Will the forecasted El Niño later this year produce a new record? Spencer comments.
June 10th, 2014 by Roy W. Spencer, Ph. D.
The Version 5.6 global average lower tropospheric temperature (LT) anomaly for May, 2014 is +0.33 deg. C, up from April (click for full size version):
The global, hemispheric, and tropical LT anomalies from the 30-year (1981-2010) average for the last 17 months are:
YR MON GLOBAL NH SH TROPICS
2013 1 +0.497 +0.517 +0.478 +0.386
2013 2 +0.203 +0.372 +0.033 +0.195
2013 3 +0.200 +0.333 +0.067 +0.243
2013 4 +0.114 +0.128 +0.101 +0.165
2013 5 +0.082 +0.180 -0.015 +0.112
2013 6 +0.295 +0.335 +0.255 +0.220
2013 7 +0.173 +0.134 +0.211 +0.074
2013 8 +0.158 +0.111 +0.206 +0.009
2013 9 +0.365 +0.339 +0.390 +0.190
2013 10 +0.290 +0.331 +0.249 +0.031
2013 11 +0.193 +0.160 +0.226 +0.020
2013 12 +0.266 +0.272 +0.260 +0.057
2014 1 +0.291 +0.387 +0.194 -0.029
2014 2 +0.170 +0.320 +0.020 -0.103
2014 3 +0.170 +0.338 +0.002 -0.001
2014 4 +0.190 +0.358 +0.022 +0.093
2014 5 +0.329 +0.326 +0.333 +0.173
This is the 3rd warmest May in the satellite record:
1998 +0.56 (warm ENSO)
2010 +0.45 (warm ENSO)
2014 +0.33 (neutral)
John Christy thinks the coming El Nino will give us a new temperature record, since it is superimposed on a warmer baseline than the super El Nino of 1997-98. I’m not convinced, since we are in the cool phase of the PDO, which favors weak El Ninos (like 2009-10).
As we finish up our new Version 6 of the UAH dataset, it looks like our anomalies in the 2nd half of the satellite record will be slightly cooler, somewhat more like the RSS dataset….but we are talking small adjustments here…hundredths of a deg. C.
The global image for May should be available in the next day or so here.
Popular monthly data files (these might take a few days to update):
uahncdc_lt_5.6.txt (Lower Troposphere)
uahncdc_mt_5.6.txt (Mid-Troposphere)
uahncdc_ls_5.6.txt (Lower Stratosphere)
Eystein Simonsen (Norway) says on June 10, 2014 at 11:47 am:
“I think it is of academic interest whether —–_—–“
==========
Eystein, Øysrein or Øistein-? ? ?
Tell me again about the significant digits and the error calculations…
Patrick B says:
June 10, 2014 at 1:43 pm
“significant digits and the error calculations”
The standard error of the mean equals the standard deviation divided by the square root of the number of observations. Therefore, as the number of observations increases, the SE approaches zero.
http://ww2.tnstate.edu/ganter/BIO311-Ch6-Eq1.gif
If the GISS and HadCRUT use surface temp.’s only, how do they measure the air temp above the oceans?
glenncz says:
June 10, 2014 at 2:37 pm
“If the GISS and HadCRUT use surface temp.’s only, how do they measure the air temp above the oceans?”
Extrapolation…….
Sorry, that’s facetious. They do measure sea surface temperatures and incorporate those, but the density of sites is highly variable so surface estimates are based on lot of smoothing and spreading out.
At the same time, I don’t think the satellites cover the entire planet either as the poles are not covered. I would estimate the amount, but there are people who know exactly so i will let them fill n the numbers.
glenncz says: “If the GISS and HadCRUT use surface temp.’s only, how do they measure the air temp above the oceans?”
They don’t. They use sea surface temperature data.
Regards
rod leman says: “AGT is only an indicator of global warming it is not necessarily linked. Many other observations must be considered to determine the warming or cooling of the planet. Satellites show the earth is retaining more heat – so, somewhere, it is warming. Probably deep ocean.”
Unfortunately, your claim is not supported by data. The ARGO-era temperature data to the depths of 2000 meters (6550 feet) show the only two ocean basins that are warming are the South Atlantic and the Indian Oceans. The North Atlantic and the largest ocean on this planet, the Pacific, show no warming in more than a decade:
http://bobtisdale.files.wordpress.com/2014/01/nodc-argo-era-vertical-mean-temp-per-basin-to-2013.png
CO2 is said to be a well-mixed greenhouse gas. It’s tough to imagine that it can warm two ocean basins to depths of 2000 meters, but not the others.
The graph is from the post here:
http://bobtisdale.wordpress.com/2014/01/31/open-letter-to-kevin-trenberth-ncar/
Ah – so The Good Lord derives his conclusion from only certain data sets (not UAH). Problem is, its not just UAH that shows his pause is too long (by 6 years), NASA GISS says the same – this time on a 5 year running mean and clearly showing that the rise in temperature since the mid-1990s is outside the measurement uncertainty.
There is no doubt that there has been a pause, but there is also no justification in trying to make it appear longer to prove a pre-determined position.
its not just UAH that shows his pause is too long (by 6 years), NASA GISS says the same
===
You don’t know what you just said…………of course they are the same
James Abbott says: “Ah – so The Good Lord derives his conclusion from only certain data sets (not UAH).”
Of course. That’s the whole point of the exercise. One valid global temperature dataset shows no warming for x-years and y-months. Simple.
James Abbott says: “Problem is…”
There’s no problem. The RSS dataset is a valid dataset. This is a simple exercise. I’m not sure why you’re trying to complicate it.
James Abbott says: “NASA GISS says the same – this time on a 5 year running mean…”
GISTEMP is a totally different metric. RSS TLT is lower troposphere temperature data, which rises well above the surface in the tropics, and GISTEMP is a combination of land surface air temperature measurements and sea surface temperatures. And why, in a discussion of a 17-year+ hiatus presented in monthly format, would you want to introduce the topic of a 5-year running mean filter? Your attempt at redirection doesn’t work.
Latitude
UAH – as per the posting we are talking about, is a satellite based temperature of the global lower atmosphere and the anomaly plot is relative to the baseline period of 1981-2000.
The NASA GISS record is the Global Land-Ocean surface temperature index on a baseline period of 1951-1980
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs_v3/Fig.A2.gif
The temperature analysis produced at GISS is compiled from weather data from more than 1,000 meteorological stations around the world, (more recently) satellite observations of sea-surface temperature, and Antarctic research station measurements, taking into account station history and urban heat island effects
So they are not the same as you believe. They cover different periods (GISS goes back to 1880), are derived by different methods and are on different baselines.
But they do show similar recent trends which conflict with Lord Monckton’s claims.
James Abbott,
That GISS chart is deceptive. It fools the eye because it uses an arbitrary zero baseline. The honest baseline is a trend line.
NikFromNYC shows the difference:
http://img576.imageshack.us/img576/2681/temperaturewithrealbase.gif
If GISS used an honest trend line, there would be nothing scary about the chart you linked to. It would simply show the steady, natural recovery from the LIA.
As you can see, that chart also goes back to the 1880’s. Now if you are yourself honest, you will admit that NASA/GISS is being deceptive in their charts. NOAA does the same, as do USHCN and others.
When the truth is pointed out, we see that there is no reason for alarm, and we see that global warming is natural.
the unusual cyclone activity in the E tropical Pacific, looks like another one is getting its act together now, is taking a toll on that pool of warm water off S Mexican coast – is this the “heat from ocean to air” that is the basis for whatever coming El Nino may develop ? Or, the taking the “head” off the strength of any coming El Nino ? There has been lots of tropical storm activity in this area also.
James Abbott says: “But they do show similar recent trends which conflict with Lord Monckton’s claims.”
I’m not sure why you’re belaboring this. Here’s Christopher Monckton’s latest post:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/06/04/the-pause-continues-still-no-global-warming-for-17-years-9-months/
Here’s the RSS TLT data:
ftp://ftp.remss.com/msu/monthly_time_series/rss_monthly_msu_amsu_channel_tlt_anomalies_land_and_ocean_v03_3.txt
Plot the RSS data for the last 17 years, 9 months and see if you come up with something other than a zero trend. That’s the only way that you could find any conflict with what Christopher has presented.
Christopher’s post was not about GISS LOTI data. It was not about UAH TLT data. It was not about the NCDC land+ocean temperature index. It was not about HADCRUT4 data. It was about RSS TLT. Simple.
dbstealey said, on June 10, 2014 at 10:33 am:
> James Abbott says:
>>…Lord Monckton states as if fact that there has been no
>> warming since August 1996.
> Lord Monckton is exactly right.
The link shows a set of graphs generated by using woodfortrees for how long each of several global temperature datasets have shown global temperature as not increasing. One of them says since 1996. Most of them say starting around the beginning of 2001, and UAH saying lack of warming started in 2004. However I see UAH showing near complete lack of warming starting around the beginning of 2002 or in the 2nd half of 2001.
I was in Mexico city from December through mid February – was about 80f in MEX. I flew back to Wisconsin ATW and it was -10f or so. Few years ago climbed Mount Kilo and Kenya – cold as hell on top and hotter than hell at the bottom…my point being I think to many people who are worried about warming are spending too much time in conditioned environments…they need to get out in the world and get out of mom’s and dad’s conditioned basements. The world is a hell of lot better off now than it was 30 years ago when I started global traveling as a BSME….. As mush as the kids with BSIBD degrees (bachelor of science in basement dwelling) want to control our lives to make us miserable it isn’t going to happen – there are billions of people out there who are pushing back and won’t go back to the cave lives they just left only a generation ago. God bless all those billions of courage’s people and all the hell they have been through. Myself, I’m for fighting with them and not fighting against them. CAGW folks not so much…
Bob Tisdale
The reason I raise it is that these 2 differently derived data sets produce the same trend – showing that there is no 17 year pause, but a 12 year pause. If you look at it on monthly data points, or annual, or the running means, you get the same answer.
dbstealey
I would suggest if you are claiming that “NASA/GISS is lying with charts. NOAA does the same, as do USHCN and others” you might have a problem with being selective.
Plus – neither NASA GISS nor UAH use an “an arbitrary zero baseline”. The zero line is the mean temperature in the base climate period of 30 years. The plots of each month or year show anomalies from that base period mean – its a standard way of looking at changes in climate.
Even though Monckton’s posts say only that according to RSS the world has not warmed for 17-plus years, I see articles in WUWT citing these posts to state as a fact that the world has not warmed for 17-plus years. I think the authors of those articles are overstating their cases for the duration of the pause.
One thing I see as favoring such overstatement is this title for a recent article by Monckton, cited above:
“The pause continues – Still no global warming for 17 years 9 months”
The title does not say that this is according to only one of the two major satellite datasets.
Donald L. Klipstein says: June 10, 2014 at 5:30 pm
“Even though Monckton’s posts say only that according to RSS the world has not warmed for 17-plus years, I see articles in WUWT citing these posts to state as a fact that the world has not warmed for 17-plus years.”
I meant to say, “with or without citing these posts, stating as fact that the world has not warmed for 18 years.”
re: Nit picking. Regardless of 12, 14, 16, 17, etc years in this pause, there is no mechanism to explain why increased CO2 has not been continually producing increasing temperatures. It is assumed the heat is hiding in the oceans yet there is no observation that shows any such transition from the ocean surface to the deeper layers. So that speculation can be rejected for lack of observed movement of this accumulated heat. It is often stated that the anthropogenic heat is buried in natural variation. However that makes no sense. Any AGW proponents want to explain that one?
James Abbott says:
June 10, 2014 at 4:30 pm
===
..you want a bigger shovel
James Abbott says: “The reason I raise it is that these 2 differently derived data sets produce the same trend – showing that there is no 17 year pause, but a 12 year pause…”
Immaterial. Christopher Monckton’s posts relate to a specific dataset and they are not the ones you chose to examine. Additionally, as Roy Spencer noted above, UAH will soon be releasing Version 6 of their TLT data and it will bring the latter period warming more into line with the RSS data.
James, you should read the post on reproducibility. It may help you understand the mistake you are making bringing up a different data set to say that Lord M.’s statement is wrong. His statement is empirically true based on the data set he used. If you were to write your research up, using a different data set, and submit it to a journal as a refutation of Lord M.’s statement, it wouldn’t pass the laugh test. Hell, it might not even get past pal-review.
James Abbott says:
Plus – neither NASA GISS nor UAH use an “an arbitrary zero baseline”…
That is exactly what they do. As you wrote:
The NASA GISS record is the Global Land-Ocean surface temperature index on a baseline period of 1951-1980.
That is an arbitrary baseline, zeroed at a 1951 – 1908 average.
Look at the chart you linked to. Scary, isn’t it? But if you contrast it to the WFT chart I posted showing an even longer term trend, it doesn’t look scary at all. If you wanted to, you could understand what is being done. As Nik quotes Timothy Leary: he who controls your eyes, controls your mind.
You clearly have no understanding of what I was trying to show you. Your confirmation bias is in high gear, so you will only understand the things that fit into your belief system.
================================
Donald Klipstein,
Here is satellite data from 1997. No global warming for 17 years.
Pamela Gray says:
June 10, 2014 at 5:58 pm
+++++++++++++++++++
Yep.
+++++++++++++++++++
Now, look very carefully at the UAH graph above, can you see the imprint of solar activity on the entire series? It’s there. Six months after my total evidence-based epiphany, still patiently waiting for you and everyone else to understand the truth: The Sun causes warming, cooling, and extreme weather events. It’s there. It’s true. Once you understand it, you’ll never go back or wonder why again. Of course it would be just too easy to simply tell you – [ not just you Pamela ] – I want you all to try to discover this yourselves.