Reposted from Dr. Roy Spencer’s blog
March 2nd, 2020 by Roy W. Spencer, Ph. D.
The Version 6.0 global average lower tropospheric temperature (LT) anomaly for February, 2020 was +0.76 deg. C, up considerably from the January, 2020 value of +0.57 deg. C.
This is the warmest monthly anomaly since March 2016 (+0.77 deg. C), and the warmest February since 2016 (+0.86 deg. C), both due to El Nino warmth. Continuing weak El Nino conditions are also likely responsible for the current up-tick in temperature, as I recently demonstrated here.
The linear warming trend since January, 1979 remains at +0.13 C/decade (+0.12 C/decade over the global-averaged oceans, and +0.18 C/decade over global-averaged land).
Various regional LT departures from the 30-year (1981-2010) average for the last 14 months are:
YEAR MO GLOBE NHEM. SHEM. TROPIC USA48 ARCTIC AUST 2019 01 +0.38 +0.35 +0.41 +0.36 +0.53 -0.15 +1.15 2019 02 +0.37 +0.47 +0.28 +0.43 -0.02 +1.04 +0.06 2019 03 +0.35 +0.44 +0.25 +0.41 -0.55 +0.97 +0.59 2019 04 +0.44 +0.38 +0.51 +0.54 +0.50 +0.92 +0.91 2019 05 +0.32 +0.29 +0.35 +0.40 -0.61 +0.98 +0.39 2019 06 +0.47 +0.42 +0.52 +0.64 -0.64 +0.91 +0.35 2019 07 +0.38 +0.33 +0.44 +0.45 +0.11 +0.33 +0.87 2019 08 +0.39 +0.38 +0.39 +0.42 +0.17 +0.44 +0.24 2019 09 +0.62 +0.64 +0.59 +0.60 +1.14 +0.75 +0.57 2019 10 +0.46 +0.64 +0.28 +0.31 -0.03 +0.99 +0.50 2019 11 +0.55 +0.56 +0.54 +0.55 +0.21 +0.56 +0.38 2019 12 +0.56 +0.61 +0.50 +0.58 +0.92 +0.66 +0.94 2020 01 +0.57 +0.60 +0.53 +0.62 +0.73 +0.12 +0.66 2020 02 +0.76 +0.96 +0.55 +0.76 +0.38 +0.02 +0.30
The UAH LT global gridpoint anomaly image for February, 2020 should be available in the next few days here.
The global and regional monthly anomalies for the various atmospheric layers we monitor should be available in the next few days at the following locations:
Lower Troposphere: http://vortex.nsstc.uah.edu/data/msu/v6.0/tlt/uahncdc_lt_6.0.txt
Mid-Troposphere: http://vortex.nsstc.uah.edu/data/msu/v6.0/tmt/uahncdc_mt_6.0.txt
Tropopause: http://vortex.nsstc.uah.edu/data/msu/v6.0/ttp/uahncdc_tp_6.0.txt
Lower Stratosphere: http://vortex.nsstc.uah.edu/data/msu/v6.0/tls/uahncdc_ls_6.0.txt
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Here is a look at the February warming across much of Siberia, … https://goldminor.wordpress.com/2020/03/04/february-warming-in-siberia/
goldminor
In a few days, the last countries will have reported their data to NOAA, and I will then download GHCN daily again. We’ll see what the Siberian stations tell us.
Rgds
J.-P. D.
“Here is a look at the February warming across much of Siberia”
You can see the actual GHCN station readings on the map here. It was very warm, at least as much as January.
It was above average because of the surface winds. January also saw similar wind patterns.
Why do we spend so much time looking are what everyone knows is unrepresentative and biased surface temperature data when 20 years ago the ice core data showed temperature surrogate change precedes CO2 concentration change? The chemistry and physics of the atmosphere and oceans did not change in the 1950s.
And if your temperature stations show a dramatic jump in temperature between January and February and it is all due to a supposed heat wave in Siberia, your temperature data is obviously junk. A dramatic northern hemispheric warming in February just isn’t possible. Did the hidden deep ocean heat teleport to to eastern Siberia? The more is see of meteorology the more I am convinced it is a pseudoscience like sociology.
“Why do we spend so much time looking are what everyone knows is unrepresentative and biased surface temperature data when 20 years ago the ice core data showed temperature surrogate change precedes CO2 concentration change? The chemistry and physics of the atmosphere and oceans did not change in the 1950s.”
Dear, oh dear.
“Biased” is the opinion of denizens here..
That’s not “everyone”.
We are discussing the UAH LT temp series.
Not the surface one.
Temps rise both before and after a CO2 pulse.
Depends on which comes first (the rising temps or the CO2 pulse).
In rising GMSTs ( orbital forcing) it lags.
In that case it is a feedback.
When humans add it it precedes (obviously).
In that case it is a driver.
“The chemistry and physics of the atmosphere and oceans did not change in the 1950s.?
No, what changed was mankind ramping up industrialisation via the burning of fossil carbon.
“A dramatic northern hemispheric warming in February just isn’t possible.”
There hasn’t been one. The NH has been anomalously warm all winter.
UAH LT Dec 0.56, Jan 0.57, Feb 0.76.
Nor has there been any “dramatic warming” in the surface record….
“The more is see of meteorology the more I am convinced it is a pseudoscience like sociology.”
And I have “thoughts” that make me convinced about people who make comments like that.
I would like have more exposure to charts that eliminate the periods of El Nino and La Nina effect and which recognize the importance of the years 1880, 1914, 1944, 1974 and 2004 because they appear to be the changeover dates between 30 year periods of continuous warming and thirty year periods where the end of period temperature is no higher than the beginning year temperature. I also realize that the years I have mentioned are not necessarily the exact beginning and ending years for particular periods but are my best estimate based on my reading of the temperature charts I have seen. I also fail to see the value of trend lines which begin within a period and extend across the end of that period into the next period. This practice draws attention away from the presence of the thirty year periods of alternating warming and pause in warming.
I would like to see a temperature chart or charts that eliminated the effects of known El Nino and La Nina activity. The cause of these effects are known and are apparently not the cause of slow warming observed since 1880. Their presence complicates the ability to observe the manner in which the slow warming is occurring. I would also like to see more attention given to the importance of the changeover from the periods of continuous warming and periods where the temperature at the end of the period was no higher than at the beginning of the period. The use of trend lines from the middle of of one period to the next appear to distract attention from the period changeovers and indicates a lack of appreciation for the importance of the presence of these alternating periods of warming and pause in warming.