July 2019 – Hottest July Ever?

News Brief by Kip Hansen

 

featured_image_hottest_JulyThe press is again awash with the latest hysterical news that July 2019 was the hottest July ever! 

NOAA Data Confirms July Was Hottest Month Ever Recorded

by Henry Fountain  appeared in the NY Times’ barely credible feature Climate Fwd:. The piece was prompted by a NOAA Press release:

 July 2019 was hottest month on record for the planet

NOAA has spent billions of tax payers dollars to send up satellites to monitor the weather and thus climate of the Earth.  It pays two different scientific groups, UAH and RSS to produce global temperature data sets of the Earth’s atmosphere, but routinely ignores them when is needs to push Climate Catastrophism.

Those who choose to read a full, scientific explanation as to why July 2019 was NOT the hottest ever should refer back to Dr. Roy Spencer’s piece on this site published on 2 August, July 2019 Was Not the Warmest on Record.

For those who are visual learners, I offer graphs of the two satellite based global temperature records that NOAA ignores when making “hottest ever” declarations, first the graphs from Remote Sensing Systems:

RSS_Global_Recentl

RSS_Global_Full

It is interesting to note how different the visual impression is between the most recent data and the longer term data.  In the top image of “recent” data, the trend line from the full data set is included — it is not the trend of the recent data.  Nonetheless, it is obvious that the data is functionally flat (or even downtrending if one wishes to start at the 2016 peak).

And as a reminder for those who may have forgotten the changes RSS made to it calculations in 2016, from Climate4you:

C4U_RSS

And from The National Space Science & Technology Center at The University of Alabama in Huntsville, the data set usually referred to as UAH,  two visualizations, same data:

UAH_LT

UAH_LT_Spencer

troposphere Just so we know what we are talking about, the Lower Troposphere is the part of the atmosphere in which most of us live.   This little image, from UCAR, helps a bit.  Earth’s tallest mountains are at almost 30,000 feet, just under the 10 km top of the troposphere.  The tops of Tropical Thunderstorms can reach as high as 12.5 km.  Down in the lower troposphere, we have everyday weather events, ground level temperatures, the winds that stir the trees and other weather and climate phenomena experienced by most humans.  Those of your who climb or hike the high peaks of the Sierras in California, as I have,  have gone up out the top of the Lower Troposphere, the same with the highest peaks of the Rocky Mountains.

UPDATE:  Aug 18, 2019  4:30 PM Eastern Time

There have been several complaints in comments about the use of the Climate4you graph for RSS — which shows the difference the 2016 change made to the RSS data set, and that I did not show changes to the UAH data set.  Here is the graph for UAH with changed shown (red older set, blue current set, as with RSS above):

UAH_C4y_changes

To complete the batch,  here is RSS as above (old and new) with UAH offset above RSS, to allow comparison of the SHAPES of the sets — which are nearly identical — the only big difference is the RSS change in 2016, which kicks that set upward:

UAH-vs-RSS

Before anyone asks, YES, overlaying UAH on top of the older (red) RSS shows them very nearly identical in all aspects up the end of the red trace.

Readers are free to make of this as they will.  Spencer says“But no satellite dataset is perfect, there are uncertainties in all of the adjustments, as well as legitimate differences of opinion regarding how they should be handled.”

UPDATE #2:  Aug 18, 2019  6:30 PM Eastern Time

I should add that although RSS and UAH have nearly identical shapes, the numerical values for the various time points are quite different, with RSS being about 0.3°C higher — in additional, since the 2016 change,  RSS has a steeper warming trend despite having the same essential shape as UAH.

# # # # #

Authors Comment Policy:

Nothing much new here, but needed to be brought up again to counter the constant biased reporting from the media and entrenched climate forces within NOAA.

Note that the Consensus Climate Team insists on mostly ignoring satellite temperature sets, which were initially  sought to help settle bias issues with the thermometer record, using instead known-to-be-upward-biased ground-based thermometer records on the spurious argument that “that’s where we live” — as if we all lived at 2 meters above ground level and not in the Lower Troposphere.  In contradiction, the Consensus Climate Team insists that satellite sea level rise data be used in place of the much more accurate  tide gauge/CORS combinations – preferring the higher values of Sea Level Rise in the satellite data set.

Address your comments to “Kip…” if you are speaking to me.

# # # # #

Advertisements

239 thoughts on “July 2019 – Hottest July Ever?

  1. Kip Hansen

    “Those of your (you) who climb or hike the high peaks of the Sierras in California,”

    Great post again !

      • Keni ==> Quoting the National Geographic Society:

        “Sierra is a Spanish word that means “saw.” The peaks of sierras are often rocky and jagged, like the rugged teeth of a saw blade. In the United States, the Sierras or the High Sierra usually refers to the Sierra Nevada, a craggy mountain range that borders the U.S. states of California and Nevada”

        • Kenji – I’ve taught Spanish and lived and hiked in the Sierras. English speakers have called them “the Sierras” since before 1872, when Mark Twain published Roughing It:

          “Within a period of six years I crossed and recrossed the Sierras between Nevada and California thirteen times by stage. . .”

          http://www.gutenberg.org/files/3177/3177-h/3177-h.htm#linkch39

          Kip’s right that in Spanish, “la sierra” means saw, the plural of which is “las sierras.” However, what English speakers call “the Sierras” (meaning “the Sierra mountains”) was (and is) called La Sierra Madre in Spanish, meaning that the collection of mountains in the range makes up a single “saw,” in which each peak is a tooth.

          Similarly, we also have the “Sawtooth Range” in Idaho.

          • The plural of which would be?
            “Grandpa was eaten by a bear in the Sawtooths…”
            “Grandpa was eaten by a bear in the Sawteeth…”

            Doesn’t matter how you spell it – Gramps should not have tried to transport open jars of peanut butter through grizzly country.

    • for God’s sake…put this is perspective….they are claiming it’s the hottest ever….by 5/100th of a degree

    • I noticed that in 2018 Reno, NV had 14 days of 100 or plus degrees.
      In 2019 they had ZERO 100 degree days. Carson City, NV had no 100 degree days in July, 2019 either.
      So hottest July where?

      • Concur. I live in Sparks (eastern border of Reno). last year was hot. This year we rarely used the AC. in fact, we frequently closed the windows because it was too cold.

      • In Spain, June perhaps was the coldest in several decades, except last week when Sahara hot air reached up to Germany and of cause it was hot in Spain. July has been colder than any July of the last 10 years. And August is colder also than last years and if forecast is right the next two weeks will be cold, down to 16 degrees C during the night and less than 30 during the day. I do not remember auch a cold summer except the 2 weeks when African hot air came up.

  2. This is the coldest summer I remember in the 30 years I’ve lived in Calgary.

    Guess I’m no good at the new math they teach in schools. And for that I am grateful everyday.

    • Joe
      “Guess I’m no good at the new math they teach in schools.”
      No it is just one location does not represent the entire planet.

      • And yet it’s also the coldest summer I remember here, at another location on the planet. It’s the middle of August, yet we’ve had the furnace running and the leaves on our plants have started to change colour.

        This time last year, the temperature was in the mid-30s, and most of the month was high 20s to low 30s. This year it’s in the low 20s.

        As usual, the planet is warming everywhere that people aren’t actually living.

          • Actually, the 30s were extremely hot… hotter than today. In fact, 1936 had a far hotter July than 2019 did, with far more days above 100 degrees F. Temperatures in North Dakota reached 121 degrees F, a record which still stands today.

          • Derg wrote: “I wonder what the 30s were like”

            Simon wrote: “Cooler than today.”

            Incorrect, Simon. It was just as warm in the recent past as it is today. There is no unprecedented warming today, which means there is no CAGW today, which means there is no need to waste Trillions of dollars trying to fix a CO2 problem that doesn’t exist.

            Here are some Tmax charts to demonstrate:

            US chart:

            https://bobtisdale.files.wordpress.com/2018/12/Figure-11.png

            China chart:

            https://bobtisdale.files.wordpress.com/2018/12/Figure-12-1.png

            India chart:

            https://bobtisdale.files.wordpress.com/2018/12/Figure-13-1.png

            Norway chart:

            https://bobtisdale.files.wordpress.com/2018/12/Figure-13-2.png

            Australia chart:

            https://bobtisdale.files.wordpress.com/2018/12/Figure-12-2.png

          • Tom Abbott
            I said the planet not rather dubious graphs of single locations by Bod Tisdale. Multiple global graphs show you are talking nonsense. Bring me one that is representative of the planet and I will listen.

          • “Bring me one [chart] that is representative of the planet and I will listen.”

            Simon, there is only one chart that represents the whole planet, the Hockey Stick chart. Unfortunately, is has been bastardized to the extent that it is no longer fit for purpose.

            Thus, if we are to discover the truth, we have to fall back on the unmodified, unbastardized regional temperature charts, which, as I demonstrated with the Tmax charts, all show that the temperatures were just as warm in the recent past as they are today. There’s no unprecedented warming today.

            If you have regional charts from all over the world that show a simillar temperature profile, then I think it would be safe to assume that the temperature profile they represent is in fact the temperature profile of the globe.

            As the old saying goes: “You can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make him drink.” You have to stretch down there and drink, Simon. Your grandchildren are safe from CAGW.

          • Tom Abbott
            “Simon, there is only one chart that represents the whole planet”
            What?????

            No there is not
            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming#/media/File:Global_Temperature_Anomaly.svg

            https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/features/GlobalWarming/page2.php

            Here’s one just for July down through the years
            https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/201907

            You note the 40’s are not even remotely close to today todays temperatures. Both adjusted and unadjusted global data shows significant warming. Sorry Tom….

          • ““Simon, there is only one chart that represents the whole planet”

            Simon wrote: “What????? No there is not”

            Simon you say “no there is not” to my statement that the only global temperature chart is the bogus Hockey Stick, and to provide proof that I’m wrong, you give links to Hockey Stick charts! Thanks for makng my case for me.

            And btw, what’s “dubious” about Tmax charts and/or Bob Tisdale? A group of Chinese scientists did a study recently, published here at WUWT, where they said that they thought Tmax was the best metric to use for measuring the temperatures. It makes sense: If you want to know when the hottest eras were you should be looking at the hottest temperatures of the era, not the average.

            I wonder why you don’t consider the Hockey Stick chart to be “dubious”. I certainly do. How do you put any stock in the surface temperature record after reading Climategate?

            Anyway, I have shown you unmodified charts from all over the world that show it was just as warm in the recent past as it is today. If you refuse to accept them as legitimate information, there’s nothing I can do to overcome that.

        • By the middle of August around 1000 ft. elevation in southeastern Washington State it is not unusual to have had over a dozen daytime highs in the triple digits. So far this year in my location we have had only 3 days that briefly hit 100 or 101 F. The daytime highs are in the mid 80s and low 90s. Lows at night are in the low 60s.

          • August has been average or below in west France. No need for climate control in the house so far this month and that is with my son in law from the UK in the house. Incidently, he feels the heat a lot and come over in february in shorts and T shirt.

            July was warm but not even close to 2003 or 1975/6. I worked in semi conductor fabrication in the 70s and someone read the thermometer and the RH everyday at least twice.

          • After the faked hottest evah July day in the UK, I can only say that August feels more like September. Somebody on twitter showed their fire lit. We may well have another Little Ice Age jetstream induced plume for the coming Bank Holiday weekend and the end of the month so that the Met O can try and convince us August was hot.

            It is a bit of an obscure connection but my hot water tank is fed from a tank in the attic so therefore the amount of warmth it receives affects the required heat to get it to temperature. This year the amount of gas used each week is running above last summer when we had the hot spell and I am not doing anything different to last year.

      • The Yamal peninsula and a bunch of trees to form the Mann made hockey stick of global warming.

      • Thank you Simon for stating the typical global warming believer response; “… one location does not represent the entire planet.”

        But somehow a single location with a urban heat island effect is proof of global warming? Referring to France, but omitting record lows posted in the Netherlands this summer.

        But leaving data aside, and not getting into alterations, re-calibrations, or just plain bogus statements, here is the real kicker as to why it’s a scam. The vast majority of global warmists don’t significantly change their own behaviour.

        They continue to fly on vacation, drive big SUVs, live in enormous houses, etc. all whilst telling you and me we have to cut back.

        Justin Trudeau, Crime Minister of Canada, and his cabinet scream about a 4 C warming bringing civilization to an end. A few days later Justin happily hops into a government jet to vacation in a place that is at least 10-20C warmer than Ottawa.

        By the way Simon, what do you drive? Do you set your heating to 65 F? Is your air conditioning set at 85 F? Do you fly on vacation?

        When Trudeau, Gore, DeCaprio, et al start flying on solar powered dirigibles, then I might take global warming seriously.

        • Joe, let Simon fly and drive when he wants. He can also ferment as much beer as he wants, drink decaf and even be cremated when he pops his clogs. As you know, rounded up, only 5% of that ‘evil’ gas up there in our sky is our fault. This leaves 95% (rounded down) which is totally beyond anyone’s control (decomposition, calcification, volcanic activity, photosynthesis, etc.)

          Tell Simon . . .
          CO2 is 1/2,500ths of the sky (400 ppm)
          Sheet of paper with 2,500 squares.
          Just ONE of those 2,500 squares is the ‘evil’ square (CO2).
          Only 5% of that single ‘evil’ square is our fault.
          95% of that single square of CO2 is absolutely impossible to control.

          So, sailing across the Atlantic on a solar powered carbon fibre racing yacht to attend a New York climate change conference ain’t gonna make one jot of difference. ‘Nuff said.

          • “CO2 is 1/2,500ths of the sky (400 ppm)
            Sheet of paper with 2,500 squares.
            Just ONE of those 2,500 squares is the ‘evil’ square (CO2).
            Only 5% of that single ‘evil’ square is our fault.
            95% of that single square of CO2 is absolutely impossible to control.”

            FWIW – gotta divide the paper into 10,000 squares. 3 of those dark square are good – only the 4th dark square is evil ( 280ppm is ideal – the extra 120ppm are the evil ones)

        • ” start flying on solar powered dirigibles”

          There’s an idea! When I was a kid I was fascinated by dirigibles.

          With the flexible solar cells being made today, it might be possible to wrap the dirigible in them to supply power. Of course, you would want a fossil fuel power source for when the Sun isn’t shining.

          If the Green New Deal is going to eliminate airplanes then they are going to have to come up with an alternative.

          One alterntive would be to fly out of Mexico or Canada when going overseas. So far, the politicians in those countries haven’t gotten crazy enough to suggest outlawing airplanes.

          The Green New Deal just shows how detached from reality the radical Left really is. They want to place all these restrictions on the people of the US, which will destroy our economy, while the rest of the world goes about their business as usual. How could anyone vote for fools like this?

        • This is what I say to my friend who is a global warming alarmist. He even had the gall (the idiocy) to recently post a pean to George (?) Carrier the inventor of A/C. When I called him on it, he hadn’t “realized” that A/C has a significant “carbon footprint.” Duh. He’s even getting “certified” in “climate change science” by some lefty environmental group. It’s truly pathetic.

      • And it is a cooler summer where i live.

        But Simon lives in GST land were “average” surface temperatures are always on the rise and temperature data is never manipulated or adjusted for nefarious purposes and where the government is going to gain control of the GST by imposing restrictions and higher costs on the rest of us.

        Borg drone.

      • There they go again, using those rubber dividers (scribing tool).
        Here’s another place on the planet, on the edge of the desert. After 43 years in this vicinity, I noted that July was either the same or a tad cooler than recent Julys. No A/C required. Even the wife wasn’t complaining. And we’re half way through August. Same story.

      • It was much more than just one location. Transcontinental Russia, eastern Europe, China, most of North America have all been anomalously colder this year. Basically the northern hemisphere. Just a few hot spots, which always happens when the jet stream becomes meridional due to weakened solar activity.

      • the same in the Alentejo, Portugal, where we have a house. 2 days ago it was for the first time 30°, the rest of the summer was unusually cold. This place has normal temperatures in the high 30°.

      • “Simon August 16, 2019 at 7:23 pm

        Joe
        “Guess I’m no good at the new math they teach in schools.”

        No it is just one location does not represent the entire planet.”

        Once again, reality is the opposite of what simon claims.
        The reality, is that many of those “one location” locations,which happen to be regional are utterly misrepresented by the alleged ‘global average’.

      • I guess Simon doesn’t understand climate science and the travesty that is climate alarmism. Probably gets his climate info from SkepticalScience.

        The 1930s were warmer globally (until the various UN driven bodies fixed older temperatures downwards and later ones upwards) and the MWP and RP were warmer still.

        From the 40s until the 70s there was a relative cooling after which temperatures increased back to the 30s level. We may yet see a return to MWP levels which would be good news.

          • Even bigger yawn…

            GISS explanation on absolute is here, written originally by James Hansen and now under Gavin’s name: https://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/faq/abs_temp.html

            For the global mean, the most trusted models produce a value of roughly 14°C, i.e. 57.2°F, but it may easily be anywhere between 56 and 58°F (13.3 -14.4C) and regionally, let alone locally, the situation is even worse.

            Gavin explains…

            http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2017/08/observations-reanalyses-and-the-elusive-absolute-global-mean-temperature/

            “In 1997, the NOAA state of the climate summary stated that the global average temperature was 62.45ºF (16.92ºC). The page now has a caveat added about the issue of the baseline, but a casual comparison to the statement in 2016 stating that the record-breaking year had a mean temperature of 58.69ºF (14.83ºC) could be mightily confusing.” Indeed…

            “In reality, 2016 was warmer than 1997 by about 0.5ºC!”

            Gavin gives a link to a 1999 paper by Phil Jones: https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1029/1999RG900002

            Jones says:

            “We present global fields of surface temperature change over the two 20-year periods of greatest warming this century, 1925-1944 and 1978-1997. Over these periods, global temperatures rose by 0.37 and 0.32C, respectively.”

            He is saying that the greatest increase in the 20th century was 1925-44, before the large increase in CO2 emissions from the war and afterwards. CO2 rose by 5.4ppm during that period. In the 34 years from 1944 to 1978, temperatures were static, for a rise in CO2 of 25.7 ppm.

            https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/19595636.pdf
            Phil Jones again: “although rarely used, the most widely quoted value for the global average for the 1961–1990 period is 14.0 C (or 57.2 F)
            https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/19595636.pdf

            When you look at all these ranges, the concept of “1.5 degrees to disaster”, with only 0.5 deg C to go, is absolutely farcical. There is no such precision and they simply lie about certainty and uncertainty. The message is the thing, the facts, not so much.

        • Simon, here in the UK, the Met office confirmed July this year, was indeed the 45 hottest since 1780.
          That one day heat wave in July 31 deg C here in central UK is a pleasant fading memory. I resisted lighting the log burner earlier this week….just.

          • Rod, we’re in the UK too. On average it’s been cold and very wet this year. Unlike last summer, there’s not a single parched yellow lawn anywhere. Changed our summer duvet for the winter duvet for the 3rd time in the last 2 months.

            Maybe we’ll all enjoy an Indian Summer come Sept/Oct?

            Warmest July Eva. Hogwash.

          • geejam

            I also live in the UK -in the Southwest. The plants tell the story.

            Last year we had a brilliant crop of tomatoes courgettes and runner beans. The weather was very hot in june very hot in july and hot the first week or so of august which then cooled down but remained fairly warm. The nights were exceptionally warm

            Result? Second warmest summer after 1976

            This year. A cool june-we had the central heating on during the first bit of the month. july very warm. August fell apart after the first week and its since been pretty cool and wet with the nights being noticeably cooler than last year.

            Result. A terrible crop of tomatoes (about 10% of the amount last year) 1 courgette. no runner beans as yet, so they are 2 weeks behind . if the weather turns warmer again we are hopeful we will get a late crop.

            overall; an ok summer but nothing out of the ordinary other than that Saharan plume of very hot weather which didn’t really get to us in the SW

          • Rod, we’re in the UK too. On average it’s been cold and very wet this year.

            Strange, I live in the UK as well, and on average temperatures have seemed above average. May and June where a bit below average, but February, March, April, and July where all well above average.

        • I believe the whole bunch of them are applying “Common Core” math to climate “science.” Example: If you can explain why 2+2=5, your good.
          Now, explain continental drift and how CO² was involved. Stuff happens.

        • I live 100 km north of Edmonton. Haven’t seen it this cold and wet since early ’70s, maybe even worse than then. Crops are rotting in wet fields, the garden is producing half of what it normally does, pasture depleting, and no hay cut (yet) for the winter. It’s not just this location (my farm) where this is happening. Last year was bad, this year is worse by far. Don’t prattle on about global warming around here. The little ice age comes to mind.

      • I’m in Edmonton too, and yes it’s been one the coldest and wettest summers in my lifetime. Relatives across the country are reporting that it’s either been an average summer or slightly cooler than usual but here on the prairies we got no summer at all.

    • Cooler than last year here in Victoria BC. My deck thermometer regularly topped thirty Celsius last year, with measurements barely touching thirty this year and the very few forest fires have failed to force us into breath masks like we had to for four days in August 2018. More rainfall than July / August 2018 too.

      Hottest July ever? No. Not here in the Pacific northwest. Looks like August 2019 will also come out cooler overall. Cooler than both 2018 and 2017.

    • Joe my neighbour was on a trail ride (horses) in Banff by Skoki Lodge and Friday they were snowed on …. I joked GLO-BULL warming my snowy Albertan ass!

    • Being here in central Minnesota, I’m guessing someone stole our summer, or at least July, which has been cooler than usual here.

      Give it back!

    • Dallas, TX had the 72nd hottest July since records were kept from the 1880’s. (According the the NOAA records).

      Similar hot spell for Texas, Oklahoma, New Mexico – just about every city in the region had somewhere between the 60th – 80th hottest summer since the 1880’s.

      An area larger the the hot spot of France

      • The record hot spot in France was a terra cotta roof over which a shaky looking sensor housing was mounted. It was a hot summer for the rest of the area in July, which occurs from time to time.

  3. We continue to warm up out of the Little Ice Age. So what if July were the warmest in 500 years? Is that not what you would expect?

    The alarmists should not get away with ascribing perfectly normal climate variability to humanity. It’s the same kind of superstition that demands human sacrifices to the volcano gods … exactly the same … think about it.

    • I often do. It is amazing that no matter how “advanced” we become, the “advancements” are always used eventually as the same as everything else in history—to advance an agenda that is based on greed and power. We just swap out the names—now it’s “scientist” and that makes the person a god. Before, it was tribal leader or spiritual leader or whatever. Technology advances, people do not.

      • I believe the whole bunch of them are applying “Common Core” math to climate “science.” Example: If you can explain why 2+2=5, your good.
        Now, explain continental drift and how CO² was involved. Stuff happens.

    • “It’s the same kind of superstition that demands human sacrifices to the volcano gods”

      Yes it is. Humans have always had some sort of blame or guilt to blame bad natural phenomena on the gods. This is as old as the hills, and seems to be apparent in every culture at every time scale of human evolution. I sometimes wonder if this is because of a genetic disposition, or a right/left brain thing, but I thought that science would cure us of that rationale. Apparently not.

      • The global warming frenzy, and the sentimentalized thinking that it indulges, is all part of the general flight from science and reason that is so prevalent on the progressive left (and among religious creationists) and that so disfigures the academic humanities, and Sociology.

        With global warming this disorder has infected the sciences.

        Even good academic scientists have fallen. Their thinking lacks the detailed rigor of proper science.

        Unjustifiable jumps in logic are entertained in support of conclusions that foster socially applauded virtue.

        In the global warming debate, the unjustified inferential jump is from radiation physics plus the Stefan-Boltzmann equation to the conclusion of excess sensible atmospheric heat.

        It looks like science, but isn’t.

        They ignore that the physical theory is very incomplete, and that the climate has alternative fast response channels.

        The conclusion of atmospheric heating is apparently what they want, and there is a general resistance against all efforts at objective correction.

        I don’t get it, but there it is.

        • In the global warming debate, the unjustified inferential jump is from radiation physics plus the Stefan-Boltzmann equation to the conclusion of excess sensible atmospheric heat.

          Ah, yes, sensible heat, as opposed to latent heat. Thermodynamics would be real simple if it weren’t for things like phase change and compressible fluids.

  4. Has anybody else noticed that in the most recent revision of the RSS dataset, for both of the 1998 and 2016 big El Ninos, the temperatures after each event never dropped below the point that the temperatures were at before the event? Is this just coincidence, or can anybody think of an explanation?

    • Kurt

      There is one theory that this is the step change mechanism creating the long term average rise. It is oceanic in origin and not CO2 caused. It may be caused by heat that has been in the oceans since 1200 AD. Hence the 800 year lag between CO2 (now) and temp (Medieval). By this mechanism, there will be a rise in CO2 caused by the current warming.

      It will be interesting to see if a series of La Niñas creates a series of down-steps.

    • I took a look to try to give you an answer. Actually, I do not see anything out of the ordinary. For the 1998 event, both RSS versions show the same thing. For the 2016 event, RSS and UAH are in good agreement as to beginnings and ends. At least as far as I can see. It looks like it is just what the planet did, nothing else going on.

      • For the 2016 event I agree that RSS and UAH are very close. But the RSS chart for the 1998 event has the old version (red) and the new version (blue), and it looks to me as if the old version – like UAH – shows monthly temperatures after the El-Nino at least briefly dropping back down to a point below the monthly temperatures before the El-Nino, then a slow upward trend kicking in, where UAH has a slight downward trend until the next super El-Nino.

        Maybe what I’m noticing is an artifact of something else that doesn’t really relate to the El-Nino’s except by the coincidence of timing. I did a little research, and the RSS version-change in 2016 was apparently due to a decision to start making empirical corrections to diurnal cycle estimations provided by climate models, in order to estimate trend adjustments from orbital drift. As I understand it, these empirical corrections compare satellites that drift to satellites that do not drift.

        If you compare the two versions, from 1979 to 2000, these corrections seem to have effectuated a very slow increase in the temperature trend. From 2001 to 2006, though, the temperatures between the two series really start to diverge, but then after 2006 the distance between the red and blue lines stays constant from what I can see. So could these inflection points be due to the use of different satellites to do the empirical corrections, as one satellite is retired or another one launched?

        • As I recall, when the new version came out, Walt Mears was quite candid about the reason for the change. He said straight up that the reason was so the RSS product would agree with the surface data sets better.

          start making empirical corrections to diurnal cycle estimations provided by climate models, in order to estimate trend adjustments from orbital drift.

          Yes, this is how I remember it. Basing the corrections on the climate models is the *way* in which the RSS product gets pulled into better alignment with the surface products.

          “So could these inflection points be due to the use of different satellites to do the empirical corrections, as one satellite is retired or another one launched?”

          Hopefully not. One of the main points of cross calibrating the sats. is to avoid discontinuities such as this when one sat drops out and another takes its place.
          Of course, when you change your whole cross-calibration method, anything can happen.

          • As I understand that quote, and as Dr. Spencer explained it in a post I read, RSS had always used models to estimate trend adjustments to correct for diurnal drift, but beginning in 2016 they started to use empirical corrections on top of the model trend adjustments, whereas UAH has always just used empirical corrections without the models. So the difference in the two RSS temperature graphs is not due to the sudden use of models, its due to the sudden use of empirical corrections (new variation) in addition to the models (on the old technique).

            While I’m sure the objective is always to avoid discontinuities, I again can’t help but notice that the period between about 2001 and 2006 accounts for virtually all of the discrepancy between the two RSS versions.

    • Bob Tisdale also notes the step change after significant El Ninos. The La Nina’s seem to be a supercharging event due to cooler waters causing less cloudiness, which then allows more effecting solar heating, which then buries the heat in the western pacific. I know I over simplified it. But it jives a bit with Kurt’s explanation.

  5. No surprise here. In fact, I’d have been surprised if they didn’t make it the hottest month ever. They need it to keep up the constant flow of climate alarmist news that’s getting to be more like a torrent now.

    They also need it to make sure that 2019 is the hottest year ever. These things take advance planning, don’t they? I mean, come next January, if they hadn’t got all the data lined up every month, they might have to go back and rewrite history. Not that rewriting history would be such a problem, there could be a few discreet instrument failures that didn’t show up until they audited their data. Or just change the data anyway and see if anyone notices. Drop the uncorrected data into the memory hole.

  6. This is certainly NOT the hottest summer in Texas…It has actually been more or less pleasant up through June, and then the usual summer heat. I remember the Summer of ’98…OMG. Now that was a hot summer.

    So they can yell and scream and throw tantrums all they want, this is business as usual where I live. And our lakes are full of water. Yeah!

    • In Reno we just had our first 100-deg day of the year – on 15 August! And then started a cooling trend. This is a very cool summer. I don’t believe there’s been another July with only double digit days in the 46 years I’ve lived here.

      • Dallas Texas had its first 100 degree day for the summer of 2019 last week. June & July have been blasted cold for a summer. FWIW I ride bicycles (semi competively) . Did a 70 race the last week in July and only consumed 2 water bottles for the entire 70 miles. Normally that race requires 3 &1/2 to 4 water bottles due to the heat.

      • That’s dang cold for Reno, Brian!

        Reno is a perfect place for demonstrating that water vapor influences temperature much more than CO₂.
        Sunny days drive temperature high, but night time temperatures plummet.
        Without high amounts of water vapor in the atmosphere, that daytime heat rapidly declines. Especially at Reno’s altitude.

        Several times, I tried to watch for meteors in the Nevada desert, Death Valley and Lake Tahoe. Find a secluded dark knoll, lay out a blanket and watch the brilliant skies.
        Towards midnight it gets downright chilly requiring warmer clothes or more blankets.

        In the East Coast mountains, one can stay out all night and not need additional clothes or blankets.

  7. *sigh*
    Here we go again. As UAH TLT is everybody’s favorite, I thought I would take a look.
    So here we are for July:
    2019: +0.38
    2016: +0.39
    1998: +0.51

    Gee, looks like this year is third warmest. With a warming trend of 0.129/decade, we will get there. Unless we get another cooling trend.
    It is just amazing to me that NOAA could make this year warmer than 1998, that is *some*adjustment. Wow.

    • “2019: +0.38
      2016: +0.39
      1998: +0.51

      Gee, looks like this year is third warmest.”

      And Hansen says 1934 was 0.5C warmer than 1998, in the United States. It was also just as warm in the 1930’s as it is today worldwide, going by unmodified surface temperature charts.

      Look at the UAH chart above and then compare it to a bogus, bastardized Hockey Stick chart(below). Look at how NASA/NOAA have adjusted the record to turn 1998 into an insignificant year. The UAH chart shows 1998 in a statistical tie for the warmest year in the satellite era (1979 to present), but NASA and NOAA have demoted 1998 to an insignificant year. They did this so that they could make the claim that 2012 was “The Hottest Year Evah!” and then they could claim that 2013, and 2014, and 2015 were the “Hottest Years Evah!”.

      Of course, they couldn’t make all those claims if they were going by the UAH chart, because 1998 is warmer than all those years on that chart. That’s why they don’t use it.

      We have a situation where the Data Charlatans are changing the temperature record right in front of our eyes and nobody calls them on it. But the UAH charts shows they are lying to the people about the temperatures.

      They lie about 1998, and they lie about the 1930’s (Climategate), where they turned one of the warmest decades in history into an insignficant also-ran. They did this because if it was as warm in the 1930’s as it is today,then they couldn’t claim we are experiencing unprecedented warming today, which means they couldn’t make a case for CAGW (Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming) happening today, So they manipulated the surface temperature record in an effort to erase those obstacles to “Hotter and Hotter” and “Hottest Year Evah!”.

      Bogus, Bastardized Hockey Stick

      https://bobtisdale.files.wordpress.com/2018/12/Reference-Figure-1.png

      The bogus, bastardized Hockey Stick is the *only* “evidence” the Alarmists have. It’s all a Big Lie, so the reality is they have nothing to back up their CAGW claims. Nothing. Their “July 2019 being the hottest month ever” is a joke. A very bad, expensive joke.

      • I *wish* we could post charts and graphs here.
        There is a price to pay for their nonsense, constantly tampering the data.
        I have a graph I have been maintaining for several years. It is a combination of UAH and NASA and NOAA. Uah is of course, lower troposphere and NASA, NOAA are both surface. What I did interesting is to break the trends at Aug, 1998 and plot the two trend lines for the early portions, and the late portions of the plot.
        Results:
        1979-1998: all plots – UAH, NASA, NOAA 0.15 , 0.14, 0.14 degrees/decade. Essentially the same. Fine.
        1998 – 2019: all plots – UAH, NASA, NOAA 0.12, 0.21, 0.19 degrees/decade.
        UAH has gone down by a slight amount, OK, so what?
        NASA and NOAA have gone UP by a whopping 40%. WHAT!!!!
        Greenhouse Theory:
        We know that greenhouse warming must happen in the troposphere. In fact, the warming in the troposphere *must be* 2x to 3x whatever we see at the surface. This is the famous (now notorious) “tropospheric hot spot”.
        Yet what we see is just the opposite!
        The surface according to NASA and NOAA is warming *faster* than the atmosphere. This is impossible according to greenhouse theory which is driving this whole show.
        I note here for the record that the two different trends break at 1998. This corresponds nicely with what became known as “The Great Thermometer Die-Off” where the number of thermometers used in the global data sets was reduced from 6000 to 1200. Seems the reduction was carefully planned to give a desired result.
        So while the manipulations of the surface record keep producing “warmest ever” records, they are also creating a situation which is physically impossible.
        Question: As the surface continually gets hotter vs. the atmosphere, how long can this go on before the temperature difference causes something dramatic to happen?
        Here is a link:
        https://i.postimg.cc/Z5y3bkf7/UAH-NASA.jpg

        • TonyL
          This is really interesting and with a couple of “straightforward” (commas purely because you clearly know how to do it as opposed to those of us who would be worried about making an error) would make an excellent posting on WUWT. I hope you give it a go and thanks.
          MCEA

        • “So while the manipulations of the surface record keep producing “warmest ever” records, they are also creating a situation which is physically impossible.”
          Who said it is physically impossible? You. You haven’t quoted anyone.

          But of course, RSS measures warming at least as high as surface. Soi if there is a contradiction there, there is one simple implication. UAH is wrong.

      • Tom Abbott
        “And Hansen says 1934 was 0.5C warmer than 1998, in the United States. It was also just as warm in the 1930’s as it is today worldwide, going by unmodified surface temperature charts.”
        Once again… lets see your evidence for this because I call BS. A mainstream data set that says what you are saying is true and not pure fiction.

        • The data set and chart is from a paper Hansen published in 1999.
          The key dates are 1934 and 1998. 1934 was the height of the Dust Bowl, known for the heat and drought throughout the US, particularly in the Midwest. 1998 was the warmest recent year, for comparison.
          Try Google Scholar, with “Hansen 1999 Climate GISS”, to find the paper.
          Scrap That!!!!! I found it for you!
          Here it is.
          https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1029/1999JD900835
          It is a .pdf so it takes a while to load, but the graphics are really good.
          You want Figure #6.
          It shows you the whole thing.

          Hope this helps.

          • Doesn’t help at at all. Tom Abbott keeps banging on about the planet being warmer in the 30’s. Your documents figure 4 makes a fool of him. Your response is to quote figure 6 which is about the US which is 2% of the planets surface. Come on boys, if you are going to provide links, al least make sure they back what you are saying. Shiiiish!!!!

          • Simon, the USA together with the UK have the longest running data set.
            The graphs are ‘anomolous anomalies’ they are not temperature graphs.
            It would be very extraordinary if the US and UK with their large urban centres had temperature increases less than the rest of the world.
            As usual , as someone remarked, the heat is always where there are no, or very few people. And please don’t mention the Arctic/Antarctic as we have little knowledge of real temperatures here. There are very very few weather stations above and below certain latitudes and the satellites don’t like ‘white stuff’.

          • @ Simon:
            I could quote your whole comment right back at you.
            Tom Abbot made a claim specifically and exactly about the United States.
            You questioned the veracity of the claim specifically and exactly about the United States.
            I provided the graph Tom Abbot was referring to, specifically and exactly about the United States.
            Now you do not like it because it is specifically and exactly about the United States.
            Bad Faith Questioning!

          • “Doesn’t help at at all. Tom Abbott keeps banging on about the planet being warmer in the 30’s.”

            Yes, I do. I do that because unmodified charts, those not bastardized by the Data Charlatans, all show that it was just as warm in the recent past as it is today. This means there is no unprecedented warming today and no CAGW problem.

            I posted several Tmax charts a few minutes ago in this thread which all show that the temperatures in the past were just as warm as today, and these charts cover both the northern and southern hemispheres (as much as that’s possible) so I would refer you to them, and here is another unmodified chart from Australia that shows the same temperature profile, i.e., that it was just as warm in the recent past as it is today. I have others, too.

            No unmodified chart resembles the bogus, bastardized Hockey Stick chart. Why do you think that is?

            https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2016/08/clip_image0022.gif

    • “that is *some*adjustment”
      No, it isn’t. It is just measuring the surface temperature at the surface. Where we live. UAH is measuring the temperature of a different place.

      But if you want real adjustment, yes, UAH V6 has 1998 at 0.51 hotter than 2016 at 0.39. But UAH V5.6, still produced until 2017, had July 1998 at 0.44°C, and 2016 at 0.45. Now that is two different versions of the same thing.

      • This whole new meme, at the surface where we live is simply misdirection. What the surface temperature is or isn’t is totally irrelevant to the question at hand, namely is the warming caused by raised co2 emissions or not.
        As we have been assured that the troposphere would warm notably faster than the surface if co2 is the culprit and more likely to be natural or other causes (uhi, land change etc) if the reverse is true we can conclude that the actual surface temps mean nothing unless we compare to the troposphere temps.

      • “Where we live.”

        And I’m sure everyone believes that had the satellite temps risen faster than the surface temps you’d still be doggedly sticking with the surface records, and not ditching them immediately as sparse, unreliable and totally inadequate.

        • Seriously. ‘Where we live’ must be the new NPC software update.

          ‘Where we live’, the temperature is maybe 10C below where it has been in previous years. That’s what it’s like ‘where we live’.

          I don’t think many people live in airports, either.

        • RSS satellite data shows temperatures in the LTL have been rising faster than the surface data set. The other main data set shows rather less warming.

          It doesn’t alter the point that you cannot compare one months figures in the lower troposphere and claim it proves the surface data is wrong.

      • “No, it isn’t. It is just measuring the surface temperature at the surface. Where we live. ”

        And averaged all together, making it meaningless.

  8. End of August failed to break 30 again today. The Canadian National Exhibition opened today and this is usually the sizzling end to the summer on southern Canada. Nope, not like it used to be. I have seen the Shell Tower show 106 F back in the day.

    It is the second cut of hay and the beginning of ensilage. Farm kids used to be excused from the first week of school to finish it. And it was hot – steaming, skin burning, Koolaid-quenched hot in the fields with the dust and the dung. That is when farmers used to drop dead in Iowa – we heard about them and worried.

    Now? Pffffft! 27 C and sunny. Gee…call NASA.

    Y”all keep an eye on that ENSO meter, eh?

  9. Wow. A statistical anomaly that is within the margin of error.
    What a peaceful world we live in, if this is what people obsesses over.
    I wonder how much statistical misery it will cause and how much statistical increase in food production will be ignored.

  10. Kip,
    You said, “Those of your [sic] who climb or hike the high peaks of the Sierras in California, as I have, have gone up out the top of the Lower Troposphere, the same with the highest peaks of the Rocky Mountains.”

    • Clyde ==> I’m willing to admit to a typo (or unintended auto-correct) of ““Those of you who climb or hike….” but then I miss another other point you wanted to make there….

  11. I drove my Korean wife down to Pueblo, CO to a farm, to buy a couple boxes of fresh cucumbers. She usually goes down there in Sept. to pick Pueblo peppers ( a red spicy variety). The farmer said he wouldn’t have any this year, and if she wants to pick some at other farmers’ fields, she’d better come early. They had a freeze on May 27 (I think he said), which ruined most of the pepper crop. On the news driving back today, I heard about the “hottest July ever”, but nothing about the pepper crop failure.

  12. I just wanted to point out that 12.5 km is not a height limit to thunderstorms, but rather is a typical height limit for garden variety storms.
    Severe thunderstorms are not at all uncommon, with those that have tops above 14 km (~46,000′) being notable for having cells producing more than 10 lightning strokes per minute.
    Sometimes severe storm warnings are issued whenever radar indicates storms exceeding 14 km in height.
    But storms can and often do go far higher.
    There are numerous accounts of storm cells that topped out far above the top of the tropopause. In the US there are accounts of storms in Texas that reached 68,000′.
    In the tropics, I have heard reports of storms reaching 80,000′, although in a quick search engine looksee, I could find documented cases of ones reaching 72,000′ (over Clarke AFB), and some unsourced references to ones measured at 78,000′.
    Just sayin’.

  13. It is certainly the coldest winter in my 27 years here, in the southern part of Queensland Aus.

    We have lost a number of native, indigenous to the area, large shrubs & small trees to the frosts.

    I shudder to think of my power bill, with the amount of heat we have needed to survive.

  14. A few years ago,I heard a former employee of NOAA and now a whistle blower said that NOAA had’fudged’ the data received in their claims of man made global warming.

  15. Well here in the south of good old blighty… yes we had two or three glorious days in July meanwhile… it’s the fourth day of rain and temperatures under 20C in August…

  16. I just checked the 50+ year weather CDD records for my locale(+42N, -89W). For July: 1966, 1980, 1983, 1988, 1999, 2002, 2011 and 2012 each had higher Cooling Degree Day totals than for 2019. Any trends? I think not.

    And 2019 will still be cooler here than a normal Summer regardless of August and September results due to May and June(along with February, March and April) being SO COLD.

  17. It seems there must be “someone” at NOAA that issues these dire pronouncements, and someone that is their supervisor or assistant that is complicit. Probably a whole team of people manipulating the record to support these claims.
    Shouldn’t they be accountable for falsifying the public record?
    Isn’t that a felony?

  18. Kip,
    “Hottest July Ever?”
    You never really answer the question. Published surface indices say yes. You seem to rely on Roy Spencer using a reanalysis set. But you didn’t mention his update, published in bold at the top:
    “[NOTE: It turns out that the WMO, which announced July 2019 as a near-record, relies upon the ERA5 reanalysis which apparently departs substantially from the CFSv2 reanalysis, making my proposed reliance on only reanalysis data for surface temperature monitoring also subject to considerable uncertainty].”

    • Nick ==> I just posted the actual graphs of the two satellite Lower Trop data sets. Nothing in here about reanalysis.

      The simple point is that you sat we live at the surface — I say we live and experience weather in the Lower Trop, yet certain folks pay for then ignore these data sets.

      • Kip
        “Nothing in here about reanalysis.”
        You said:
        “Those who choose to read a full, scientific explanation as to why July 2019 was NOT the hottest ever should refer back to Dr. Roy Spencer’s piece on this site published on 2 August”
        And that is entirely about use of reanalysis, complete with his revision that maybe that isn’t such a good idea.

        As to surface, in fact NOAA was (unwisely) basing its claim that you criticise on an absolute measure (60.4°F). Clearly UAH did not record higher temperatures than that. So you have, out of character, switched to anomalies.

        • Nick ==> I’m afraid I have made a point way to simple for you….we have satellite data sets meant to inform us more scientifically about atmospheric temperature in the LOWER troposphere, where we live and where our weather (mostly) is — — — it is the atmosphere that is supposed to be warmed by CO2 emissions at whatever rate your opinions lead you to believe –(an unsettled question as of yet) and despite all those satellites and work put into making satellite data sets — NOAA carps on as if thermometer (thermistor) records are absolute.

    • Nick Stokes: “Hottest July Ever? … Published surface indices say yes”

      From what I’ve been able to find, July 2019 beat the record of July 2016 by +.03c but they don’t give the margin of error. In other documents I’ve found, according to NASA, the margin of error is about ±0.05 degrees Celsius which means .03c±0.05c is a statistical tie. Even ±0.05 seems to me to be an unrealistic margin of error since I doubt the temperature readings are actually accurate to ±0.05 and it seems unlikely that averaging the temperatures for a month would make them more accurate. I’d be very interested in what you have to say on this. Thanks.

      • “From what I’ve been able to find, July 2019 beat the record of July 2016 by +.03c”
        Well, GISS said it was 0.08°C higher. TempLS was 0.096°C higher.

        But hottest ever means the highest recorded. If not 2019, then what year was hotter? If you insist on complete certainty (whatever that is), you can never get a hottest, or coldest, anything. We saw that a few years ago. 2014 was the highest to date. But no, they said, the difference could have been error. Then 2015 was hotter, but no again. That got a bit harder to argue with 2016. But the thing is that unless temp increases by a large amount in one step, as in 2016, you’ll never, on that logic, have a hottest year, even though it keeps getting hotter and hotter.

        • Mr. Stokes: “If you insist on complete certainty …”

          I didn’t insist on complete certainty, I simply pointed out that there is uncertainty built into the measurements which undermines the claim of the “Hottest Year Ever”.

          “But the thing is that unless temp increases by a large amount in one step, as in 2016, you’ll never, on that logic, have a hottest year…”

          Why is there an urgent need to have a “Hottest Year”? Why is it not acceptable to say that based on the margin of error, the temperatures are the same?

          Also, do you think that ±0.05 degrees Celsius is a valid margin of error for averages of temperatures that are most likely not measured with that precision?

          Thanks.

          • “Also, do you think that ±0.05 degrees Celsius is a valid margin of error for averages of temperatures that are most likely not measured with that precision?”
            People here like to demand numbers for “margin of error” without asking what it is the error of. In fact, “uncertainty” is trying to quantify what range you would get if the number was derived with other, legitimate choices.

            One is choice of instrument, or observer, measuring the same temperature in the same place. That is reduced with sample size, and the samples here are very large. It is a very small component of the uncertainty of the global average.

            The greatest part of the 0.05 is location uncertainty. What if you measured accurately, but in different places? To what extent can the average be called global? A world average can only be got by sampling, and this is the spatial sampling error.

            That is why you need to break down uncertainty. There may be a 0.05°C variation had you measured in different places. But in comparing 2019 and 2016, this didn’t happen. With few changes, they measured in the same places. So 0.05 overstates the uncertainty relevant to that difference.

          • Mr. Stokes: “People here like to demand numbers for “margin of error” without asking what it is the error of…”

            Off hand, I can think of at least four things that can cause uncertainty in temperature measurements:
            1) Uncertainty inherent in the instruments themselves.
            2) The uncertainty of temperatures derived from other measurements (such as those derived via homogenization)
            3) Instruments that have changed over time in surroundings or type or have been moved
            4) Adjustments made to the past records of an instrument

            Global temperature averages are derived from measurements with all of these uncertainties and likely others that I am unaware of, but you feel that because the averages are derived from a large sample size, the uncertainty of global averages are reduced to less than ±0.03c and so it is valid to say that since 2019 was warmer by 0.03 degrees than any previous global average, 2019 is the hottest year ever, correct?

            Thanks.

          • “all of these uncertainties”
            No, there are more. One has to keep saying it, but we are talking about the uncertainty of a global average. What you have described is local to that instrument, and would be counted as instrumental uncertainty. Actually adjustment is not an uncertainty; you know what was done. And homogenisation doesn’t really work like you say, and in any case, you can use if you want the unadjusted records. I do and it makes little difference.

            The key issue is sampling. You could have just one super accurate instrument, but it won’t give a reliable global average. The limitation is coverage. That is why the improvement with GHCN V4 is important. It reduces some of the real error in the estimate.

        • Nick Stokes: “No, there are more.”

          I agree, as I said ‘all of these uncertainties and likely others that I am unaware of’

          “Actually adjustment is not an uncertainty; you know what was done. ”

          True, but there is uncertainty in whether what was done accurately fixed the problem that required the adjustments.

          “And homogenisation doesn’t really work like you say”

          What was wrong with my statement about homogenisation?

          “The key issue is sampling. You could have just one super accurate instrument, but it won’t give a reliable global average. The limitation is coverage. That is why the improvement with GHCN V4 is important. It reduces some of the real error in the estimate..”

          My question is do these thing reduce the real error in the estimate to less than 0.03c?

          Also, thank you for your patience in answering my questions. One of things I like about this blog is that knowledgeable people such as yourself are willing to take the time to help me understand an issue.

  19. A temperature is hotter than another, with confidence, only if the error bounds are calculated ans stated. Otherwise, we might just be comparing the noise, or part thereof, when the temperatures are not statistically different.
    Does anyone have references to the +/- error terms that might apply to the above discussion of temperatures?

    For over a year I have been trying to get our BOM to shed some light on the figure they use for comparisons. Here is part of a letter from December 2018. A later letter does not provide a definite, useful answer.
    Question One: What are the full uncertainty numbers for historic temperature measurements for all stations in the ACORN_SAT group, including both accuracy and precision, for both Tmax and Tmin, preferably expressed as figures like “T +/- X degrees C”?
    Answer: Uncertainty on measured values at each observation site, and the comparison between temperatures measured by different thermometers and automated instruments, is the subject of a number of upcoming publications by the Bureau of Meteorology. These are to be included in the supporting material for ACORN-SAT on the Bureau’s website, and the associated scientific papers are currently working their way through the peer review process. As part of the release of the next version of ACORN-SAT the Bureau is preparing a paper on uncertainty estimates for annual-mean Australian temperatures and trends. This uncertainty mostly relates to adjustment uncertainty, representative error and area averaging for monthly values.
    The Bureau is working towards certification of its instrument calibration processes under the International Organization for Standardization (ISO). We have recently achieved certification to ISO17025 for pressure and we are now focussing on doing the same for temperature. We expect the certification process to be completed in the first half of 2019. Once certified for temperature, we will be able to provide you with more detailed information in relation to your questions on uncertainty.

    • They should have been able to provide you a specific answer 25 years ago, Geoff.

      The casuistic double-talk you received, interpreted generously, implies they are doing now what they should have done then.

      It also implies that they have been stating certainties of temperature for 25 years and more without knowing the uncertainty bounds; an admission to 25 years of professional negligence and misrepresentation, in other words.

      • Hi Pat,
        Yes, that was my take also.
        But, as you know, it is one matter to detect such a truism, but a much harder matter to have it publicised to become part of the accepted history of the country.
        Currently, I am mulling over ways to air this whole matter in a better way than we have tried before.
        Not so easy when your own fun money has exhausted and the cheques from Big Oil have failed to arrive again.
        Geoff S

  20. Back at the end of April, the Babylon Bee (a satirist website) said we only have 12 seconds until climate change does us all in. So whatever the temperatures did in July don’t matter I suppose….

    https://babylonbee.com/news/update-we-now-have-only-12-seconds-left-until-climate-change-destroys-the-planet

    Babylon Bee writers didn’t even have time to finish the story…

    “…This tragic development means that humanity won’t have time to correct climate change, and our writers probably won’t even have time to finish thi “

  21. Dear Kip, please start with reading the article you’re commenting on with glasses on this time

    And discover the main sentence: “the hottest >>>July<<<< in the 140-year record".

    Then redo all your graphics. Or revoke the article. Something…. more honest or lucid at least.

    Thanks.

    • Dowser ==> You may, if you wish, debunk yourself by looking at the monthly data for the two sets.

  22. Kip, the referral to Dr. Roy Spencer’s article is a miss, since he just proposed to switch to another methodology altogether. The claim “hottest July” should be discussed within the context of global measurements and averaging. Doubting the validity of the used data itself merely would lead to “we don’t really know anything for sure here”. Which is simply another topic altogether.

    The rest of your graphics actually show that indeed July 2019 appears to be warmest on record. Although not the warmest month ever, which some headlines might appear to be saying.

    In short: another article with zero content and misleading claims from Kip. Why is it even on this blog?

    • Dowser ==> You don’t have to like Spencer’s analysis — just offer it since UAH is his data set.

  23. Sceptics have to be the most unlucky people in the world now. They have for decades been telling us its just natural variation and that the warming will stop soon, if it hasn’t already; or that the scientists have constructed a temperature series by setting historic temperatures down and adjusting recent ones up, and yet, so unluckily, the temperatures measured keep going up. Not even probability is on their side seemingly.

    • You know, believers in Catastrophic Anthropomorphic Global Warming have to be the most unlucky people in the world now. They have for decades been telling us that based on their models, temperatures are going to rise so fast as to make the earth uninhabitable and yet they continue to rise slowly from the bottom of the little ice age in a manner that is consistent with natural variation and is no where near as large as what their models predict; even with the scientists having constructed a temperature series by setting historic temperatures down and adjusting recent ones up they can’t get the temperatures to come close to matching their models, and yet, so unluckily, the temperatures measured keep going up so slowly as to prove that their models have no predictive power whatsoever. Not even probability is on their side seemingly.

    • “or that the scientists have constructed a temperature series by setting historic temperatures down and adjusting recent ones up, and yet, so unluckily, the temperatures measured keep going up.”

      You have to take into consideration who is doing the measuring. You would probably benefit from spending some time over at Tony Heller’s website. And a dive into the Climategate scandal would also help.

      As for the temperatures going higher, it depends on what data you are looking at. The UAH data shows the global temperatures have cooled by about 0.5C since Feb. 2016. The temperatures are trending down, not up, at the current time.

      Read ’em and weep:

      http://www.drroyspencer.com/wp-content/uploads/UAH_LT_1979_thru_July_2019_v6.jpg

      • “As for the temperatures going higher, it depends on what data you are looking at. The UAH data shows the global temperatures have cooled by about 0.5C since Feb. 2016. The temperatures are trending down, not up, at the current time.”
        I can’t believe you genuinely believe we are in a cooling trend given the peak in 2016 is such an obvious cherry pick. If you had any level of honesty you would be acknowledging that to achieve a record (or even near record ) in July globally in an Enso neutral world (SST’s are about average) is something quite remarkable. But you truck along denying the blindingly obvious. One can only assume you do this in the hope others less discerning will believe your nonsense.

        • “f you had any level of honesty you would be acknowledging that to achieve a record (or even near record ) in July globally in an Enso neutral world (SST’s are about average) is something quite remarkable. ”

          I don’t believe the numbers the Data Charlatans are putting out. That doesn’t make me dishonest.

          The Data Manipulators are manipulating the data to make things look “quite remarkable”. That’s the whole purpose of bastardizing the surface temperature record. And they are doing a good job of it. They fooled you, didn’t they.

          • Tom Abbott
            OK so exactly where are the bastardizing the data. All adjustments are free to be downloaded and analysed. I have an idea, rather than taking shots from the cheap seats, why don’t you actually point our where the fiddling has been done. I mean pin point it. Don’t just climategate this and climategate that. As I recall that was the point of Berkeley. You know the last and final data analysis that was going to sent all scientists to hell. Only they found the warming was real. So Tom, lets see what you got? Where is the fraud?

  24. Kip Hansen

    “And as a reminder for those who may have forgotten the changes RSS made to it calculations in 2016, from Climate4you”

    Aha. Mr Hansen seems to have a very selective memory.

    What about “a reminder who may have forgotten the changes UAH made to it[s] calculations” in 2015, of course untraceable on Climate4you:

    https://drive.google.com/file/d/1oWCzqozGfqTXkP6LiHOUUOnrznOsKjdA/view

    https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rqp8B8B6vUCvDoUc5rZy75DS7fCH59R3/view

    • Bindi,
      Your first chart could also be labeled :
      “The UAH v6 diurnal drift correction of AMSU-satellites validated against a reference dataset consisting of satellites with no or little drift (that do not need adjustments).”

      The validation fails..

    • Bindidon ==> Spencer has always been very open about his corrections due to various satellite problems — the data you point to shows less than 0.1 degrees differences — both up and down.

      To understand These changes, both to RSS and UAH, read Spencer’s blog from the appropriate time periods.

      • The fact remains,
        RSS validated their new product using nondrifting reference satellites
        UAH invalidated their new product using nondrifting reference satellites

        • Bindidon ==> GISS and UAH are entirely different beasts — GISS is a thermometer based surface data set — UAH is a satellite data set.

          If you are concerned about UAH adjustments and reasons for them, read Dr. Spencer’s blog and his peer-reviewed papers published with Christy and others — it is all out there for everyone to see — every nuance, wrinkle and wart.

          I have already posted Spencer’s bottom line on the RSS adjustments — along the lines of “scientific opinions vary”…..

          Our opinions obviously vary — but I am uncertain what point you are trying to make. I am, and have been, aware of what Nick Stokes thinks on the issue — our opinions vary as well.

  25. We did have one hot July day in central England, when I had to remind myself to get a grip and that this was nothing compared to what I regularly walked in when living in South Carolina. But what a fuss the media made of it!

    If we get a hotter than usual weather period then the BBC loves to trumpet the doom and gloom of global warming. Then, several months later, the people who’s job was other than reporting global warming (ie gardeners, sports reporters festival-goers etc) will usually recall it as a “good summer”. In nation of people who will more likely talk/complain to strangers about the weather than anything else, you can tell what people really think.

    The Met Office used to threaten us with future “barbecue summers” and “a Mediterranean climate”. That is until they probably realised that not only were we not getting all the barbecues promised, but that most people quite like the idea of a warmer climate in the UK. That’s why so many choose to vacation and retire in such places.

    • “We did have one hot July day in central England…”

      Here in Northeastern Ohio in July we did have our Killer Heat Wave when the temperatures got up into the mid to upper 90’sF for two whole days! Amazingly, the grass and trees are still green and alive and none of my neighbors were killed by this Unprecedented Heat Wave.

    • England got hot for a few days because the meridional jet stream allowed hot air from Africa to intrude farther north. Simultaneously, eastern Europe was anomalously cooler.

  26. Well, July 2019 was the hottest July on record according to:

    surface data
    Gistemp loti v4
    Berkeley earth l/o
    NOAA global temp
    JMA (tie with 2016
    TempLS (Nick Stokes)
    ERA5
    JRA-55
    NCEP/DOE (tie with 2016)

    Lower troposphere:
    RSS TLT
    NCEP/NCAR 500 mbar geopotential
    NCEP/DOE 500 mbar geopotential
    JRA-55 500 mbar geopotential

    NCEP/ NCAR surface had 2019 second, close to 2016
    UAH v6 is a clear outlier having July 1998 on top. Could be explained the teams belief-based choice of satellites and adjustments, not supported by data..

      • “Any answer to Olof R?”

        Climategate. Which shows that the Keepers of the Temperature Data conspired to manipulate the surface temperature record for political purposes and make it look like the tempertures are getting hotter and hotter in concert with the increase in the level of CO2 in the atmosphere. Thus, they created the Hockey Stick chart which erases all the significant warm periods in history because this was necessary in order for them to be able to claim that we are experiencing unprecedented warmth today that can only be caused by CO2 increases.

        Tmax charts. Which show that it was just as warm in the recent past as it is today and puts the lie to the claim that we are experiencing the hottest month in history today. The Unted States for example is about 1C cooler today than in 1934.

        I posted some Tmax charts elsewhere in this comment thread. Look them up and see the truth.

        As a bonus, here’s an unmodified chart from Nigeria that shows it was just as warm in the past as it is today. No unprecedented warmth today. No CAGW today.

        https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2017/06/station.gif

        • Please leave out the conspiracy ideation. It has no place in a sound scientific debate..

          Regarding tmax, you can’t directly compare measurements from the old days with that of modern equipment.

          Here’s a case from Belgium. The Royal Meteorological institute has through side by side studys of old and modern equipment found that the old Belgian tmax record 38.8 C from 1947 probably was 2.2 C too hot compared to modern standards

          https://www.brusselstimes.com/all-news/belgium-all-news/health/61223/belgiums-highest-recorded-temperature-could-be-broken-on-thursday/

          Anyway, the old record at Uccle, 38.8 C ( or rather 36.6) was broken by the 25 July with 39.7 C, but a new Belgian record was set elsewhere, 41.8 C.

          • “Please leave out the conspiracy ideation. It has no place in a sound scientific debate..”

            You imply the Climategate conspiracy was not real. It was real. We have the conspirators own words in writing to prove it.

            They have been true to those words ever since, continuing to this day to bastardize the official surface temperature records.

            The surface temperature record has been tampered with for political purposes. It is no use to science.

        • Tom Abbott

          You have been shown in earlier WUWT guest posts that your TMAX charts do not reflect reality at all, as they concern CONUS only. The Globe behaves completely different.

          And your chart of JUST ONE station in the TROPICS showing no temperature change gives a good measure of your extraordinara competence: there is NO climate change in the Tropics, that is absolutely evident.

          Why don’t you show charts concerning the Arctic?

          Even UAH’s lower troposphere measurements show that the Arctic warms 2 times faster than the rest of the world. At least 95 % of the UAH 2.5° grid cells with the highest trends are located in the latitude band 80.0N-82.5N.

    • It wasn’t the hottest everywhere. Which is why averaging all the measurements from all over the world together is meaningless. Intensive properties people. You can’t present a single number and say “see! Hottest!” Doesn’t work that way.

      Not to mention that “on record” is a very short time.

  27. As I recall, there was a very late, cold Spring and ~1-month late crop planting in the Midwest last year , but the excellent warm summer weather made up for that.

    This year, cold wet weather in the Midwest reportedly caused ~30% of the USA corn crop to not get planted – the ground was too wet for equipment.

    Could these be early signs of the imminent global cooling to commence by ~2020-2030. which I (we) predicted in my Calgary Herald article published 1Sept2002?

    I suggest that more research should be devoted to frost-resistant crops, because climate is about to get colder. While the average temperature may not drop much, the advent of early killer frosts will have a significant negative impact on global crop yields.

    We experienced this global cooling from ~1945 to 1977, even as fossil fuel combustion accelerated, and grain crop failures were much more common, especially in Russia.
    https://www.nytimes.com/1982/06/21/business/soviet-grain-crop-one-more-failure.html

  28. Nope. Not the “hottest” ever. Checked my own records, and frankly, if 90F is not normal for July in my AO, then what is? Should it be cold and snowing instead?

    Go on, media mavens, keep hollering “WOLF!!” even though you don’t go “outside” if you can help it. If you ever spend more than a five minute period outside in the fresh air, please let me know.

  29. Can we get some numbers? Since every previous July was not pointed out in those charts, it’s possible that none of the months above that line was a July.

  30. As always …. it depends on what you mean when you say “hot”. As Spencer notes, the maximum temps are not getting hotter, the overnight lows are what is driving the increased average. …. and the overnight lows are being driven by surface heat sinks, like asphalt.

    We’ve yet to reach 100 this summer where I live. … and we frequently have several weeks above 100F.

  31. If they really believed in climate change they would ban all immigration, support nuclear power, and ban all private jets. All these actions are the least disruptive and easy to implement. I will believe them when they actually act like this really is an existential threat.

  32. I live on the water in SoCal…anyone care to explain why we have a deep, persistent, resilient marine layer halfway through August?

  33. I live in So. California in the high desert, it has been a fairly mild summer here so far. Last summer I recorded 12 days of 100 degrees or better and 17 days the previous year, this year I am at 3 days of 100 degrees or more. We also had a cold and long winter here this year. I know one location doesn’t mean much in the grand scheme but I am happy to get some cooler weather.

  34. I would love the explanation of why, when politics was not involved, the highest temperatures recorded by state are most frequently claimed to have occurred in the 30’s. Wikipedia has the details.

    • “I would love the explanation of why, when politics was not involved,”

      That’s the reason: Politics wasn’t involved. People back then were not conspiring to manipulate the temperature data. They had no reason to do so.

      Today lots of people have reasons to manipulate the temperature data. And they do. You can’t trust any of the manipulated official surface temperature data. It’s cooled off about 0.5C over the last three years yet the Data Manipulators are still making “Hottest something Evah” claims. They are a one-trick pony, and all they have to hang their hat on is a bogus, bastardized Hockey Stick global temperature chart that is pure science fiction being sold as facts.

  35. I wonder what the USCRN data says for July 2019?
    Why is it rarely reported when it is supposed to be the mast pristine data set.
    Any time I google for a plot, I only get plots that are older mostly presented by Anthony.
    Why did they spend so much money establishing it while ignoring the data?
    I realize it is only Continental USA but that is where many live.
    Anyone have a link to the plot?

  36. Richard A. O’Keefe: “satellites don’t measure temperature”

    Then isn’t this also true: “Thermometers don’t measure temperature, they measure expansion of a liquid in a tube (glass thermometers) or the resistance of a sensor (electronic sensors). Using the output of models that interpret the height of the liquid (glass thermometers) or the resistance of the sensor (electronic sensors) as temperature makes comparing the model output to measured surface temperatures a case of “apples and oranges.”

    • Mr O’Keefe, as you have brought up the subject of Surface Temperatures measured by Thermometers perhaps you can explain why most of the major Continents shown by Tom Abbott further up the post do not show higher temperatures for July 2019?
      Please note that they are “AS MEASURED” temperatures, which tend to agree with the UAH values.
      He has shown the results for
      USA
      China
      India
      Norway
      Australia

      I wonder if you are aware of just how much the Temperature Values have been changed over the years?

    • “After calibration, there is no intervening “model” needed for the glass/electronic instrument.”

      Sure there are; the model that converts the height of a liquid to a temperature or the one that converts the resistance of a sensor to a temperature. If your argument is that there are more variables in the satellite models than in the thermometer models and/or that it is easier to calibrate thermometers models than it is to calibrate a satellite model, I would agree with that, but it doesn’t negate the fact that none of them actually measure temperature.

      “PS, satellites don’t measure microwave brightness at the surface, whereas you can locate glass/electronic instruments at the surface.”

      True but irrelevant to the discussion about the existence of models for thermometers and satellites.

      • It is absolutely relevant when using satellite derived temperatures and using them to discredit the surface measurements. Apples and oranges.

      • PS, the linear relationships between scale marks on a glass thermometer, or between current and temp in an electronic device are much simpler than the “model” of an air column with pressure/altitude factors, and moisture content. Additionally, my personal “perception” of temperature relates very well with experience of my outside thermometer. Can’t say the same about an unseen device flying overhead at 27,000+ kph at 150 kilometers.

      • “It is absolutely relevant when using satellite derived temperatures and using them to discredit the surface measurements.”

        This is irrelevant to our discussion of whether the devices being discussed actually measure temperature.

        “PS, the linear relationships between scale marks on a glass thermometer … are much simpler than the “model” of an air column …”

        True and I conceded that in my previous comment but that still does not negate the fact that none of these devices actually measure temperature.

    • Hey
      0.81°F 0.65°F

      you forgot to mention that USCRN is

      HOTTER THAN THE “BAD” STATIONS

      opps.

      Historically CRN is a little bit warmer than the “bad” “adjusted” “hoax” data.

      Go figure.

      Here is the thing.

      Month in and month out.
      year in and year out.
      decade after decade..

      CRN will be there to show you guys that the “bad” stations, and “adjusted” data is

      perfectly fine.

      • So you are claiming they are still adjusting station data since 2012 through 2019?
        Are they adjusting them to be a little lower than USCRN?

  37. The great irony is that by laying more asphalt and pouring more concrete in mega cities we will further the climate crusades via UHI effect with focus on surface stations.

    • Indeed. I have been looking up how I can model the earths energy budget using a kinetic model that focuses on joules, and was surprised to find, the heat capacity of CO2 is approx 850 j/kg, dry air itself is 1008 j/kg, asphalt is 920 j/kg. We have close to 15 billion tons of asphalt roads, we emit only 5 billion tons of CO2 per year. Asphalt never goes away, CO2 is gone in a few years. Multiply out the amount of heat absorption, and release back to the atmosphere from CO2 and asphalt, and we find that asphalt is a significantly greater contributor than CO2. Heck for that matter, if we converted ALL of the “dry air” to CO2, the heat capacity of the atmosphere would drop from 1008 j/kg to 850 j/kg.

      This all smacks of fraud imo.

  38. Significant changes in local seasonal and yearly temperature are always the result of the peculiarities of the Jet Stream. They don’t happen in the tropics. And, the earth has not warmed since the Younger Dryas. Gaia worshippers get over yourselves. The pendulum swings and ice is inevitably coming with it.

  39. At least satellites can measure the entire earth; it is consistent data. Thermometer data are simply made up where they don’t exist, which is most of the world. It’s real science vs. imaginary science.

    • “At least satellites can measure the entire earth”
      Actually, they don’t, at all. They fail near poles and at high altitude. But more seriously, they only look at each point once or twice a day, and have some uncertainty about climatically what that reading corresponds to. Whereas thermometers are always there. Even the old min/max scann ed the whole day, while recording the min and max.

      Another serious problem is that they have to sort out a result from a single signal that is a mix of many levels in the atmosphere.

      • Right, Nick. And min-max LiGs have a resolution of ±0.25 C.

        Except for yours, of course, which we know not only had perfect accuracy but also infinite precision.

      • So basically it’s all crappy data (satellite and thermometer) to try to reach any kind of certainty for policy decision making purposes.

        • Some coverage is missing from satellites, but nowhere near as bad as what Nick might indicate. Thermometers are not always there because they often pick and choose over the years which ones they continue to use or not. The surface coverage is always changing and not comparing like for like.

          UAH measures from 85S to 85N so only about 1% of global surface is always missing.
          RSS measures from 70S to 70N so about 3-4% of the global surface is always missing.

          Surface temperatures actually cover less than about 0.1% of the global surface to within 25k sq km. A few stations at best over a 1000 sq km for example doesn’t represent full coverage as is often in denial.

          Total surface area of Earth 510,072,000 sq km Total water surface area: 70.8% (361,132,000 sq km) Total land surface area: 29.2% (148,940,000 sq km)

          There are 1408 stations used in this data series currently and one covers about 25 square kilometres. So here we have 1408 x 25 sq km =35075 sq km.

          This truly represents 0.024% of the land surface without going into even less coverage of the ocean surface. Some countries have zero stations and a lot still only have a few for hundreds and even thousands of miles.

          https://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/station_data_v3/

          The global coverage of the surface data even now is absolutely awful, satellite for coverage are light years ahead as the surface don’t even come remotely close.

        • This is for mods only!!!!

          Why do my posts always vanish from view recently and are in moderation?

          I made an error once of using a different similar user name, but I always stick with this one.

      • they only look at each point once or twice a day

        That may not be a big deal. Here in NH, I love to keep an eye on the temperature atop Mt Washington. It’s only 6288′ high, but the peak sits in a stream of air that has little ground connection, and therefore shows little heating during the day, at least until late AM when ground level air becomes neutral buoyant and mixing begins. I suppose it might be fun to look at nighttime effects for CO2 radiation and reabsorption.

        A great rule of thumb is to take it’s morning temperature, and add 30F to it (the dry adiabatic lapse) and that gives you a decent idea of the day’s high temperature.

        My point is that the microwave soundings don’t have as severe a diurnal change. The bigger factor is from the shuttling of air masses through the area.

        https://w1.weather.gov/data/obhistory/KMWN.html shows the temperature range in the last 24 hours between 50F and 54F. Pretty warm for mid-August, but we have a warm and humid air mass coming in. The “low troposhere” soundings are from around 14,000′ where there’s even less diurnal impact.

  40. Richard ==> Take it up with NOAA — they pay for these two satellite data sets because they help them know what is happening with the temperature of the atmosphere, which is the concern about CO2 concentrations.

  41. Alaska records hottest month in July?
    “Alaska’s average temperature in July was 58.1 degrees (14.5 Celsius). That’s 5.4 degrees (3 Celsius) above average and 0.8 degrees (0.4 Celsius) higher than the previous warmest month of July 2004, NOAA said.”
    “But Alaska’s recent heat has had silver linings. Barley and other crops are ready to harvest, said Stephen Brown of the University of Alaska Fairbanks Cooperative Extension Service.

    The growing season has been extended by a month, and if extra days become the norm, they will expand what can be grown in the state. Brown used heat radiated from his blacktop driveway to grow fruit not usually seen outside greenhouses.

    “I’ve got a bumper crop of tomatoes and jalapenos this summer,” he said.”
    https://apnews.com/d7b565a7e2f14f3381065f7a677231af
    Any comments?

  42. Why the record temperatures for July 2019 are wrong?

    If you compare the station coverage from gistemp with the cooler areas from the uah satellite July 2019 these areas have little or no surface coverage.

    https://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/station_data_v3/

    https://www.nsstc.uah.edu/climate/2019/july2019/201907_map.png

    Give the missing areas above average temperatures then just like magic we have record temperatures. They have been doing this dishonestly for many years.

    This gives them freedom to make up these areas whatever they want to keep giving record temperatures when they feel like it. There is dishonest science in the surface data giving only confirmation bias.

    Global temperatures always have cool and warm anomalies and if you deliberately remove most of these either way, records will be broken because it’s not how the planet’s weather patterns/climate ever behaves.

    • “And if you look at the GISTEMP anomaly mad, you will see that most of the areas that are cool in the UAH data are also cool in the GISS data.”

      Only one area is cool on land (NE Europe) that match the satellite with a few about average/above temperatures, but I do know that the anomalies are based on different periods. The warm bias is clear because there is not more than a 1c difference in temperature between the different time base lines. There is a comparison with UK station temperatures and gisttemp at the bottom below.

      https://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/maps/index_v4.html

      Western Europe and most of Africa are around 1-4c above normal not shown anywhere else. Africa have hardly any surface stations that have been filled in from elsewhere. The anomalies in Africa are nothing like each other because the data is made up for most of it and takes up a large section of land mass.

      https://www.nsstc.uah.edu/climate/2019/july2019/201907_map.png

      The UK land stations was 1.2c above average for July 2019 whereas for gistemp most of UK is between 2c to 4c above normal.

      https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/research/climate/maps-and-data/summaries/index

      • I do know that the anomalies are based on different periods.

        That’s why I gave you a map based on the same period as UAH, 1981 – 2010.

        The UK land stations was 1.2c above average for July 2019 whereas for gistemp most of UK is between 2c to 4c above normal.

        Nope. The GISS map shows the UK being in the 1 – 2°C range, UAH shows it being in the 0.5 – 1.5°C range. The actual value of 1.2°C is within both ranges.

        Western Europe and most of Africa are around 1-4c above normal not shown anywhere else. Africa have hardly any surface stations that have been filled in from elsewhere.

        Nope, compared with 1981 – 2010 GISS shows Western Europe and Africa less than 2°C above average, with the exception of Spain. UAH shows a lot of the area up to 1.5°C above average, with Southern Africa warmer. There are differences over Spain and the Mediterranean, with UAH showing areas between -0.5 and +0.5°C, but these are areas where there is station data.

        Of course there are differences between the two, GISTEMP, and all other data sets, have been warming faster than UAH. GISTEMP is 0.52°C above the 1981 – 2010 average, UAH 0.38°C. But I don’t see evidence for your claim that the difference is due to there being no stations where the cooler parts of the globe.

      • The UK land stations was 1.2c above average for July 2019 whereas for gistemp most of UK is between 2c to 4c above normal.”

        “Western Europe and most of Africa are around 1-4c above normal not shown anywhere else. Africa have hardly any surface stations that have been filled in from elsewhere.”

        “Nope. The GISS map shows the UK being in the 1 – 2°C range, UAH shows it being in the 0.5 – 1.5°C range. The actual value of 1.2°C is within both ranges.”

        “Nope, compared with 1981 – 2010 GISS shows Western Europe and Africa less than 2°C above average, with the exception of Spain. UAH shows a lot of the area up to 1.5°C above average, with Southern Africa warmer. There are differences over Spain and the Mediterranean, with UAH showing areas between -0.5 and +0.5°C, but these are areas where there is station data.”

        Both these values in the blockquote were from the 1951-1980 timeframe because I was showing how warming bias there has been introduced from then compared with now. No way was Western Europe and Africa for example that much cooler back then. That’s why I stated this before “The warm bias is clear because there is not more than a 1c difference in temperature between the different time base lines.”

        The gistemp now barely shows any cooling for NH between 1940’s and 1970’s. The 1970’s were significantly cooler than the 1930’s and 1940’s despite what gistemp had been frequently adjusted too over the years.

        Regarding the UK comparing the same baseline that you have correctly stated it still has roughly an 0.5c warmer anomaly because of the bands.

        There is a big disagreement with Spain between the two of a significant amount.

        With Africa uah shows between -0.5c and 1.5c for most of Africa, gistemp between 0.5c and 2.0c, so again there is roughly a warm bias this time of nearer 0.5c to 1.0c.

        This type of regular pattern it what makes monthly record global temperatures, in places with little or no data.

        “But I don’t see evidence for your claim that the difference is due to there being no stations where the cooler parts of the globe.”

        The claim is actually when the cooler regions occur in places with no stations, when the warmer regions occur with stations. This is when there is very likely a claim for global record month.

        I have demonstrated about 0.5c to 1.0c difference for these areas in Africa and it is pretty big chunk of land. Most of the anomalies have a warmer 0.5c band for gistemp compared with uah.

  43. Can anyone please explain the outrageous growth of greenery this summer? Yes, it’s been cooler in the UK ( except for a bit of July) and wetter than last summer, but after the couple of hard frosts in the spring the greenery; trees, bracken (giant ferns, about six feet high) briars, and trees have all gone crazy. I’ve been hiking the same woods for 20 years and never seen anything like it. Sunspots, solar flares or what?( If anyone mentions CO2 I will set my dog on you. )

  44. Dallas TX – NOAA shows July 2019 to be the 72nd hottest July since 1880
    Norman Oklahoma shows July 2019 to be the 61st hottest July on record since 1895
    Norman okla is missing 1975-1998 records on the noaa website – what is that all about.

    Even with the missing years. 2016 is ranked as the 28th hottest year since 1895 (ignoring the 23 years of missing data on the website)

    • I don’t know about Norman, Oklahoma, but a Tulsa meterologist said about a week ago that he didn’t think Tulsa was going to hit 100F this month. It’s been a close call but I’m not sure Tulsa has hit 100F yet. And that is highly unusual. This area usually has numerous days over 100F during the summer.

      This summer in the heart of the Dust Bowl we have had a very mild summer with unusual amounts of rain (which has held down the 100F+ high temperatures, although not the Heat Index).

      We’ll take a summer like this every year, minus the overabundance of moisture. About half of what we got this year in rain would be sufficient. 🙂

  45. There have been several complaints in comments about the use of the Climate4you graph for RSS — which shows the difference the 2016 change made to the RSS data set, and that I did not show changes to the UAH data set. Here is the graph for UAH with changed shown (red older set, blue current set, as with RSS above):

    Kip, I’m pretty sure that red line is still showing version 6 of UAH. It’s from May 2015, the month after the new version was released.

    Here’s a better comparison.

    http://www.drroyspencer.com/wp-content/uploads/V6-vs-v5.6-LT-1979-Mar2015.gif

    • “red line is still showing version 6 of UAH”
      Indeed so. The change analogous to the change in RSS, and of about the same magnitude but the other way, happened in April 2015. The graph displayed here, which pretends to correspond, in fact just compares two different releases of V6.0.

      Spencer’s graph does show it correctly, but in a way that makes the scale look small. Here is a plot which shows the differences made between versions for both UAH and RSS. They are virtually equal and opposite.

    • Bellman ==> Thank you — that is a better comparison.

      In all honesty, I have come to the conclusion that ALL global temperature data sets are OPINIONS and can not be classified as facts. Some data sets that more closely agree simply demonstrate that the groups producing them agree as to their opinions of how, more or less, the raw data should be interpreted.

      Thus we see RSS and UAH, for example, agreeing as to the SHAPE of the data (the hills and valleys) but disagreeing as to the magnitude, the numerical value in degrees.

      • You agree that the graph isn’t comparing uah 5.6 and 6.0, but this hasn’t been changed in the article. The implication of the update is that there has been almost no change in UAH, which is misleading to say the least.

        “…All global temperature sets are OPINIONS…”

        I really don’t agree. All sets are estimates and gave to make assumptions, but that does’t mean they are just the opinions of their maintainers. If they were it would be trivial for someone who believed there was no warming to take the raw data and show no warming.

        • Bellman ==> we’ll have to leave it at that then — they may well be informed opinions — the details of each, the numerical values, — are al a direct function of the scientific opinions of the teams that create the data sets — they all are quite certain that their methods and opinions are sound (or at least justified by circumstances.)

  46. READERS ==> I have added two updates to the end of the essay over the last couple of hours. — kh

  47. Epilogue:

    Well, readership here is a funny old thing. I expected readers to pick up on the fact that NOAA actually claimed, not the just the hottest July on record, but:

    “Much of the planet sweltered in unprecedented heat in July, as temperatures soared to new heights in the hottest month ever recorded.”

    Anyone with even rudimentary familiarity with the topic of Global Surface Temperatures data sets knows that this categorically untrue. Don’t they have Editors? Don’t they have press release fact-checkers?

    More than one reader insists that we must use a thermometer-based surface temperature data set because “that’s where we live”. I may take up the issue of whether we live “at 2 meters above ground level” versus “Do we live in the Lower Troposphere?” If you have favorite weather station images, depicting where “2 meters above ground level” is when they measure the temperature there, please post links to the images. I’m pretty sure none of us live, for example, at 2 meters above the tarmac at the local airport — nor do we live at 2 meters above the roof of the local fire station — you get the idea.

    Thanks for Reading.

    # # # # #

  48. Well from our perspective in the Southern part of Australia we are looking forward to seeing the sun again, hopefully sometime soon. It seems as though our winters are getting colder here with lower minimum temperatures.

    But the media will proudly announce in December that it has been the hottest year on record. I always wonder where are they measuring the temperature ? Even some of our summers have been very incipid.

    We can easily survive a couple of extra degrees up, but I don’t think we’d do too well if the surface was covered in ice and snow for 365 days a year.

  49. Kip,

    — as if we all lived at 2 meters above ground level and not in the Lower Troposphere.

    Fits like a hand in the glove with

    — as if we all lived at 2 meters above sea level and not any height, anywhere in the Lower Troposphere.

    • Johann ==> The question of “where we live”has intrigued me for some time — Spencer and Christy peg the Lower Troposphere at “surface to about 8 km” or about up to 26,000 feet. I’ve stood on solid Earth as high as 14,505 feet (4,421 m) at the peak of Mount Whitney in the Sierra Nevada.

      While I am no Weather Man, I understand that the majority of our weather (and thus the climates we experience) happens in the Lower Troposphere.

      Land surface warming is mostly the result human land use changes and the processing methods used to calculate larger geographical “averages” (such as CONUS and Global). Sea surface temps from satellites are really more correctly sea surface SKIN temperature, which is a function of the sun shining on the water. Anyone swimming still ocean water knows that the skin temperature is not the same as the the surface water (two meters) temperature.

  50. Kip Hansen

    Thanks for the updates, fair enough.

    I come back here to you last reply somewhere upthread:
    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/08/16/july-2019-hottest-july-ever/#comment-2774667

    1. “GISS and UAH are entirely different beasts — GISS is a thermometer based surface data set — UAH is a satellite data set”.

    No they aren’t.

    The surface, where we live, and the middle of the lower troposphere indeed are ‘entirely different beasts’ with an average temperature difference of about 24 °C, and harsh weather differences: Roy Spencer doesn’t measure anything directly at surfaces (due to inherent biases especially above the ocean), all is done somewhere around 4-5 km.

    But the graph below might very well convince you that satellite-based evaluations of O2’s microwave emissions and thermometric measurements at surface are all but ‘entirely different beasts’ – when viewed together as departures from the same mean:

    https://drive.google.com/file/d/1MC1Ebx6HAxdHTNE7w1eL73BTer-rhkLa/view

    2. “Our opinions obviously vary — but I am uncertain what point you are trying to make.”

    Well that is really a surprise. You are in my opinion a honest person, and I therefore can’t understand where such uncertainty could arise from.

    Is it not evident that I try to contradict the usual opinion that RSS, GISS and others perform data tampering, karlization etc etc etc, and that UAH is the one and only good guy?

    3. “I am, and have been, aware of what Nick Stokes thinks on the issue — our opinions vary as well”.

    My reference to the moyhu page on UAH adjustments compared with GISS’ adjustments
    https://s3-us-west-1.amazonaws.com/www.moyhu.org/2015/12/uahadj1.png

    was not at all intended to show what Nick Stokes “thinks on the issue’. Not Nick’s opinion, let alone my own one do matter here: only data does.

    And that data, everybody can manage to find, download and process it, using any spreadsheet calculator.

    Here is another comparison of the UAH adjustments for 1979-2011 with those obtained by comparing GISS’ actual data witht that saved in 2012 into the Wayback Machine:
    https://drive.google.com/file/d/1b6axDruUd62XggCQtxje25aI8I4bOFGX/view

    You clearly can see that the anomaly differences for GISS are by no means higher than those computed for UAH6.0 minus UAH5.6 in the LT.

    That was Nick’s point, not more not less, and is mine as well.

    Let me close this comment by coming back to the comparison of UAH LT adjustments at the transition from version 5.6 to 6.0, with those made by RSS from 3.3 to 4.0:
    https://drive.google.com/file/d/1xVNr2ry4ozSCYh49MpfLoH7Twx7C2HLP/view

    What we see here, this sudden divergence starting somewhere after 2000, has in my humble opinion nothing to do with any kind of data tampering to make the Globe warmer.

    It is a hint on a huge technical problem whose search for an adequate solution bypasses the lay(wo)man’s average understanding and experience by dimensions.

    Best regards
    J.-P. D.

    *
    Sources

    UAH5.6 LT
    https://www.nsstc.uah.edu/data/msu/t2lt/uahncdc_lt_5.6.txt

    UAH6.0 LT
    https://www.nsstc.uah.edu/data/msu/v6.0/tlt/uahncdc_lt_6.0.txt

    RSS3.3 LT
    http://data.remss.com/msu/monthly_time_series/RSS_Monthly_MSU_AMSU_Channel_TLT_Anomalies_Land_and_Ocean_v03_3.txt

    RSS4.0 LT
    http://images.remss.com/data/msu/monthly_time_series/RSS_Monthly_MSU_AMSU_Channel_TLT_Anomalies_Land_and_Ocean_v04_0.txt

    GISS actual:
    https://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata_v3/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt

    GISS saved in 2012 (many documents are present):
    https://web.archive.org/web/20120927103121/http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata_v3/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt

    • Bindidon ==> ah ==”Is it not evident that I try to contradict the usual opinion that RSS, GISS and others perform data tampering, karlization etc etc etc, and that UAH is the one and only good guy?”

      You are arguing against I point that I did not make and do not hold.

      My entire point — the point of the essay — which I have repeated many times, in the essay itself and in comments, is that July 2019 was not the hottest month ever– and I showed graphs of both RSS and UAH to illustrate.

      • Kip Hansen

        1. Please follow back all my comments and your successive replies.

        *
        2. Here is the top ten of a descending sort of all July anomalies in the temperature series RSS4.0 LT:

        1. 2019 7 0.71
        2. 2010 7 0.70
        3. 2016 7 0.68

        2018 7 0.64
        1998 7 0.63
        2017 7 0.62
        2014 7 0.54
        2005 7 0.49
        2015 7 0.49
        2011 7 0.48

        (Caution: RSS anomalies are wrt the mean of 1979-1998, making them some 0.14 C higher compared to 1981-2010. But that doesn’t change the sort.)

        It is nice to show graphs ‘illustrating’ your point!
        But numbers are better.

        If I were you, I would by now ignore RSS4.0 because it does not 100% support your view. It’s much too hot, looks like GISS or NOAA in the LT! Keeping on UAH6.0 would be by far better. It’s so pretty cool there…

        Here is the top ten of a descending sort of all July anomalies (wrt the mean of 1981-2010) in the temperature series UAH6.0 LT:

        1. 1998 7 0.51
        2. 2019 7 0.38
        3. 2016 7 0.38

        2010 7 0.34
        2018 7 0.32
        2017 7 0.29
        2002 7 0.23
        2009 7 0.22
        2005 7 0.22
        2014 7 0.21

        *
        Sorry, Kip: we live in the lowest part of the lower troposphere, far far below where RSS and UAH pick up their data.

        I guess that at least 99% of Mankind live below 1000 m altitude, that’s about 3-4000 m below the satellites’ LT measurement level.

        Rgds
        J.-P. D.

  51. I’m all but a fan of ‘hottest evah’ but… data is data is data.

    Let us await HadCRUT’s global stuff in

    https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/hadobs/hadcrut4/data/current/time_series/HadCRUT.4.6.0.0.monthly_ns_avg.txt

    for July 2019: it is still not there today, on 2019 Aug 22.

    Meanwhile, we see that NOAA’s evaluation of the mid troposphere. STAR MT (see link in a comment above), also shows July 2019 on top:

    2019 7 0.3130
    2010 7 0.3040
    2016 7 0.2520
    1998 7 0.2440
    2018 7 0.2300
    2017 7 0.1670
    2014 7 0.1450
    2009 7 0.1300
    2005 7 0.1300
    2015 7 0.1280

    I guess that the one and only official surface data looking like UAH is Ryan Maue’s WeatherBELL.
    Unfortunately, it is behind paywall since quite a while.

    But… it is reanalysis data, based on… a model.
    But… I had to learn that while models showing warming are bad models, those showing cooling are good ones.

    Hmmmh.

Comments are closed.