UAH: Globally, the coolest September in the last 10 years.

From Dr. Roy Spencer:

UAH Global Temperature Update for September, 2018: +0.14 deg. C

Globally, the coolest September in the last 10 years.

The Version 6.0 global average lower tropospheric temperature (LT) anomaly for September, 2018 was +0.14 deg. C, down a little from +0.19 deg. C in August:

Global area-averaged lower tropospheric temperature anomalies (departures from 30-year calendar monthly means, 1981-2010). The 13-month centered average is meant to give an indication of the lower frequency variations in the data; the choice of 13 months is somewhat arbitrary… an odd number of months allows centered plotting on months with no time lag between the two plotted time series. The inclusion of two of the same calendar months on the ends of the 13 month averaging period causes no issues with interpretation because the seasonal temperature cycle has been removed, and so has the distinction between calendar months.

This was the coolest September in the last 10 years in the global average.

Some regional LT departures from the 30-year (1981-2010) average for the last 21 months are:

YEAR MO GLOBE NHEM. SHEM. TROPIC USA48 ARCTIC AUST
2017 01 +0.33 +0.32 +0.34 +0.10 +0.28 +0.95 +1.22
2017 02 +0.39 +0.58 +0.20 +0.08 +2.16 +1.33 +0.21
2017 03 +0.23 +0.37 +0.09 +0.06 +1.21 +1.24 +0.98
2017 04 +0.28 +0.29 +0.26 +0.22 +0.90 +0.23 +0.40
2017 05 +0.45 +0.40 +0.49 +0.41 +0.11 +0.21 +0.06
2017 06 +0.22 +0.33 +0.10 +0.39 +0.51 +0.10 +0.34
2017 07 +0.29 +0.31 +0.28 +0.51 +0.61 -0.27 +1.03
2017 08 +0.41 +0.40 +0.42 +0.46 -0.54 +0.49 +0.78
2017 09 +0.54 +0.51 +0.57 +0.54 +0.29 +1.06 +0.60
2017 10 +0.63 +0.67 +0.59 +0.47 +1.21 +0.83 +0.86
2017 11 +0.36 +0.34 +0.38 +0.27 +1.35 +0.68 -0.12
2017 12 +0.42 +0.50 +0.33 +0.26 +0.45 +1.37 +0.36
2018 01 +0.26 +0.46 +0.06 -0.11 +0.59 +1.36 +0.42
2018 02 +0.20 +0.25 +0.16 +0.03 +0.92 +1.19 +0.18
2018 03 +0.25 +0.40 +0.10 +0.07 -0.32 -0.33 +0.59
2018 04 +0.21 +0.31 +0.11 -0.12 0.00 +1.02 +0.69
2018 05 +0.18 +0.41 -0.05 +0.03 +1.93 +0.18 -0.40
2018 06 +0.21 +0.38 +0.04 +0.12 +1.19 +0.83 -0.55
2018 07 +0.32 +0.42 +0.21 +0.29 +0.51 +0.29 +1.37
2018 08 +0.19 +0.21 +0.17 +0.12 +0.06 +0.09 +0.25
2018 09 +0.14 +0.15 +0.14 +0.24 +0.88 +0.21 +0.18

The linear temperature trend of the global average lower tropospheric temperature anomalies from January 1979 through September 2018 remains at +0.13 C/decade.

The UAH LT global anomaly image for September, 2018 should be available in the next few days here.

The new Version 6 files should also be updated at that time, and are located here:

Lower Troposphere: http://vortex.nsstc.uah.edu/data/msu/v6.0/tlt/uahncdc_lt_6.0.txt
Mid-Troposphere:http://vortex.nsstc.uah.edu/data/msu/v6.0/tmt/uahncdc_mt_6.0.txt
Tropopause:http://vortex.nsstc.uah.edu/data/msu/v6.0/ttp/uahncdc_tp_6.0.txt
Lower Stratosphere: http://vortex.nsstc.uah.edu/data/msu/v6.0/tls/uahncdc_ls_6.0.txt

0 0 votes
Article Rating
97 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
October 3, 2018 12:41 am

Never mind we all know that the promised heat is just hiding somewhere. Keep the money coming , we have so much research to do to save the planet.

MJE

Robertvd
Reply to  Michael
October 3, 2018 6:11 am

If it keeps hiding we will never get out of this 3 million years of ice age.

comment image

Whit Tarleton
Reply to  Robertvd
October 3, 2018 10:52 am

Now that looks like a hockey stick . . . .

Caligula Jones
Reply to  Robertvd
October 3, 2018 5:52 pm
Reply to  Michael
October 8, 2018 8:39 am

Ha-ha.

Alan Tomalty
October 3, 2018 12:42 am

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAgh. The only global temperature chart that both sides trust and it still shows as a trend of + 1.3 C per century. Just our skeptic unluck that the satellite record started off in a cool period. It looks like the alarmists will be able to avoid admitting defeat for a while yet. However if it ever ends up in the blue again (below 0 anomaly) the alarmists are busted. I am betting that Mann and friends are working like hell to get Spencer and Christy’s funding cut off.

Alan Tomalty
Reply to  Alan Tomalty
October 3, 2018 1:07 am

Just redid my calcs on CO2 doubling. At a CO2 net increase of 0.5 % per year, it will take 139 years from 1979 to double the CO2 from 340 to 680ppm. That means we have about 100 years left to reach that doubling point. Based on UAH temperature trend, we have increased 0.52 C since 1979. Another 100 years will add on 1.3C. That will take us to 1.82 C increase by 2118. Living in a cold country like Canada, my living descendants will thank me on my gravestone that I fought this fraud all the way so they werent energied to poverty and could thus enjoy a temperature increase of 1.82C in the year 2118 from it was in 1979. Of course we skeptics dont think the increase will be that high given all the colder predictions of an inactive sun for the coming decades. But we are allowed to hope for this increase for everyone living in Canada in 2118. I am sure that there are lots of other folks in places of the world that would like to be a little warmer as well. The above analysis actually assumes the warmists are correct and that CO2 will cause this warming. Now I am actually starting to root for global warming even though the skeptic in me tells me, it isnt true and that CO2 is innocent of all charges.

Mark Pawelek
Reply to  Alan Tomalty
October 3, 2018 1:45 am

No way will your descendants get a temperature increase of 1.8C. Kind thought though. Atmospheric warming will trail ocean warming. The top layer of the oceans will not be warming by 1.8C within the next century; so neither will the planet’s surface. I applied my Common Sense Model™ of climate to arrive at this scientific ‘projection’.

ResourceGuy
Reply to  Mark Pawelek
October 3, 2018 6:09 am

Correct

Rich Davis
Reply to  Alan Tomalty
October 3, 2018 2:46 am

CO2 may not have boiled the oceans, but it really likes its beer.

Sarc ref:
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/2018/10/01/brett_kavanaugh_loves_his_beer_454856.html

Ron Long
Reply to  Alan Tomalty
October 3, 2018 3:01 am

Alan, I hope your anticipated temperature for Canada comes true. I have read several comments about 80% of Canadians live within 100 miles of the USA border and therefore this anticipated increase might allow Canadians to spread out a little. When you fly over the northern third of Canada you are struck by how immense and uninhabited it is. When you work there you are impressed by how big the mosquitos are (summer only).

Greg
Reply to  Alan Tomalty
October 3, 2018 5:26 am

“Now I am actually starting to root for global warming even though the skeptic in me tells me, it isnt true and that CO2 is innocent of all charges.”

CO2 ‘likes beer. CO2 has always liked beer, I was raped by CO2 40 years ago as a child but I can no longer stay silent. I feel it is my public duty to come forward.

Tim
Reply to  Greg
October 3, 2018 8:17 am

Well, you can make all kinds of allegations against CO2 and that is fine. But if you don’t have any witnesses or any evidence or a police report, then you don’t have a case. And under our system of laws, CO2 is entitled to the presumption of innocence, just like any other greenhouse gas.

MarkW
Reply to  Tim
October 3, 2018 9:22 am

However, if Greg were a female, then the presumption of innocence is discarded.

Greg
Reply to  Tim
October 3, 2018 11:46 am

I could self-identify as female , doe s that count ?

Greg
Reply to  Tim
October 3, 2018 12:00 pm

I’ve just remembered that I was at another party in about 1980 or 1984 ( I think ) where I was gang raped by a whole roomful of greenhouses gases and I’m sure that CO2 was among them. They were all hanging around outside the door. I remember how hot it was.

I am now scared of flying ( except when giving evidence or doing polygraph tests ) because I can not stand the thought of being surrounded by GHGs and I have heard that there are more and more of them in the atmosphere now.

commieBob
Reply to  Alan Tomalty
October 3, 2018 4:39 am

The alarmists know they have no case unless the temperature rise will be catastrophic. They used to postulate a tipping point beyond which positive feedback would result in runaway global warming. The Medieval Warm Period was a problem because it showed that modern temperatures were not unprecedented. Indeed, it showed that we didn’t have to worry about a tipping point.

The alarmists wanted to get rid of the MWP. link Dr. Mann’s hockey stick was a transparent attempt to do that.

If it can be shown that the global temperature will rise only 1.3 degrees in a century, the alarmists know the jig will be up.

Ve2
Reply to  Alan Tomalty
October 3, 2018 5:22 am

Try asking a warmunist why they have their baseline temperature in the Little Ice Age, the coldest period in the last 8000 years.

AGW is not Science
Reply to  Ve2
October 3, 2018 9:50 am

That’s their go-to strategy – start your measurements in a cold period, end them in a warmer period, declare imminent catastrophe if we don’t do what they say. Rinse, re-lather, and repeat as often as needed.

John Tillman
Reply to  AGW is not Science
October 3, 2018 6:28 pm

Or the reverse, for Arctic sea ice.

Start near the high for the century, then go alarmist over perfectly natural decline therefrom. The problem with that strategy is that in 30 years or so, the ice will start growing again, as indeed it has done since 2012.

Richard M
Reply to  Alan Tomalty
October 3, 2018 6:02 am

Really shouldn’t use a linear trend for data that is extremely noisy. If you use only the years and months where the noise is minimal you see this.

1980-81 14.4 C (58.0F) -.06C
1990….. 14.5 C (58.1F) .01C
1995-96 14.6 C (58.2F) .08C
2001-02 14.7 C (58.4F) .18C
2007….. 14.7 C (58.3F) .15C
2014….. 14.7 C (58.4F) .18C
2018….. 14.7 C (58.4F) .20C

A value of .26 C over nearly 4 decades cuts the trend in half. Not only that but we also know there was no warming going back 40 years prior to 1980 even in the highly manipulated surface data. That halves the trend yet again. Finally, to make it even more ridiculous, all of the warming occurred between 1980-1998.

Nick Werner
Reply to  Alan Tomalty
October 3, 2018 9:26 am

What Canadian weather is like at 400 ppm:

“But all that snow meant two separate weather records were broken in the city. Environment Canada said the 32.8 centimetres of snow that fell in Calgary Tuesday shattered the Oct. 2 snowfall record of 4.6 centimetres set in 1954. And the snow also broke the record for one day in October, which was 30 centimetres set in 1914.”

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/calgary-october-snow-day-two-1.4848394

We’ve never seen anything like it. Except maybe around 300 ppm.

ResourceGuy
Reply to  Nick Werner
October 3, 2018 12:53 pm

Snowfall and snowfall records don’t count unless they are in the City of Toronto. sorry

Gerard O'Dowd
Reply to  Alan Tomalty
October 3, 2018 3:39 pm

If that happens scientists, businessmen, farmers, investors, commodity traders, politicians, average American citizens in the private sector would be happy to offer him support. Perhaps AW/ WUWT could put together an article based on reader suggestions with Plan B ideas to fund Spencer and Christie should they ever lose Federal funding. I can think of one or two ideas to monetise the data UAH offers gratis.

Tom Gelsthorpe
October 3, 2018 12:42 am

It can’t be cooler in September, October, or any other month. It must be fake data. Everything is getting hotter, faster, worse, and rottener than ever before. Mutant mosquitos, and a whole lot more are going to kill us if the heat waves don’t. That’s what McKibben, Gore, Hansen, Gov. Moonbeam, and 97% of their acolytes say, so it must be true.

Rich Davis
Reply to  Tom Gelsthorpe
October 3, 2018 2:50 am

It’s their truth. Who are you to deny their experiential reality?

#BelieveWarmin

mikewaite
October 3, 2018 12:54 am

One of the disadvantages with having a simple mind , such as mine, is that you look at the chart , mentally subtract the temporary negative effects of volcanoes (Chinon and Pintaubo) , the positive effects of El Ninos and end up with a graph that shows an anomaly trend of 0 +/- 0.1 C.
This then irritates enormously my simple mind because I think of the billions being wasted on climate alarmism that could instead have been invested in solving disease, hunger , homelessness and the deteriorating infrastructure of our many cities.

Phoenix44
Reply to  mikewaite
October 3, 2018 1:19 am

I see no trend, a step change and then no trend. Seems to me that something kicked the climate out of one state in 1999, and since then it’s been in a slightly different state. Perhaps warring against itself in a somewhat turbulent way.

Tom
Reply to  mikewaite
October 3, 2018 4:58 am

…..Not to mention relieving some of the poverty that is currently being caused by excessive spending and the increasingly exorbitant costs of governments’ waste in most Western nations.

gregole
Reply to  mikewaite
October 3, 2018 5:10 am

I too see no trend. None. What we are seeing, IMHO, is measurement artifact. ENSO is acting as a kind of calibration event – that we can see a bit of an uptick during El Nino gives some credence to the satellite measurement – that with close correlation to balloon – radiosonde data.

But look at the Y-axis. Tenths of a degree. Beware of noise and artifact when resolution is tuned high. So what I see is noise about some mean. It’s nothing to worry about; but interesting in this era of space exploration that we can credibly measure temperature on a global basis.

To me, these measurements of earth atmospheric temperature from space occupy a parameter space somewhere between cute and miraculous; and all they show me, a casual observer, is that occasionally the ocean burps up heat; the instruments have a slight uptick; then return to noise about a mean.

AGW is not Science
Reply to  gregole
October 3, 2018 9:56 am

If only OBSERVATIONS were used by so-called “climate scientists” we wouldn’t be in this mess of The Invocation of Human-Induced Climate Catastrophe.

But then, as the saying goes (and I’m paraphrasing), “It is difficult for a man to understand something if his salary depends on his not understanding it.”

Graemethecat
October 3, 2018 12:55 am

I have a feeling the Guardian and the other MSM won’t show this chart. Lying by omission.

October 3, 2018 1:00 am

It is wrong to go to local scale, but what the heck, here are 3 stations around my home town of Melbourne Australia, showing the months of 2018 compared to the long term means of those months, for Tmin, the minimum temperatures. Remember winter here is summer in USA and Britain, so we have come through winter and are now in early spring.
Many claim that there is a global warming effect that can be seen over the years as warming of Tmin. That might or might not be so, but the rate of cooling of Tmin here is rather large.
Please do not do a linear extrapolation to 2050 or 2100 like some alarmists might.
Geoff
http://www.geoffstuff.com/cold_melb.jpg

Lewis P Buckingham
Reply to  Geoff Sherrington
October 3, 2018 3:21 am

The above table shows the Australian anomaly to be + .18C.
Not much to write home about.
BOM is forcasting average rainfall for NSW in the next two months.
Perhaps armageddon is delayed.

Stephen W
Reply to  Geoff Sherrington
October 3, 2018 3:44 am

Looks like it might be dry around Melbourne this year.
Less clouds?

Earthling2
October 3, 2018 1:13 am

“UAH: Globally, the coolest September in the last 10 years.”

Ya think? More like 30 years in some places. It just goes to show how quickly things can go south with a trend. Of course, this is just weather and Robsy Waves in the jet stream as a result of other long term cyclical features of the climate.

Rob Leviston
October 3, 2018 1:27 am

Why start at 1979? Because that was the coolest point in recent history! Go back further, and you will see there has been no trend in rising temperature!

Reply to  Rob Leviston
October 3, 2018 2:12 am

satellite data available only from 1979

October 3, 2018 2:10 am

Sun is taking a rest, it may be a long one, and there were few volcanic eruptions recently, there is a degree of an indirect correlation between long solar minima and global volcanic eruptions (not proven but it is occasionally suggested that the solar system interactions are responsible for both).

Peter
Reply to  vukcevic
October 3, 2018 4:28 am

Yes Vukcevic, I read your story here few years ago, there was graph volcanic activity versus solar activity and volcanic activity versus ice age state, plus dust content in atmosphere. From this point I was watching low solar activity and waiting for increase in volcanic activity and surprise, it came..

Btw. recently I got idea. Big stone arcs on Earth. Like Rainbow Bridge in Utah. Their shape is totally same as shape of Sun Corona magnetic loops. They are formed by same process, magnetism.
When lava is molten, it is shaped to loops by magnetisms. Some of them are soldified and keeping their shape forever.
This just shows how magnetic activity of Sun is related to volcanic activity on Earth.

Gilbert K.Arnold
Reply to  Peter
October 3, 2018 6:12 am

Peter: Nice idea but… Rainbow bridge is composed of sedimentary rock (specifically the Navajo Sandstone) and was carved by water. Magnetism (or perhaps you were thinking of “magmatism”?) had nothing to do with it.

Russell Duke
Reply to  Gilbert K.Arnold
October 3, 2018 7:20 am

Gilbert: The arches in that area are caused by wind blown particulates eroding the sandstone.

Thomas Englert
Reply to  Russell Duke
October 3, 2018 9:45 am

Arches are caused by freeze-thaw effects, salt, rain, and the type of sandstone. Bridges caused by the above, plus erosion by streams which may be dry 90% of the time.

Both occur largely in strata resulting from eolian deposits, such as Navajo and Wingate sandstones in the Southern Utah area.

The Deplorable Vlad the Impaler
Reply to  Russell Duke
October 3, 2018 10:03 am

It was during my undergrad years at the U of Utah (late ’60’s – early ’70’s) that our cohort developed the ultimate theory that could explain *****EVERYTHING***** geological. We called it the “Theory of Universal Glaciation”, and that it took care of every geological question or problem. Universal Glaciation explains everything:

For example: red beds (a lot in Utah are Triassic/Jurassic): as the glaciers advanced, they ran over all the existing fauna, and squeezed the blood out of them, leaving the red stain in the rock.

Plate Tectonics/Continental Drift: As the glaciers receded, they sucked into the North Pole, and fell UNDER the continents, so now the continents are ‘sliding’ around on the ice, bumping into each other, and what-not.

So, Dr. Duke, leave us NOT confuse the issue with FACTS!!!!! Leave a great (and obviously plausible, self-evident) theory alone. Universal Glaciation and Magmatic Sandstone Arches will require many, MANY billions of research dollars and grants, employing generations of grad students and their dissertation committees. Dr. Peter and I shall need thousands of support staff to properly educate the media, academe, our peers, the public; not to mention the necessity of forming a UN committee to keep track of and report on the advancements of our Theories: isn’t it obvious that we need a UGAMSAT right away? I certainly hope you’ll sign on, and support this VITAL research right away!

Regards,

Vlad

Gilbert K.Arnold
Reply to  Russell Duke
October 3, 2018 11:06 am

Russel Duke: You might want to reconsider Suggest you read the following:https://www.nps.gov/rabr/learn/nature/geologicformations.htm

MarkW
Reply to  Peter
October 3, 2018 7:21 am

Do you have any idea how strong a magnetic field would have to be to lift that much magma?

Adrian
October 3, 2018 4:24 am

I would love to see an article that provides an animated graph through it’s different “adjusted” versions.

I believe this would be very illuminating. For each global temp record. Then a finale showing V1 to V6 or whatever latest version is, when the decline got erased, the present & recent past got warmed up and the history got cooled down.

Can anyone do that for me or at least point me to the data so I can collate in several sheets of Excel?

TonyL
Reply to  Adrian
October 3, 2018 5:49 am

I poked around the UAH file server. Here is what I came up with.
UAH TLT version 5.5
https://www.nsstc.uah.edu/data/msu/t2lt/oldversions/
Scroll all the way down to the bottom for the data file.

UAH TLT version 5.6
https://www.nsstc.uah.edu/data/msu/t2lt/
Again, the data file is down the bottom. Also note the README files at the top. It is a change log for the work in progress and the versions. It is technical and goes on about inter-satellite calibrations and such and estimates changes version-to-version of ~.001 degree/decade and the like. Actually, it is an interesting read.

You already know where to get version 6.0
To see if there are earlier versions available, you might surf over to Roy Spencer’s web site and get his email addr. Then you can ask him directly.

Tom in Florida
October 3, 2018 4:45 am

Yet in the Tampa area it has been the warmest September ever. Now, I understand that the official temperature is taken at Tampa International where major renovations have been taking place for quite a while now. And that the airport is a lot larger than ever before. So one has to wonder how it is possible to compare temps from the 50’s, 60’s, 70’s etc when the area is not comparable.

Reply to  Tom in Florida
October 3, 2018 5:03 am

A weakening Gulf Stream that normally exports to Europe the Carribean warm water means I guess that it hangs around Florida instead. Trump’s to blame of course for all those trade tariffs.

Red94ViperRT10
Reply to  Phil Salmon
October 3, 2018 8:25 am

Riiiiight! Just like Trump withdrew the US from the Paris Climate Extortion and just like that we get Harvey one summer and Florence the next. Pretty little country you got heah. It’d be a shame if anything was to happen to it. /sarc

AGW is not Science
Reply to  Tom in Florida
October 3, 2018 10:06 am

And there, in a nutshell, is why nobody should be in a panic over “climate change” – not only isn’t there anything alarming going on, but the direction of the “adjustments” – recent temperatures UP, older temperatures DOWN – are exactly the REVERSE of what any reasonable person would think they should be, if they knew about it and were bothered to think about it.

When considering the different environments the original raw temperature readings were taken in, the non-climate differences are always “more rural/less developed” to “less rural/more developed,” meaning any “adjustments” should be exactly opposite what they have been – older readings higher (relative to newer readings) and newer readings lower (relative to older readings).

Hocus Locus
October 3, 2018 5:11 am

HOTTEST SEPTEMBER ON RECORD — EVER — among Septembers where Live Cattle and Lean Hog futures were both in decline, a Lady Gaga film box office opening was competing with a Marvel Comics production and Mueller sold a number of fire hydrant flange replacement kits that has at least two representations as a sum of two cubes. (Note: September futures data extrapolated from October model projection)

Latitude
October 3, 2018 5:23 am

They are all such clowns……with what little data they have….as far as they know, now could be the normal

and who decided that a totally iced over arctic was normal in the first place…
…all the animals that depend on open water to breathe certainly didn’t

paul marchand
October 3, 2018 5:32 am

This UAH graph indicates global warming isn’t doing anything CLOSE to what the desk warriors in 1998 predicted. Yes, granted 1998 caused concern. But at least 4 entities profit from doomsday scenarios:
1) the federal government well-paid desk warriors
2) third world countries looking for CO2 money distribution to them
3) subsidized green companies
4) anthro global warming “scientists” on the payroll
5) the democrat party over-pushing the issue, for the MONEY angles in 1,2,3,4

SAMURAI
October 3, 2018 5:35 am

I think UAH’s September 0.14C marks the end of cooling from a weak La Niña cooling cycle, and will start increasing from October as we switch to a weak El Niño cycle.

By end 2020, we’re due for a strong cold La Niña cycle to start, which will coincide with the PDO/AMO/NAO all in or near the start of their respective 30-year cool cycles, and the start of a 50-year Grand Solar Minimum cycle. Oh, my..

With all the major seismic activity going on around the world, I also think a VEI 5+ volcanic event will also soon occur, which will add to global cooling.

In about 5 years from now, anyone even mentioning CAGW will be giggled at.

D. J. Hawkins
Reply to  SAMURAI
October 3, 2018 6:56 am

I don’t know where you see a weak La Niña. The NINO3.4 index has been solidly above 0 since June 2018 and most recently was threatening to break the 0.5 barrier into El Niño territory. Based on the slope of the line, it’s probably going to get there next month.

Robert W Turner
Reply to  D. J. Hawkins
October 3, 2018 7:08 am

The lag in atmospheric response to ENSO is up to 6 months so this is the last bit of cooling from the weak El Nino at the beginning of the year, perhaps.

SAMURAI
Reply to  D. J. Hawkins
October 3, 2018 7:45 am

D.J-san:

Nino3.4 index just hit 0.5C last week and will continue a rising trend for a year.

Ocean temps for top 150 meters seem to indicate a weak El Niño cycle.

We’re due for a strong and cold La Niña cycle after the current El Niño runs its cycle as we haven’t had strong one one for about 10 years.

bit chilly
Reply to  D. J. Hawkins
October 3, 2018 7:55 am

read the comment again.it says weak el nino transitioning to a strong la nina.

D. J. Hawkins
Reply to  bit chilly
October 3, 2018 2:49 pm

Uhhhh, no:

“I think UAH’s September 0.14C marks the end of cooling from a weak La Niña cooling cycle, and will start increasing from October as we switch to a weak El Niño cycle.”

He’s claiming we are in a weak La Niña NOW; we are almost in an El Niño NOW. Last weekly value for NINIO3.4: 0.49; El Niño threshold: 0.50.

bit chilly
Reply to  D. J. Hawkins
October 3, 2018 4:35 pm

apologies, if the comment wasn’t subsequently edited i read it wrong.

Richard M
October 3, 2018 6:16 am

Here’s something I found that is quite informative. Sept 1996 and Sept 2018 are very similar in many ways.

Both are ENSO neutral coming off of La Nina winters.
Both are near solar minimums.
Both are during +PDO conditions and +AMO conditions.

Between these months ~40% of all human CO2 emissions occurred (360-410 ppm).

So what has all this extra CO2 created in terms of warming? 0.00 None, nada, zip, zero, nil, nothing. Yup, both have exactly the same anomaly of 0.14. No warming at all in 22 years.

October 3, 2018 6:25 am

Atmospheric CO2 ppm ….. verses …. global average lower tropospheric temperatures

Dr. Roy Spencer’s graph of “global average lower tropospheric temperatures” for the past 39 years, to wit:

comment image

And if one compares the above plotted temperatures between 2008 and 2018 ….. to NOAA’s measured CO2 ppm quantity as defined below, they would be hard pressed to “show” association or correlation between the two data sets, to wit:

Excerpted NOAA ESRL DATA
year ..mth ………… atmospheric ppm
2008 5 2008.375 388.54
2009 5 2009.375 390.14
2010 5 2010.375 393.00
2011 5 2011.375 394.19
2012 5 2012.375 396.74
2013 5 2013.375 399.78
2014 5 2014.375 401.78
2015 5 2015.375 403.96
2016 5 2016.375 407.70
2017 5 2017.375 409.65
2018 5 2018.375 411.24
Source: ftp://aftp.cmdl.noaa.gov/products/trends/co2/co2_mm_mlo.txt

According to the above Mauna Loa CO2 record, the quantity of CO2 in earth’s atmosphere increased by 22.7 ppm ……. during the ten (10) year period from May 2008 until May 2018.

Whereas Dr. Spencer’s global average lower tropospheric temperatures “bounce” up n’ down, ….. like a basketball being dribbled, ……. during the same ten (10) year period from 2008 thru 2018.

Thus, it should be obvious to most everyone, that near-surface air temperatures have no measurable effect on increases or decreases in atmospheric CO2 ppm quantities.

And neither does the “green-growing” or “microbial-decomposing” biomass of the Northern Hemisphere.

Petit Barde
Reply to  Samuel C Cogar
October 3, 2018 8:33 am

Hello,

in terms of annual means,
CO2 seems to behave as an integral of global Temp.

See :
http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/esrl-co2/from:1979/mean:12/derivative/plot/uah5/from:1979/scale:0.22/offset:0.14

and Dr Salby’s lectures on this subject :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5J0F8T9BY3U
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U_GLPBH4JAc

Reply to  Petit Barde
October 4, 2018 4:36 am

Petit Barde – October 3, 2018 at 8:33 am

Hello,

in terms of annual means,
CO2 seems to behave as an integral of global Temp

Shur nuff, …… Petit Barde, ….. but when one expresses their thoughts as “seems to behave as”, … they are themselves dubious as to what is happening and are simply “guessing” as to what might be happening.

If one looks at the steady and consistent …. “seasonal increases/decreases” and the ”annual average increases” ….. in atmospheric CO2 ppm as denoted on the Keeling Curve Graph and/or as defined in the Mauna Loa Record, ….. it requires a partially blind, highly partisan., proponent of CAGW not to see the direct correlation of said CO2 to the “changing of the equinoxes”.

Keeling Curve w/equinox lines
http://i1019.photobucket.com/albums/af315/SamC_40/keelingcurve.gif

beng135
October 3, 2018 6:54 am

Yeah, but, but, but — it’s still 0.14C above average! That just has to be at the point of no return, doesn’t it? I mean, 97% of (fill in the blank) couldn’t be wrong!

pochas94
Reply to  beng135
October 3, 2018 7:00 am

All we have to do is take a hint from the adjusters and change the average, which will happen in 2020, I presume.

beng135
Reply to  pochas94
October 3, 2018 7:39 am

Many of the anomaly numbers/graphs we see STILL use the 1970-2000 30-yr norms because the 1980-2010 norms wouldn’t look as bad.

ResourceGuy
October 3, 2018 6:57 am

Give it time. The Roman Empire did not fall in a few months. The Green Political Dynasty will be nicked and picked all the way down below the 1970s cool start to the satellite record. The only question is whether another over reach administration will come along during that decline to bet on the opposite outcome based on polling data and media influence.

October 3, 2018 7:11 am

To effectively put an end to AGW nonsense we need average global temperatures to fall to around -.40c from the 1981-2010 means.

In the meantime there has been no further global warming. In fact the trend in global temperatures is down for the last few years not up.

Robert W Turner
October 3, 2018 7:14 am

El Nino finally seems to be developing with a moderate warm pool to work with. This will probably stall the cooling long enough to keep the CACA meme alive for another year.

ResourceGuy
Reply to  Robert W Turner
October 3, 2018 8:04 am
Caligula Jones
October 3, 2018 9:17 am

OBVIOUSLY fake news. It was very warm many times here in Toronto so there is still global warming. Toronto IS the center of the universe. Just ask anyone from here.

Ok, I also had to have the furnace on the same week I had the air conditioning.

Is it too late to change my rant from global warming to climate change? Because its changing very often now…

(do I have to actually include a /sarc tag?)

ResourceGuy
Reply to  Caligula Jones
October 3, 2018 9:27 am

At this site you do need the tag.

Stewart Pid
Reply to  Caligula Jones
October 3, 2018 10:26 am

Send some of Toronto’s GLO-BULL warming west …. folks in Calgary are drowning in snow. And freezing too!

JohnS
October 3, 2018 9:27 am

the temperature anomaly for the lower 48 is 0.88, versus 0.14 globally. This may explain all of the hysteria this past summer over heat and wildfires.
The lower 48 anomaly has much greater variance than the global anomaly, of course. When temps in the US are high, the screaming and activism are intense. When the US swings to low temps, they are sleeping off their hysteria

AGW is not Science
October 3, 2018 9:46 am

Not that I’ve read the comments yet, but…

“The linear temperature trend of the global average lower tropospheric temperature anomalies from January 1979 through September 2018 remains at +0.13 C/decade.”

Which basically means there is no warming since the (modern) satellite records began in 1979 (an unusually cold period at that). Because nobody could convince me that the temperature records from any source have error bars smaller than 0.13 C, which means the supposed warming, like it is for the whole of the instrument temperature record, is within the range of errors in what is laughingly called “data.”

ResourceGuy
Reply to  AGW is not Science
October 3, 2018 10:54 am

+1

DWR54
Reply to  AGW is not Science
October 7, 2018 1:44 am

“… nobody could convince me that the temperature records from any source have error bars smaller than 0.13 C…”
________________________________

In fact the error bars are much smaller than 0.13 C over that period. The warming in UAH is lower than all the other main global temperature data sets, including the other main satellite TLT set, RSS (formerly the darling of readers here), but there is still a clear and statistically significant warming trend in UAH since 1979; currently 0.127 ±0.058 °C/decade (2σ) since 1979: http://www.ysbl.york.ac.uk/~cowtan/applets/trend/trend.html

The ‘best estimate’ global warming in UAH TLT since 1979 is therefore +0.51°C. By contrast, in RSS TLT the best estimate warming since 1979 is 0.78°C, while in the land-based temperature data set produced by GISS it’s 0.68°C.

BallBounces
October 3, 2018 10:55 am

Please. You can say Uh or Ah, but UAH is just wrong.

Reg Nelson
Reply to  BallBounces
October 3, 2018 1:09 pm

Huntsville is name of a city and proper noun. Proper nouns are capitalized. This is why the University of California Los Angeles is known as UCLA.

Hugs
Reply to  Reg Nelson
October 4, 2018 11:49 am

Seriously. My scotus starts itching.

ren
October 3, 2018 10:55 am

Winter is in the southern hemisphere. Ice extent in the Antarctic is growing.
comment image

ren
October 3, 2018 10:57 am

The first major snowstorm in the Rocky Mountains is approaching.

Joe Banks
October 3, 2018 11:10 am

All I see is the AMO

ResourceGuy
Reply to  Joe Banks
October 3, 2018 12:09 pm

Bingo

ResourceGuy
Reply to  Joe Banks
October 3, 2018 12:14 pm

Yes, as the only long cycle in a world of little statistical movement and other shorter-term cycles the AMO is the logical story by subtraction.

ren
October 3, 2018 11:19 am

The level of galactic cosmic rays is the highest since 2009.
comment image

October 3, 2018 1:31 pm

BBC weather man:
“Heaviest October snowfall in Calgary in 60 years”

dh-mtl
Reply to  vukcevic
October 3, 2018 2:48 pm

Could the record, early October snow in Calgary be related to the solar minimum.

Reply to  dh-mtl
October 3, 2018 3:15 pm

Yes, if regularly repeated over next 4 -5 years, very uncertain just for one off
https://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/environment/item/30214-nasa-sees-climate-cooling-trend-thanks-to-low-sun-activity

bit chilly
Reply to  dh-mtl
October 3, 2018 4:41 pm

depends who you ask. if you ask the climateriat it will be due to the anthropogenic component of atmospheric co2 as are all climate phenomena. you obviously didn’t get the memo 😉

Anthony Banton
Reply to  dh-mtl
October 4, 2018 8:40 am

No it’s “related” to this…..

comment image

An anomalously warm Arctic with the cold spilling south into Canada.
Lot of “red” on that map.

This has been a feature of recent Autumns, and indeed of winters since 2011.

http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/meant80n.uk.php

Steven (back in KY)
October 3, 2018 4:49 pm

WOW, Obama’s plan did work and now Trump will reverse it…. 😉

DWR54
October 7, 2018 1:58 am

The divergence between the UAH and RSS TLT monthly temperature anomalies for September 2018 is one of the largest for any month on record. Both set to UAH’s preferred 1981-2010 anomaly base, UAH is 0.14 C against 0.35 C in RSS. The divergence between the 2 data sets, which process information from more or less the same sources, has been pronounced since 2001 and is increasing at a rate of 0.06 C per decade. At least one of these two producers is wrong. RSS is in much better agreement with the surface data since 2001.

Anthony Banton
Reply to  DWR54
October 8, 2018 8:56 am

Also, post ’98 the AMSU sensor onboard NOAA15 shows a cooling trend relative to predecessor MSU on NOAA14 and relative to radiosonde.
The RSS group partially corrected for it (split the difference). But the UAH team believed the newer one to be of “Cadillac quality” and so have presumed it correct.
They are both wrong (relative to radiosonde) but RSS a little less so.

comment image
comment image

%d bloggers like this: