Northern Winter Nights

Guest Post by Willis Eschenbach 

[See Addendum at the bottom.] [See Second Addendum at the bottom]

I got to thinking about the distribution of the so-called “global” warming. I’d heard that a good chunk of it was due to increasing nighttime minimum temperatures. So I grabbed the Berkeley Earth land-only temperature dataset. It has its problems, and I suspect the overall warming trend is exaggerated, but at least it is internally complete and consistent. I wanted to know both where and when the warming is strongest, and where and when it is weakest. I used the post-1900 data because prior to that the error bars get pretty wide, but the choice of starting point doesn’t make much difference.

For my first subdivision in time and space, I looked at the daytime maximum and the nighttime minimum temperatures by hemisphere. Figure 1 shows the result:

Figure 1. Maximum daytime temperatures (orange/red) and minimum nighttime temperatures (dark/light blue) by hemisphere. Data goes from 1900 through 2014.

This shows that as a hemispheric average, the nighttime minimum temperatures are rising faster than the daytime maximums, and that the northern hemisphere nights are warming the fastest of the four groups.

(I note in passing that while both the northern and southern hemisphere daytime temperatures dropped strongly from about 1945 to 1975, the corresponding drop in the nighttime temperatures is nowhere near as large. No idea why … always more questions than answers, gotta love that, but I digress …)

However, that wasn’t quite what I was looking for. I wanted to know more details about exactly where and when the warming was going on. So I made a couple of movies. Since the fastest warming is in the night-time, here are the century-plus nighttime minimum temperature trends, on a 1°x1° gridcell basis:

Figure 2. Berkeley Earth month-by-month average minimum nighttime temperature trends, in degrees C per decade. 

This is what I was looking for, the details of the location and timing of the warming. The Northern Hemisphere nighttime temperatures are increasing the most during the winter in Siberia and Canada. And similarly, in the Southern Hemisphere the nighttime warming is greatest in the winter, although it is more evenly distributed spatially. Meanwhile, there is little trend change month-over-month in the tropics.

Now, call me crazy, but I don’t recall anyone ever saying “Boy, I sure wish that the February nights in the Yukon were colder” …

What about the daytime maximum temperatures? Figure 3 below shows the days:

Figure 3. Berkeley Earth month-by-month average maximum daytime temperature trends, in degrees C per decade. 

Curiously, or perhaps not curiously, this daytime view shows the same pattern as the nighttime temperatures. The warming is concentrated in the extratropics in the winter.

Conclusions? Well, the most obvious conclusion is that the “global” warming is not global at all. Instead, it is strongest at night in the winter in Siberia and Canada. I’m pretty sure the poor people in Murmansk are not complaining about that …

In addition, there are large regions of the earth where for one or more months of the year, over more than a century the temperatures have actually cooled … the entire southeastern US, for example, is now colder in January than it was a century ago, both during the day and at night. If nothing else, this highlights the complex nature of the climate.

That’s what I see so far, but there’s much more to learn in the movies …

Clear weather today. I’m off to build an outdoor viewing tower so our cat can survey its domain … got to take my shirt off and saw up some wood in the sunshine, we melanin-deficient folks need to get our Vitamin D.

Best wishes to you all, whether you are in sunshine or rain,

w.

Addendum: I was accused in the comments of suffering from  hypo-Europhilia, as evidenced by my Pacific-centered movies. Hey, I’m a tropical South Pacific boy, guilty as charged, so here’s the new movie:

Second Addendum: A commenter asked how well the climate models do at reproducing the patterns shown above. Here are a comparison of four different months (Feb, May, Aug, Nov) of one single GISS-E2-R model run from the KNMI dataset:

I don’t find the agreement particularly compelling, but YMMV.

Data: I got the Berkeley Earth temperature data from the marvelous KNMI site. Click the link entitled e.g. “1833-now: Berkeley 1°” and look down at the bottom of the resulting page for the gridded NetCDF dataset.

PS: I am reliably informed that it is no longer politically correct to refer to so-called “white” people as being “melanin-deficient”, as it implies that something is wrong with them. The new politically approved term is “melanin-challenged”.

My Usual Request: If you disagree with me or anyone, please quote the exact words you disagree with. I can defend my own words. I cannot defend someone else’s interpretation of my words.

My Other Request: If you think that e.g. I’m using the wrong method on the wrong dataset, please educate me and others by demonstrating the proper use of the right method on the right dataset. Simply claiming I’m wrong doesn’t advance the discussion.

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

154 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Barclay E MacDonald
February 23, 2016 12:43 pm

Interesting post as always Willis, but we are still talking temperature changes within 1 degree C with significant range of error. Do we really know anything? What a lucky cat:)

Reply to  Barclay E MacDonald
February 24, 2016 12:33 am

Cats are amazing family members, they love being “observers’ we are planning a “Cat Walk” along the ceiling they already have a climbing post with a landing but they have told us they want a loft!

rbabcock
February 23, 2016 12:44 pm

As always Willis, concise and very interesting. As usual though, the data is suspect. Can you do the same with just the satellite data (if it is available). Would be very interesting to see what it shows for the past 35 years or so as it is more believable.

Reply to  rbabcock
February 23, 2016 4:42 pm

No You cant do it with Satellite data.
1. UAH does not publish temperatures
2. RSS does
HOWEVER, satelllites DONT measure the temperature at the same time every place on the globe
so they have to adjust the data.
RSS adjusts the data to LOCAL NOON. it does this adjustment using a GCM
Hint
This is one reason why people who compare surface and satellite, by simply looking at anomalies dont know what they are doing
Oh ya, Radiosond data is reported in UTC time… so if you want to use that you have more adjusting to do

Bob Boder
Reply to  Steven Mosher
February 24, 2016 5:18 am

Steve/Willis
The largest temperature changes are happening in the areas that are the least populated. What would be the most likely reason for that?

Hugs
Reply to  Steven Mosher
February 25, 2016 9:45 am

What would be the most likely reason for that?

The temperatures at those areas are pretty harsh. So most warming over land has happened where there was very cold to start with.

Reply to  rbabcock
February 23, 2016 4:53 pm
Reply to  Steven Mosher
February 23, 2016 6:07 pm

Undaunted Courage by Ambrose is a terrific chronicle of their expedition.

Frederik
Reply to  rbabcock
February 23, 2016 10:25 pm

i suspect that would take down the scope of the article it handles about a century. (starting in 1900) Satellite data is only available since 1979 which is too short for this…
i would be more interested to see where the urbanization did grow significantly or where the land use has changed dramatically to see the similarities…. sure that it would folow pretty close with the warming hotspots….

Francisco
February 23, 2016 12:47 pm

Let me see if I understand this right. The areas that are more sensitive to climate change are experiencing a bit more marked climate change than the areas that are less sensitive….. Were we supposed to have stable climate? I missed that memo.
I think I understand that what you have presented: in a warming world, the areas where it is colder will warm much faster than the ones where it is warmer, has more humidity, thus more resilient to changes.
Unfortunately, your observations will fall on deaf ears to those that want us to be the culprit for the new normal… or is it worse than the new normal?

Latitude
Reply to  Francisco
February 23, 2016 3:08 pm

“the areas that have the least witnesses to climate change are experiencing a bit more marked climate change”
…strange how climate change is effecting the least populated places on the planet
http://www.populationlabs.com/maps/World_Population_Map.png

Reply to  Latitude
February 24, 2016 9:17 am

Strikes me planet land surface is warming most where it is coldest. Human distribution is inverse. This means the equilibrium functions are working well. Westerlies are evident in the progression of NH hot and cold blobs.
Since they are working well the result will be the same regardless the source of the warming.
Now, if we could only figure out why it is warming…
This is a great piece of work, Willis.

Michael Carter
February 23, 2016 12:47 pm

Nice work but pray tell me the number and distribution of locations where minimum nighttime temperature was recorded prior to (say) 1960? Global records? Yea right!

Reply to  Michael Carter
February 23, 2016 4:51 pm

Its actually NOT minimum nightime. Its the minimum during the 24 period whenever that occurs.
Daily records go back to the early 1800’s
Even Lewis and clark recorded daily temps.. They “calibrated” their thermometers as well using the boil and freeze method

RACookPE1978
Editor
Reply to  Steven Mosher
February 23, 2016 5:29 pm

Steven Mosher

Even Lewis and Clark recorded daily temps.. They “calibrated” their thermometers as well using the boil and freeze method

Did Lewis and Clark use an elevation/atmospheric correction for their freeze/boil checks? They did not know the altitude of the mountains they were passing through, only the atmospheric pressure. And no calibration elevation until they got back to near- sea level in Oregon the second winter.

Reply to  Steven Mosher
February 24, 2016 12:39 am

That’s correct. minimum temperatures typically occur shortly after dawn when warming from incoming solar radiation exceeds cooling from OLWR.
It’s my contention that a significant part of minimum temperature warming results from increased solar radiation at the surface in the early morning resulting from decreased air pollution and lowlevel aerosol seeded clouds, from decreased vehicle pollution, crop residue burning, domestic burning of wood and coal, etc. This effect would be strongest at mid to high latitudes in winter due to the low angle of early morning sunlight at this time. And note the same cause would account for the 1945 to 1975 daytime cooling.
Australian BoM temperature data taken at fixed times supports this explanation with most warming occurring between the last night time measurement and and the first daytime measurement. Although with some warming in the afternoon, consistent with a general increase in solar radiation at the surface.

Reply to  Steven Mosher
February 24, 2016 12:46 am

The Min Max mercury thermometer (the Six’s Thermometer) was invented in 1780 and in widespread use by the early 1800s, and until electronic thermometers came along. You only need to read and reset it once a day.

Reply to  Steven Mosher
February 24, 2016 10:20 am

Good reply Mosh. Appreciate your comments. They often provide pondering material. Some of us remember calibrating thermometers in our old physics classes 50 years ago. Wonder if they still do that? Probably not. Interesting lesson in applying offsets WITHIN known boundaries and knowing your measurements could be precise but not accurate.

Steve Fraser
Reply to  Michael Carter
February 24, 2016 2:48 pm

@RACook: boiling point varies by atmospheric pressure. Pressure varies by altitude, but it’s not necessary to know the altitude… Only the pressure.

Lucius von Steinkaninchen
February 23, 2016 12:48 pm

It is interesting that in the movies Antarctica shows “strong” tendencies for both heating *and* cooling, depending on the month observed. Maybe that has some relation with the observed overall Antarctic ice increase?

February 23, 2016 12:52 pm

Conclusions? Well, the most obvious conclusion is that the “global” warming is not global at all. Instead, it is strongest at night in the winter in Siberia and Canada. I’m pretty sure the poor people in Murmansk are not complaining about that …
Another hypothesis is that the “global” warming is strongest where there are the fewest thermometers.
Nothing like homogenizing across 500 km to put your thumb strongly on the scale. A slice here, a dice there, and “What difference will it make?”
I am disappointed you went to Berkley Earth at all. I have viewed their scalpel method with theoretical disdain from Day One based upon what happens in the Fourier Domain.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/12/13/circular-logic-not-worth-a-millikelvin/#comment-1172277
(with links to other references)
Did you ever get a satisfactory answer from Zeke and others at BEST to the question you posed here? http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/06/28/problems-with-the-scalpel-method/

commieBob
Reply to  Stephen Rasey
February 23, 2016 2:15 pm

Another hypothesis is that the “global” warming is strongest where there are the fewest thermometers.

In North America the greatest warming was in the northern states and prairie provinces. This area has lots (hundreds) of airports and therefore met stations.

Reply to  commieBob
February 23, 2016 3:46 pm

[Even] In North America the greatest warming was in the northern states and prairie provinces.
You see? The fewest (i.e. lowest density) thermometers will be found in the Northern States and prairie provinces.
See the maps here: http://climateaudit.org/2008/02/10/historical-station-distribution/
Do not overlook the change in coverage from 1985 to 2005.
(Even if it is just missing location data in 2005, how can that be?)

commieBob
Reply to  commieBob
February 23, 2016 4:33 pm

Stephen Rasey says:
February 23, 2016 at 3:46 pm

This makes no sense. The maps you link show almost no temperatures for the Canadian prairies. On the other hand, if you google metar saskatchewan you see about 40 airports for which local met data is available. Similarly, if you go to a map of Environment Canada Active Weather Stations at link you see a bunch. I didn’t check them all, it looks like more active weather stations than there are airports. WUWT?

Reply to  commieBob
February 23, 2016 4:59 pm

“You see? The fewest (i.e. lowest density) thermometers will be found in the Northern States and prairie provinces.”
Dont use GHCN data from 2008 as the post on climate audit did.
big piles of data are missing from GHCN old versions

Reply to  commieBob
February 23, 2016 8:47 pm

Typical Mosher, Drive by… leave no links.
Would have been so easy to provided a link to a better set of maps.. but Noooooo.
Some expert.

commieBob
Reply to  commieBob
February 24, 2016 2:24 am

Stephen Rasey says:
February 23, 2016 at 8:47 pm

It would have been better if Steven Mosher had provided a link but at least he deals with the problem. Saskatchewan is full of official government thermometers. Are they being ignored or are the maps on ClimateAudit wrong?

Reply to  commieBob
February 24, 2016 8:08 am

Saskatchewan is full of official government thermometers. Are they being ignored or are the maps on ClimateAudit wrong?
I would bet on Both.
The maps linked to on ClimateAudit ARE wrong.
“Not only is it easy to lie with maps, it is essential!” — Opening line in “How to Lie with Maps.”
The real question is how wrong are they? Until I see better maps I’ll use what I have.
Also, a safe bet is that not all official thermometers in Saskatchewan are used. The “Great Dying of Thermometers” is no myth. There are official thermometers that are not being used.
Some were being used and are now estimated.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/06/28/the-scientific-method-is-at-work-on-the-ushcn-temperature-data-set/
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/09/27/approximately-92-or-99-of-ushcn-surface-temperature-data-consists-of-estimated-values/

Reply to  commieBob
February 24, 2016 11:26 am

CommieBob:
Map concentration of temperature stations – I would think it is a relative issue. Remember the Canadian population is 1/10 the US. Note also how the temperature stations have a perceived limit that runs on a SE to NW line that probably corresponds to the Canadian Shield. As you move west, there are more northerly stations.
I know that there are stations in places like Wollaston Lake, Stony Rapids and Uranium City, Cumberland House and so on but they are so disperse and some have somewhat discontinuous records. The old records from the Hudson Bay Company and the North West Company are probably more reliable. (I have used some of that kind of information in engineering work up there – though it was 25 to 30 years ago so maybe some of the new stations are better. )
This is a log HOUSE with a canvass flap for a door in Sandy Bay, Saskatchewan at about 35 below in the winter of 1978 next to the community’s water treatment plant that I was up there looking at. (see next post- browser has locked up) Consider how lucky we are to live in our insulated heated houses. The School or the HBC store frequently looked after temperature recordings in the north, or in this case there was the nearby Island Lake hydro-electric facility. I don’t know how official their records were but we got them for engineering purposes (and proofed with field work). The dam was built in 1920 and weather records were kept there – and still are through an automated station installed by EC in 2004. Previous records don’t show but they exist. I suspect that is the case for many locations. Record High for Sandy Bay – July 21, 1929 at 40C, record low for Sandy Bay January 15, 1930 at -46.1C. Interesting that the record High and the record low were within 6 months of each other.
A long winded reply to say that there is a lot more information out there than you will find on an official government site. Though the quality might not be good enough for climate, it is good enough for engineering.

Reply to  commieBob
February 24, 2016 12:17 pm

For Commie Bob – Sandy Bay house. To twist a phrase: “When you are up to your a$$ in snow, it is hard to remember you came to measure the temperature.”comment image?dl=0

commieBob
Reply to  commieBob
February 24, 2016 2:58 pm

Wayne Delbeke says:
February 24, 2016 at 12:17 pm
… Sandy Bay house. …

The wiki article on Sandy Bay raises more questions than it answers. The situation in northern communities and on reserves is often really crappy and there are no easy answers.
Notwithstanding the above, a well chinked log cabin can be pretty cozy.

Tom Halla
February 23, 2016 12:52 pm

I cannot reconcile mainly nightime increases in temperature and the CO2 causing warming models. Presumably, given the assumptions of the models, the increase should be general.

Editor
Reply to  Tom Halla
February 23, 2016 3:40 pm

CO2 warming occurs in the tropical troposphere. That has to be the place, because it is where CO2 intercepts the most outgoing IR. From there, the warmer CO2 itself emits IR which warms the tropical surface. From the tropics, the heat then spreads to the rest of the world. Now look at Willis’ globe : There is no warming at the tropics. So not only do we not have a tropical troposphere ‘hot spot’ but we also do not have any tropical heating of any kind. In any other branch of science, a failure like that would terminate the hypothesis.

Hugs
Reply to  Mike Jonas
February 25, 2016 9:58 am

You don’t understand, though Al Gore said it is so simple?
For real, (C)AGW has never and nowhere been explained; and no-one will because the doom is only predicted with a model run, not with understanding directly the mechanisms in Nature.

Richard M
Reply to  Tom Halla
February 23, 2016 5:24 pm

If you accept negative feedback the answer is quite simple. During the day the warming increases convection which leads to more clouds and decreased high altitude water vapor. Both of these cool. At night the clouds have nothing to reflect (they warm) and convection usually decreases at night.
This maps in the summer warming because there is more day and winter cooling because there is more night. The bottom line is CO2 warms exactly when it helps the most and doesn’t warm when warming would be a problem.

Tom Halla
Reply to  Richard M
February 23, 2016 6:24 pm

I am under the impression the IPCC models assume positive, not negative, feedback regarding CO2.

Reply to  Richard M
February 23, 2016 7:21 pm

My understanding is that water vapor is by far the most significant greenhouse gas. When water vapor is present in high enough concentrations it masks much of the radiative forcing effect of CO2. There is very little water vapor in very cold air so we would expect more CO2 warming.

Reply to  Tom Halla
February 24, 2016 1:09 am

The CO2 theory would predict most warming in the afternoon as maximum OLWR occurs then and hence maximum warming from DLWR per the theory.

February 23, 2016 1:00 pm

Thanks for a great post. A similar thing is happening with monthly minimum maximums that I have plotted, both in terms of extreme min/max and median mean max for western Canada from 49 N to 82 N – which of course are derived from the daily temperatures so not a big surprise.
Your plots are excellent and show anomalies a number of people have commented on before but your plots really show extremely well.
Thanks. I have filed this one away for future reference.
Now I’ve got to get back to cutting birch trees for firewood as I have burned through almost 4 cords of wood already this year. Get a start on next year’s during our current heat wave. It’s plus 2 C outside. 😉

joelhg@gmail.com
February 23, 2016 1:02 pm

Lucius, I wouldn’t read too much into the Antarctic data. The trends you’re noticing are almost certainly artifacts from poor data coverage. In the early part of the period, explorers struggled to even survive on the continent. Automatic weather stations weren’t deployed until the 1970’s, but, even now, spatial coverage is so low that any trends are largely dependent on the validity of interpolations across wide expanses of unsampled ice sheet.

DD More
Reply to  joelhg@gmail.com
February 24, 2016 11:16 am

Let Mosher speak from the past.
Steven Mosher | June 28, 2014 at 12:16 pm | [ Reply to the ” ” prior post – spelling in the original ]
“One example of one of the problems can be seen on the BEST site at station 166900–not somempoorly sited USCHN starion, rather the Amundsen research base at the south pole, where 26 lows were ‘corrected up to regional climatology’ ( which could only mean the coastal Antarctic research stations or a model) creating a slight warming trend at the south pole when the actual data shows none-as computed by BEST and posted as part of the station record.”
The lows are not Corrected UP to the regional climatology.
There are two data sets. your are free to use either.
You can use the raw data
You can use the EXPECTED data.

http://judithcurry.com/2014/06/28/skeptical-of-skeptics-is-steve-goddard-right/
See how easy it is.
If a fully automated, staffed by research Or just call it something else.
Which reminds me – Willis did you use the ‘RAW’ data or the ‘EXPECTED’ data?

February 23, 2016 1:02 pm

Oops – “median mean max for western Canada” should say median min/max.

Doonman
February 23, 2016 1:10 pm

After reviewing you analysis, all I can say is that if current trends continue, in the future children will not know what quilts are.

tty
February 23, 2016 1:12 pm

The only thing i object to in this essay is:
“Conclusions? Well, the most obvious conclusion is that the “global” warming is not global at all. Instead, it is strongest at night in the winter in Siberia and Canada. I’m pretty sure the poor people in Murmansk are not complaining about that”
Actually Murmansk is on the Kola Coast and has a maritime climate only moderately cold and strongly influenced by the Gulf Stream and hasn’t experienced any appreciable warming, nighttime or otherwise. Change to “Yakutsk” instead, and You will be spot on.

Hugs
Reply to  tty
February 25, 2016 10:00 am

If there is anyone here from Yakutsk, I sure they won’t object some warming. Like, -50C => -30C can only be an improvement.

Editor
February 23, 2016 1:16 pm

Thanks, Willis.

braddles
February 23, 2016 1:18 pm

People have been talking for years about the anomalous warming in Siberia. The best explanation is that in the Soviet era, heating fuel was distributed according to local temperature, and in remote Siberia the local authorities would exaggerate the cold (change the temperature data) to get better resources. When the Soviet Union collapsed there was no longer any incentive to do this, so they reported the real temperatures. Voila, instant warming!

Tony
Reply to  braddles
February 23, 2016 1:27 pm
1saveenergy
Reply to  Tony
February 24, 2016 6:16 am

Thanks Tony, thats a useful resource.

Mike Macray
Reply to  braddles
February 23, 2016 4:34 pm

Well said Braddles, having spent some weeks in Siberia (Jan/feb 1992) your explanation matches my experience there. The ‘gaming’ of the system was staggering during the Soviet era!

Hugs
Reply to  Mike Macray
February 25, 2016 10:04 am

Right, sounds overly probable in the Soviet system. But there has to someone who knows this if it is true.

rogerknights
Reply to  Mike Macray
February 28, 2016 2:57 am

“Right, sounds overly probable in the Soviet system. But there has to someone who knows this if it is true.”
Someone should apply for a grant to interview old-timers there. It would be amusing to see what reason the NSF gave for rejecting it.

charles nelson
February 23, 2016 1:38 pm

Because water vapour is the principle energy transporting substance on the planet. (atmosphere)
If we believe their data, then we can conclude that there is more water vapour reaching these frozen deserts, much of which will turn to ice or snow.

Dick McNider
February 23, 2016 1:38 pm

Nice post! Asymmetrical nighttime warming over day time warming has never been a signal that climate models produced. They always had Tmin rising at nearly the same rate as Tmax. So we are left with the biggest observed signal of global warming being unpredicted by the CO2 warming models. See McNider et al. 2012 JGR and a post here back in 2012. Also, models greatly under predict the high latitude warming. I suspect the model problem is too much mixing in the stable boundary layer so that they are not sensitive as they should be to land use changes or radiative forcing changes. My personal belief is that the high latitude warming in the NH is due to radiative forcing by aerosols that are destabilizing the stable boundary layers and producing warmer surface temperatures by a redistribution of heat not an accumulation of heat. At high latitudes in aerosols can be et warmers since the dimming effect is reduced by the low sun angles.

Reply to  Dick McNider
February 23, 2016 3:38 pm

See Bob Tisdale’s book: Tisdale – On Global Warming and the Illusion of Control – Part 1 – pages 270 to 286. The discrepancy between the models and “measured” is covered.
Though I am still wondering what is doing what. And as shown in Willis’ graphic, there appears to be circulation and geographic influences that don’t work bunching data into a pure north-south analysis. Seems pretty clear that the atmosphere, oceans, land, and geography influence what happens. Why it happens is another unanswered question for me.
I do know that I don’t know.
But I have been wrong once or twice before.

john harmsworth
Reply to  Wayne Delbeke
February 24, 2016 2:53 pm

Further to this, I read your comment regarding the records of 1929 being within 6 months of each other. As you are no doubt aware, both winter low temps and summer high temps occur during episodes of high pressure systems. I couldn’t say whether or why that time period would be predominated by highs but the 30’s in Western Canada were of course drought years and also show many of the record winter lows. Possibly even a few hardy souls at that time homesteading and living in sod huts. Hard to believe! Curious that intense highs would occur within 6 months of each other but dry conditions may have exacerbated that- with the lack of moisture resulting from patterns of North to South weather patterns as winds from the West tend to predominate but bring Pacific moisture and more moderate temps. I will also try to check my theory against these records as I believe that high pressure systems in this region are associated with full moon phase. Or perhaps I just howl at the moon more when it’s hot or cold.

ulriclyons
Reply to  Dick McNider
February 25, 2016 5:39 pm

High latitude northern hemisphere warming since the mid 1990’s was driven by increased negative North Atlantic Oscillation. That is the opposite of what increased GHG’s should do to the NAO.

Dick McNider
February 23, 2016 1:40 pm

In the last sentence above should be – At high latitudes aerosols can be net warmers since the dimming effect is reduced by the low sun angles.

February 23, 2016 1:42 pm

I prefer the term “melanin optimized”. I have exactly the amount of melanin my body requires — no more, no less. YMMV.

Logoswrench
Reply to  Alan Watt, Climate Denialist Level 7
February 23, 2016 2:05 pm

That is fantastic.

Brett Keane
Reply to  Alan Watt, Climate Denialist Level 7
February 23, 2016 4:25 pm

That’d be right. Not many Tropics in the USA.

John M. Ware
Reply to  Alan Watt, Climate Denialist Level 7
February 23, 2016 5:25 pm

Indeed. I, mine own self, am neither melanin deficient nor melanin challenged. I’m merely an old white guy, tired of politically correct language, thought, and action.
I enjoyed the article greatly. It makes a lot of sense and brings together some of the stats I’ve seen in separate places over the past few years.

Erik
February 23, 2016 1:42 pm

Is there a relationship to the CO2 fluctuations in these regions during these seasonal time periods?

Reply to  Erik
February 23, 2016 8:09 pm

That’s a joke, right ?

Brian
February 23, 2016 1:44 pm

These patterns were generally forecast in Arrhenius’ 1896 paper.
“By means of these values, I have calculated the mean alteration of temperature that would follow if the quantity of carbonic acid varied from its present mean value … This calculation is made for every tenth parallel, and separately for the four seasons of the year. The variation is given in Table VII.
“A glance at this Table shows that the influence is nearly the same over the whole earth. The influence has a minimum near the equator, and increases from this to a flat maximum that lies further from the equator the higher the quantity of carbonic acid in the air … The influence is in general greater in the winter than in the summer … On account of the nebulosity of the Southern hemisphere, the effect will be less there than in the Northern hemisphere. An increase in the quantity of carbonic acid will of course diminish the difference in temperature between day and night.”

jorgekafkazar
Reply to  Brian
February 23, 2016 2:03 pm

Hey, wait. Arrghenius says “carbonic acid.” According to Wankerpedia, carbonic acid is “a chemical compound with the chemical formula H₂CO₃ (equivalently OC(OH)₂).” This is not the same as CO₂. You can’t have carbonic acid without water present. Arrhenius must have known that. Was gibt?

Brian
Reply to  jorgekafkazar
February 23, 2016 2:32 pm

It’s an archaic term for CO2, along with “fixed air”.

Gard R. Rise
Reply to  jorgekafkazar
February 23, 2016 3:44 pm

Yep, Arr(g)henius uses the word “kolsyra”. (Lit. “coal/carbon acid”). As Brian says, when referring to carbon dioxide, the usage of the word is archaic. It is still frequently used about the fizzy bubbly stuff in your regular can of carbonated soft drink, though. I sometimes like to refer to carbon dioxide as “kolsyra” for fun; it tends to remove some of the scariness behind the supposedly planet-devastating CO2. (“Varför är ni rädda för kolsyra?/Why are you afraid of carbonic acid?”)

Gil Dewart
Reply to  Brian
February 23, 2016 3:05 pm

There are, of course, many other factors involved, but this is what would be expected on the basis of the radiative absorption spectrum of carbon dioxide.

Owen in GA
Reply to  Gil Dewart
February 23, 2016 5:23 pm

It is also precisely what would be expected from poor station siting and UHI.

Gil Dewart
Reply to  Gil Dewart
February 24, 2016 11:40 am

Of course, “other factors” could also include deliberate falsification, not unknown, for example, during wartime (is there any other?).

RWturner
February 23, 2016 1:48 pm

So most of the warming is in places where there are very few stations and the interpolation is high? *feigning surprise*
I always say this when discussing regional warming/cooling patterns, but based on Mann’s logic when analyzing paleoclimate (Manngic?), modern climate change is modest at most and not global in scope.

jorgekafkazar
February 23, 2016 1:50 pm

I’m wondering what the output would look like if you used temperatures instead of anomalies. . .

Bill Illis
February 23, 2016 1:53 pm

Night-time winter temperature increasing substantially in more polar locales would be mostly caused by increased cloud cover at night one would think.
I don’t think CO2 by itself would cause this much of a change (especially, nighttime versus daytime). [But also remember there is a polar amplification effect whereby the poles might react by up to 2X to what the global average is reacting – this is in part due to the fact that 1.0 W/m2 of increased forcing will have a greater temperature impact in areas that are colder simply due to the Stephan Boltzmann equations – which are correct equations].
So is there evidence for increased cloudiness (and/or at night).

eyesonu
February 23, 2016 2:00 pm

Maximum and minimum temp trends in the US; what’s not to like? Though it looks like Florida could stand to be a little warmer in January so someone please change the setting on the atmospheric temp control knob.

Curious George
February 23, 2016 2:09 pm

Just nitpicking on terminology. A northern winter night can last up to 180 days. The meaning of a daytime/nighttime temperature should be defined better.

MarkW
Reply to  Curious George
February 23, 2016 2:34 pm

Only north of the Arctic circle.

MarkW
Reply to  Curious George
February 23, 2016 2:41 pm

Actually the 6 month night only occurs at the pole itself. As you move from the pole to the equator the length of the longest night decreases.

1 2 3