C)
1. 1998 0.419
2. 2010 0.398
3. 2005 0.260
4. 2013 0.236
5. 2002 0.218
6. 2009 0.209
7. 2007 0.204
8. 2003 0.187
9. 2006 0.186
10. 2012 0.170
11. 2011 0.130
12. 2004 0.108
13. 2001 0.107
14. 1991 0.020
15. 1987 0.013
16. 1995 0.013
17. 1988 0.012
18. 1980 -0.008
19. 2008 -0.009
21. 1981 -0.045
22. 1997 -0.049
24. 1983 -0.061
25. 2000 -0.061
26. 1996 -0.076
27. 1994 -0.108
29. 1989 -0.207
31. 1993 -0.245
34. 1985 -0.309
Compared to seasonal norms, in December the warmest area on the globe was the northeastern Pacific Ocean, where the average temperature for the month was 4.91 C (about 8.8 degrees F) warmer than seasonal norms. The coolest area was in central Manitoba, near Lake Winnipeg, where temperatures in the troposphere were 5.37 C (almost 9.7 degrees F) cooler than seasonal norms.
Archived color maps of local temperature anomalies are available on-line at:
As part of an ongoing joint project between UA Huntsville, NOAA and NASA, Christy 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 —
Dr. Roy Spencer’s report:
The Version 5.6 global average lower tropospheric temperature (LT) anomaly for December, 2013 is +0.27 deg. C, up from +0.19 deg. C in November (click for full size version):
The global, hemispheric, and tropical LT anomalies from the 30-year (1981-2010) average for the last 12 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 +0.160 +0.226 +0.020
2013 12 +0.265 +0.273 +0.257 +0.057
Splice says:
January 6, 2014 at 11:17 am
“@RichardLH
Science has many bases and the internet blog is not the right place to do scientific discussions.
That’s why I’m here in another purpose – to change my knowladge (that warming didn’t stop) into money. I just need to find someone who believes warming stopped – unfortunately it seems a lot of skeptics claims the warming has stopped but hardly any of them believes their own claims.”
So it would appear. Ah well, why do you think a bet has any scientific merit? Next card red or black? Whatever.
I do not know if it has stopped rising or not. Nor does anyone else (including you). But there ought to be at least some scientific basis for your convictions. Seems not. Next card red or black is the best you can do.
@richardscourtney
You didn’t read my proposition – I proposed a written agreement. More details after e-mail contact, but generally my idea is: both of us buy a bar of gold and we put them in some bank safe and sign an agreement. After result of bet is known the winner takes both bars.
And you are presenting someting of this kind:
“I know for certain fact that there is no evidence for the Earth being a globe – none, zilch, nada. But I’m not a gambler, so I won’t take your bet that moving always west we will get back to the place we started”
This kind of behaviour is typical for someone who doesn’t believe their own claims.
The other clue that you don’t believe your own claims is the lack of link to IPCC’s document that there was a pause (probably you don’t belive such a document exists, but you claim it exists).
And the last clue is you didn’t noticed the article http://suyts.wordpress.com/2013/12/19/shock-news-global-warming-bypasses-even-the-first-100-meters-of-ocean/ is extremally ignorant.
@davidmhoffer
The Earth was cooling since Holocene climatic optimum about 7000 years ago until about the begin of industrial era (in all reconstructions probably). And this cooling is consistent with changes in obliquity+eccentricity+longitude of perihelion+precession of Earth and its orbit.
@RichardLH
I don’t see any regular cycle in the reconstructions. Just some irregular changes in general downward trend since 7000 years ago until about the begin of industrial era and similar irregularities in the upward trend after.
Splice,
Are you Scott Supak?
If not, why act like a Supak? One is more than enough for this troubled world we live in.
Splice says:
January 5, 2014 at 2:08 pm
“We simply have the signal which constantly goes up and the noise which in some periods goes up and in other periods goes down. As we are able to observe only the sum of them we see “pause” in periods when noise goes down.
That’s why I’m ready to bet we will have a record after next future El Nino (as ENSO is the largest source of the noise).”
Since when is noise solar energy distributed around ocean surface currents from the natural ENSO build up and disperse cycle? It is not noise, it it how the planet moves the build up of too much energy in the tropics to the rest of the world. It is natural thermostat that prevents the tropics warming too much. The reason why during major ice ages the tropics hardly changed and only cooled about 1c.
http://morriscourse.com/elements_of_ecology/images/ocean_currents.jpg
http://www.plantsciences.ucdavis.edu/plantsciences_Faculty/Bloom/CAMEL/Art/CurrentsOcean.jpg
The ocean currents above show how energy from the E equatorial Pacific move west with trade winds and spread into 3 different directions from the W equatorial Pacific. One warm current moves N toward the Arctic, the other moves S towards Antarctica and the main one moves energy towards the Indian ocean which joins surface currents that eventually reach the tip of South Africa and move up the Eastern side of North and South America until reach Europe and finally the Arctic.This is how the planet naturally removes energy from a hot tropically region preventing it from positive feedback.
Only surface ocean water cant last that long before cooling can it? Yes it can and does because the surface ocean current can be at least 200m deep.
The diagram below shows how the warming in E equatorial Pacific formed back in 1997 below the surface.
http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/GODAS/mnth_gif/xz/mnth.anom.xz.temp.0n.1997.04.gif
How can it be noise when it causes a step up roughly half of the original El Nino in global temperature rise. Then stays flat with maybe a very slight cooling trend until the next strong El Nino appears. This shows that global temperatures are only rising when a strong El Nino occurs. When there isn’t one, global temperatures remain generally flat like recent years since the last strong El Nino back in 1997/1998.
http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut3gl/from:1982/plot/hadcrut3gl/from:1997.5/trend/offset:-0.05/plot/hadcrut3gl/from:1987/to:1996.5/trend/offset:-0.05
The strong El Nino back in the early 1980s would have been larger on global temperatures if it had not been for a major volcanic eruption back then.
Splice says:
January 6, 2014 at 12:43 pm
“@RichardLH
I don’t see any regular cycle in the reconstructions. Just some irregular changes in general downward trend since 7000 years ago until about the begin of industrial era and similar rregularities in the upward trend after.”
Interesting. So downwards to 1840ish and then upwards since is the best you can do.
CO2 responsible for all the rise but none of the fall.
How I wish I could see things so clearly. Scales have dropped from my eyes. It is all CO2 based, I mean, what ELSE could it possibly be?
@RichardLH
“Next card red or black? Whatever.”
I see it differently. The cards are semitransparent and everyone who sees well enough sees the next few card are red. But it’s ideologically and financially inconvinient (especially for some very ritch lobbys) that these cards are red. So there are generally four groups of people:
– those who see cards are red and say they are red
– those who see cards are red but say “I know for certain fact that there is no evidence for cards being red”
– those who don’t see well enough but predend they see well
– those who don’t see well enough and admit they don’t
That’s why no group wants to take a bet the person from the first group proposes.
Splice:
Stop procrastinating.
You want to make a bet but you have posted several lies and you refuse to reveal your identity .
I repeat, ARE YOU BASED IN NIGERIA?
Richard
Matt G:
re your post containing good information at January 6, 2014 at 1:13 pm.
Splice has repeatedly asserted that he/she/they/it does not want any information but only wants to place a spurious bet.
Obviously, this anonymous liar is a scammer. So, providing information (about ENSO effects or anything else) to this crook is pointless. He/she/they/it will continue to ignore all information but will continue posting nonsense until some gullible fool agrees to be scammed by accepting the spurious bet.
The crook is behaving as internet scammers usually do; i.e. attempt to drive away any who are not potential victims while persistently offering the fraud to everybody else in hope of gaining a victim.
Richard
Mods:
I made a post which went to moderation probably because it used the f—d word. This is a resend with that word replaced by con.
=============================
Matt G:
re your post containing good information at January 6, 2014 at 1:13 pm.
Splice has repeatedly asserted that he/she/they/it does not want any information but only wants to place a spurious bet.
Obviously, this anonymous liar is a scammer. So, providing information (about ENSO effects or anything else) to this crook is pointless. He/she/they/it will continue to ignore all information but will continue posting nonsense until some gullible fool agrees to be scammed by accepting the spurious bet.
The crook is behaving as internet scammers usually do; i.e. attempt to drive away any who are not potential victims while persistently offering the con to everybody else in hope of gaining a victim.
Richard
Nope. The amended version went to moderation, too. This post will discern if it is me being moderated.
Thanks mods. My resend and check post can both be binned.
Richard
Splice says:
January 6, 2014 at 1:40 pm
whatever.
So please, please enlighten us with your deep knowledge about how to see through the impenetrable mist that us poor ignoramus live in.
We all wish to understand your clarity of vision.
@Matt G
Noise is somenthing that is observed but is not a signal. Sources of noice could be various, ENSO is one of them in this case.
And more steps could be generated this way: http://www.skepticalscience.com/graphics/Escalator_2012_500.gif
@RichardLH
This blog is not a right place to discuss about how changes of obliquity+eccentricity+longitude of perihelion+precession of Earth and its orbit caused downward trend which started 7000 years ago and how it changed to upward. There are beter places to do that. As I’ve written I am here to propose a bets not to learn or teach.
Splice says:
January 6, 2014 at 2:26 pm
“As I’ve written I am here to propose a bets not to learn or teach.”
Or be civil either.
So it’s all down to orbital cycles. Long live the orbital cycle. Been proposed by much better educated and informed people than you. And in a much more interesting fashion.
Friends:
At January 6, 2014 at 2:26 pm Splice again says:
I write to again warn.
DO NOT BE TAKEN IN BY THE LIAR:
ANY BET OFFERED BY AN ANONYMOUS LIAR CAN ONLY BE A CON.
‘HEADS YOU LOSE, TAILS YOU DON’T WIN’.
Richard
@richardscourtney
My initial proposition to meet bring gold bars put them into safe and sign an agreement is to do it in London UK, but other places (or other agreement conditions) are possible too. Details negotiations by e-mail.
@RichardLH
The source I know next decade’s temperatures will be higher is similar from which I now next quarter’s (of year) temperatures will be higher (in Europe and North America). Mechanism of thermal energy transmision which will cause that is just simplier in the latter. Internet blog is not the right place to lern or theach about details of these processes.
@RichardLH
Downward trend which took place from 7000 to about the beginning of the industrial era was driven (according to the most of the evidences) by orbital cycles. It doesn’t mean the other trends that could be identified were/are driven this way too [identically one person died because of AIDS doesn’t mean other one that died, died this way too].
Splice says:
January 6, 2014 at 3:08 pm
Blah, blah
Splice says:
January 6, 2014 at 2:26 pm
The signal has been warming since the Little ice age and you fail yet again to address why I have shown most of the warming in your linked graph is ENSO related. The issue is why is 0.5c warming of that trend is noise, when I have shown the 0.5c out of the total 0.6c rise is ENSO related?
http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/gistemp/to:1970/plot/gistemp/to:1970/trend
What caused this?
How long until noise becomes signal? You claim I have talked about noise when ironically it covers virtually all of the rise in your linked graph.
richardscourtney says:
January 6, 2014 at 1:58 pm
richardscourtney says:
January 6, 2014 at 2:52 pm
Thanks, think your right..
The problem with Splice is that he is putting words in skeptic’s mouths, and then daring us to back up the things that we never said with a bet saying that what we never said would happen, would. He seems to think he wins either way. If we don’t bet with him, he can claim we won’t put our money where our mouth is. That we’ve attempted to point out to him what our position actually is, but he doesn’t want to discuss that. He’s not here to learn, by his own admission, and he’s only here to propose a bet that is defined in a manner to his liking.
This is a fairly new incarnation of troll strategy in my experience, but that might just be me. Bottom line is that, confronted with facts and logic, the trolls retreat to a definition too narrow to be useful in any discussion. 97% of climate scientists say…. Your opinion doesn’t count unless its been published in a journal… Same strategy, just a different version. The only way the warmists can win the debate is by defining the terms of the discussion, and this is just a blatant attempt to do that.
davidmhoffer says:
January 6, 2014 at 3:19 pm
“Bottom line is that, confronted with facts and logic, the trolls retreat to a definition too narrow to be useful in any discussion.”
Took forever to finally get at what he was basing his shouting on. Got there in the end. Now just blah, blah as far as I a concerned.
https://twitter.com/RobMeekel/status/420281283969683456/photo/1
I graphed this satellite data today (lower graph) and posted it on WUWT twitter to show how utterly ridiculous this comment about warmest year ever is compared to reality, the global climate and equipment margin of error. I chose 14°C as the “global temperature” as I could not find what the actual amount is. I chose the y axis as -65°C to +40 as most of the globes temperatures fall within that range and used the “calculated” data that was posted for 1979 to 2013. As I thought it looks ridiculously flat for the statement “4th warmest winter”
Of interest is the top graph where I adjusted the pre Aqua satellite data UP 0.3°C to see what the line looks like. Again an alarmingly flat trend line. If you look at the data pre Aqua it trended at -0.1°C and post Aqua it trended +0.2°C, this why I wanted to see an adjustment up for the pre Aqua satellite data. FYI Aqua has thrusters to maintain its elevation that effects temperature readings. Elevation readings are effected at a rate of 7°C /km according to websites.
@davidmhoffer
There exist ‘sceptics’ that claim there is no such things like Greenhouse Efect nor Greenhouse gases
There exist ‘sceptics’ that claim increase in CO2 concentration in the last two centuries is caused by volcano emissions not fossil fuel burning
There exist ‘sceptics’ that claim there was no CO2 concentration grow in the last two centuries
There exist ‘sceptics’ that claim the average temperatures didn’t change in the last two centuries
There exist ‘sceptics’ that claim IPCC published documents that warming has stopped (but couldn’t link such a document)
etc.
I’m really not interested to learn which one of you accepts which set of those claims and which of them rejects.
I just want to earn some money from people who belive that the warming have stopped.
@RichardLH
Yes. Internet blog is not a place for scientific discussions. There are better places to do that. I came here to find someone to bet with. I’ve written that many times. It seems some people are not able to understand this simple thing.
@Splice
And there exist alarmist whose faith is so strong they tell everyone they have no need of learning or of education.
Splice:
At January 6, 2014 at 4:07 pm you write
Bollocks!
I completely understand your “simple thing”. You are attempting a scam.
I again warn people to avoid your so-called bet, and I again ask if you are operating out of Nigeria.
Richard