Potential record warmth

[nzucker]

The major surface datasets agree.

The satellites did not have 2010 as the warmest year on record. It was 1998 on RSS and UAH, I believe. 

 

Also, GISS was tied between 2010 and 2005 for the warmest year on record. 2005 was a lot warmer on GISS than other sources.

 

In any case, the global temperature trend is nearly zero, Chris, regardless of if you use GISS, Hadley, UAH, or RSS. I have shown this to be true using the graphs I've posted. We've not warmed in any meaningful fashion in the last 10 years. 

[pazzo83]

The satellites did not have 2010 as the warmest year on record. It was 1998 on RSS and UAH, I believe. 

 

Also, GISS was tied between 2010 and 2005 for the warmest year on record. 2005 was a lot warmer on GISS than other sources.

 

In any case, the global temperature trend is nearly zero, Chris, regardless of if you use GISS, Hadley, UAH, or RSS. I have shown this to be true using the graphs I've posted. We've not warmed in any meaningful fashion in the last 10 years. 

Most of the warmest years on record have occurred in the past 14 years.  That in and of itself is remarkable.

[nzucker]

Most of the warmest years on record have occurred in the past 14 years.  That in and of itself is remarkable.

That is still possible with a zero trend in global temperatures. I agree that the Earth is at near-record warmth compared to the modern dataset, but it hasn't been warming nearly as fast as projected by IPCC. 2012 finished the 9th warmest year on record. That's not that warm considering it was basically an ENSO-neutral year with just a slight tilt towards La Nina. 

[pazzo83]

That is still possible with a zero trend in global temperatures. I agree that the Earth is at near-record warmth compared to the modern dataset, but it hasn't been warming nearly as fast as projected by IPCC. 2012 finished the 9th warmest year on record. That's not that warm considering it was basically an ENSO-neutral year with just a slight tilt towards La Nina. 

The 9th warmest year on record in a dataset of 100+ years is pretty warm.  I don't think anyone was expecting the increase in global temperatures to be linear.  Agreed that the first decade of the 21st Century has seen a dramatic slowdown in the warmth of the globe, but we are still warming.

[nzucker]

The 9th warmest year on record in a dataset of 100+ years is pretty warm.  I don't think anyone was expecting the increase in global temperatures to be linear.  Agreed that the first decade of the 21st Century has seen a dramatic slowdown in the warmth of the globe, but we are still warming.

Since 2000, the rate of warming on the four major datasets (GISS, RSS, UAH, Hadley) has been about .06C/decade. This is a considerable decrease from the .16C/decade that these sources warmed since 1979, at a time when carbon dioxide concentration was increasing at a faster rate than ever. You can see that there has been a divergence between rapidly increasing CO2 concentrations and the rate of warming, which has been almost nil since 2002:

 

Some sources show no trend at all since the 97-98 super Niño. This is admittedly starting at a warm point globally, cherrypicking to a certain extent but RSS satellite analysis has an absolutely flat trend since 1997:

[pazzo83]

Why would you use a linear regression there?  Variations in global temp are anything BUT linear.

[nzucker]

Why would you use a linear regression there?  Variations in global temp are anything BUT linear.

It is just an easy way of showing the divergence between the global temperature slowing its warming while CO2 concentrations continue to rise rapidly. The graphs were already made, although WoodforTrees does allow you to make your own. I am not a statistics expert but it is pretty clear to me that global temperatures are basically stable.

 

In addition, I don't expect any major global warming in 2013. Global SSTs have dropped significantly, and a weak La Niña appears to be forming as we speak. We're also seeing impressive snow cover over the Northern Hemisphere which has led to cold anomalies over large areas of land such as China, Russia, and Europe. 

[Weathergun]

64F for Central Park is wrong:

 

METAR has 13C (55F) for Central Park:

 

METAR KNYC 141551Z AUTO 29006KT 7SM CLR 13/10 A3008 RMK AO2 SLP179 T01280100 51016

000SXUS51 KOKX 141557OSOOKXNEW YORK CITY METROPOLITAN WEATHER ROUNDUPNATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE NEW YORK NY1100 AM EST MON JAN 14 2013CITY           SKY/WX    TMP DP  RH WIND       PRES   REMARKSCENTRAL PARK   CLOUDY    64  50  60 VRB5      30.10RLAGUARDIA APRT PTSUNNY   54  49  83 NW9       30.07RKENNEDY INTL   PTSUNNY   55  53  93 W8        30.09R FOGNEWARK/LIBERTY CLOUDY    56  53  90 W6        30.08RTETERBORO APRT CLOUDY    56  51  84 W3        30.06S

[HailMan06]

Guys you all know that there's a CC forum to discuss this stuff right?

[famartin]

I think Upton is doing manual corrections.  Here's what I found:

METAR KNYC 141551Z VRB04KT 10SM CLR 18/10 A3010 RMK AO2 SLP183 T01780100

64F for Central Park is wrong:

 

METAR has 13C (55F) for Central Park:

 

METAR KNYC 141551Z AUTO 29006KT 7SM CLR 13/10 A3008 RMK AO2 SLP179 T01280100 51016

000SXUS51 KOKX 141557OSOOKXNEW YORK CITY METROPOLITAN WEATHER ROUNDUPNATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE NEW YORK NY1100 AM EST MON JAN 14 2013CITY           SKY/WX    TMP DP  RH WIND       PRES   REMARKSCENTRAL PARK   CLOUDY    64  50  60 VRB5      30.10RLAGUARDIA APRT PTSUNNY   54  49  83 NW9       30.07RKENNEDY INTL   PTSUNNY   55  53  93 W8        30.09R FOGNEWARK/LIBERTY CLOUDY    56  53  90 W6        30.08RTETERBORO APRT CLOUDY    56  51  84 W3        30.06S

[TWCCraig]

Since 2000, the rate of warming on the four major datasets (GISS, RSS, UAH, Hadley) has been about .06C/decade. This is a considerable decrease from the .16C/decade that these sources warmed since 1979, at a time when carbon dioxide concentration was increasing at a faster rate than ever. You can see that there has been a divergence between rapidly increasing CO2 concentrations and the rate of warming, which has been almost nil since 2002:

divergenceco2.png

 

Some sources show no trend at all since the 97-98 super Niño. This is admittedly starting at a warm point globally, cherrypicking to a certain extent but RSS satellite analysis has an absolutely flat trend since 1997:

satellitesnotrend.jpg

 

This

 

 

Don't know about you but it doesn't look like it's slowed down at all.

 

 

 

 

Back OT: Maxed at 58F today, 59F at KISP, not bad at all.

[nzucker]

That graph adjusts for ENSO/PDO conditions as well as solar activity. Of course if you take out natural variation, you're going to have the human-caused signal left. The reason we've cooled is BECAUSE of solar and ENSO.

 

That is NOT a graph of raw global temperatures like the ones I posted. Do you understand that? 

This

 

 

Don't know about you but it doesn't look like it's slowed down at all.

 

 

 

 

Back OT: Maxed at 58F today, 59F at KISP, not bad at all.

 

[Isotherm]

No matter which dataset you examine, I think it's pretty apparent that the rate of global temperature increase has slowed significantly over the past decade. Even those in the strong AGW camp will admit (or if they don't, they know the truth) that the past 10 years have not been as warm as anticipated by the IPCC.

 

We'll see what the future holds, but with a continued -PDO, low solar, and gradually declining AMO in the year 5-10 period, I don't expect the 2010s to be any warmer than the 2000s.

[TWCCraig]

That graph adjusts for ENSO/PDO conditions as well as solar activity. Of course if you take out natural variation, you're going to have the human-caused signal left. The reason we've cooled is BECAUSE of solar and ENSO.

 

That is NOT a graph of raw global temperatures like the ones I posted. Do you understand that? 

 

Raw? Not sure what you want my graphs to be more like. My point is whether or not there is natural variation that's slowing our global temps from rising, global warming will continue, unless some how these natural variations get even stronger to overcome the greenhouse effect, which I doubt. If what you mean by raw is not taking out natural variation causes, I don't the point you're trying to make. The rate of warming may have slowed down, but that doesn't mean the earth is suddenly going to begin cooling at a more rapid rate and create the next big ice age.

[nzucker]

Raw? Not sure what you want my graphs to be more like. My point is whether or not there is natural variation that's slowing our global temps from rising, global warming will continue, unless some how these natural variations get even stronger to overcome the greenhouse effect, which I doubt. If what you mean by raw is not taking out natural variation causes, I don't the point you're trying to make. The rate of warming may have slowed down, but that doesn't mean the earth is suddenly going to begin cooling at a more rapid rate and create the next big ice age.

That's not an actual graph of global temperatures. That's a graph of temperatures ADJUSTED for ENSO and solar activity. That makes the last few years look warmer because ENSO and solar have been cooling factors, so they adjust upwards..

[TWCCraig]

That's not an actual graph of global temperatures. That's a graph of temperatures ADJUSTED for ENSO and solar activity. That makes the last few years look warmer because ENSO and solar have been cooling factors, so they adjust upwards..

 

Well, no $#!%