Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,611
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    NH8550
    Newest Member
    NH8550
    Joined

2014 Global Temperatures


StudentOfClimatology

Recommended Posts

Fascinating times. I wonder how long this hiatus in global warming will continue

especially with a very weak solar 25 forecast. Of course we are likely to see a

global temperature uptick due to enso but this is likely to be temporary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 2.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

NOAA has updated their anthropogenic greenhouse gas index (AGGI) to 2013. The index is a measure of additional forcing due to man-made greenhouse gases. Last year AGGI increased by 1.5% which is a little higher than recent increases but smaller than increases in the 1980s when non-CO2 GHG were increasing more rapidly.

 

http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/aggi/aggi.html

aggi.fig4.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ENSO 1-2 has warmed substantially.

 

So has the entire Indian ocean geezus H!!!!

 

And parts of the equatorial central Pac.  Big area of 1.5-3C+ anomalies

 

The last CFS update I received was 12z on the 27th of .17c+ on the dailies.  So we are going to be very warm going into May with enso finally making a move.

 

navy-anom-bb.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Global temps this month (in the lower troposphere) are pretty much the same as they were this time last year: http://ghrc.nsstc.nasa.gov/amsutemps/amsutemps.pl?r=003

Some of the "reports" in this thread are a bit exaggerated.

 

 

GISS will be right around .70C+ for the month.

 

 

Last April GISS was at .47C.

 

UAH was .08C+ last year.

 

Both will be substantially warmer than last April.

 

Nothing has been exaggerated.

 

 

You are talking about temps at 7.5KM or 24,000 feet versus the surface.

 

 

BArpKQW.png

 

 

Saying reports are being exaggerated with incomparable data is going to mislead people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

GISS will be right around .70C+ for the month.

Last April GISS was at .47C.

UAH was .08C+ last year.

Both will be substantially warmer than last April.

Nothing has been exaggerated.

You are talking about temps at 7.5KM or 24,000 feet versus the surface.

Saying reports are being exaggerated with incomparable data is going to mislead people.

I understand. I really enjoy your posts and enthusiasm, I just think the wording/interpretations are a little extreme at times. I can get that way too, because it's such an interesting topic, and full of emotions.

Posts like this will only entice the anti-science folk:

ENSO 1-2 has warmed substantially. So has the entire Indian ocean geezus H!!!!

The bulk lower troposphere & surface correlate pretty well on a multi-month scale. Usually the warming will be amplified in the lower troposphere, if anything, due to enhanced thermalization and positive H2O feedback.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its substantially warmer this year at the start than it was last year.

 

 

He was talking about lower troposphere data (i.e satellite temps)...this year is actually colder at the start than 2013 was.

 

UAH in 2013 for the first 3 months went +0.51, +0.20, +0.20 and in 2014 have been +0.30, +0.18, +0.17. RSS was similarly colder.

 

 

I do think it will catch up as April/May were fairly cold on UAH. And of course GISS has started warmer than 2013 when talking about surface temps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

AMSU channel 6 is correlated to TLT temperatures but it should not be mistaken for the actual measure that Dr. Spencer uses for UAH.  At this point, lower troposphere temperatures are likely still under the "impact" of the borderline la nina we had over the winter.  It will take some time for the impact of the brewing El Nino to be felt in the tropospheric temps.

 

I would argue that the surface temperatures datasets (GISS/HadCrut) starting as warm as they have this year is telling and do not appear to be exaggerated. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Purple is 2013, Blue is 2014. It's obviously going to get warmer as El Niño develops, but as of right now we're running about where we were this time last year on all datasets...surface datasets warmer, satellite datasets colder.

 

Sure but that's somewhat irrelevant as the added warmth isn't coming from above.  As you say, its just lagging behind which is to be completely expected.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not sure why temps up around 400mb have dropped so much.  It may just be a delay from the surface temps plummeting recently.

 

 

But we are talking about surface temps and SSTA and you are trying to compare them to temps around 25,000FT.

 

 

The surface is much warmer than last year at this time.  Weekly SSTA anomalies below show this past week up to .32C+ last year at the same time was .235C+.

 

 

That is almost a .10C difference and last years global ssta dropped big time in early May thru June. That is surely not happening this year.

 

 

XbneQmg.png

 

 

 

Comparing non corrected daily sat temp data measured at 400MB to CFS, GISS, and SSTA is totally incompatible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thru April of 2013 GISS averaged a .553C+ anomaly.

 

Thru April of this year assuming April finishes with a .70C+ monthly.

 

Giss would be averaging a .635C+ anomaly.

 

 

 

 

Thanks to that massive .51C+ last January UAH started out with a .30C+ last year thru March.

 

Compared to this years .22C+

 

 

April thru August on UAH went:  .11, .08, .30, .17, .16C+.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with TGW on this. I don't use UAH, and prefer to use GISS. It has been plagued with problems since the 90's and even expressed a cooling trend before 1998. 

 

 

 

It was one of the first global temperature datasets developed from satellite information and has been used as a tool for research since the 1990s. It has proved controversial as, previously, there were inconsistencies between the UAH dataset and surface measurements. Significant corrections during the late 1990s and the first decade of the 2000s, have resolved many of those differences.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with TGW on this. I don't use UAH, and prefer to use GISS. It has been plagued with problems since the 90's and even expressed a cooling trend before 1998.

The wisest thing to do is aggregate all datasets together. Satellites and surface measurements both have "quirks" unique to them. RSS and HADCRUT4 have been cold outliers, while UAH and GISS have been running on the warm side of the pack lately. NOAA/NCDC is right in the middle.

I'm not a big fan of RSS, UAH, or GISS. RSS has had to do multiple corrections for orbital drift, UAH has experienced multiple cases of radiometer decay, and the method GISS uses to incorporate SSTs is beyond strange.

I personally blend NOAA and HADCRUT4, then account for missing arctic data with satellite readings. The result is a dataset that is more stable, and it remains in the middle of the pack without deviating.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The wisest thing to do is aggregate all datasets together. Satellites and surface measurements both have "quirks" unique to them. RSS and HADCRUT4 have been cold outliers, while UAH and GISS have been running on the warm side of the pack lately. NOAA/NCDC is right in the middle.

I'm not a big fan of RSS, UAH, or GISS. RSS has had to do multiple corrections for orbital drift, UAH has experienced multiple cases of radiometer decay, and the method GISS uses to incorporate SSTs is beyond strange.

I personally blend NOAA and HADCRUT4, then account for missing arctic data with satellite readings. The result is a dataset that is more stable, and it remains in the middle of the pack without deviating.

 

 

I am not sure if GiSS has dramatically changed the way they report arctic temps.

 

But there are hundreds of buoys up there, ships, moorings, and so on in the arctic all year that have functional reliable working thermometers.

 

These sources can be easily validated. 

 

Of course they would have to be accounted for moving around.  But GISS already is pretty low res for the meshed together final product.

 

It certainly can't be worse than using such a small amount of reporting stations over such a large region that happens to be warming faster than any place else on Earth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The wisest thing to do is aggregate all datasets together. Satellites and surface measurements both have "quirks" unique to them. RSS and HADCRUT4 have been cold outliers, while UAH and GISS have been running on the warm side of the pack lately. NOAA/NCDC is right in the middle.

I'm not a big fan of RSS, UAH, or GISS. RSS has had to do multiple corrections for orbital drift, UAH has experienced multiple cases of radiometer decay, and the method GISS uses to incorporate SSTs is beyond strange.

I personally blend NOAA and HADCRUT4, then account for missing arctic data with satellite readings. The result is a dataset that is more stable, and it remains in the middle of the pack without deviating.

 

UAH and RSS have undergone major revisions, their result is more dependent upon certain assumptions and methodlogy, and as a consequence they have larger statistical error bars than GISS and HadCRUT4. So i give some preference to the surface datasets over the satellites.

 

Also, IIRC the difference between GISS and HadCRUT4 is not so much how SST data is incorporated, but that they have different sources of SST data. 

In the end though, i agree the best method is to blend GISS/HadCRUT4/NCDC outside of the arctic, and then to infill the arctic with satellite data. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not sure if GiSS has dramatically changed the way they report arctic temps.

 

But there are hundreds of buoys up there, ships, moorings, and so on in the arctic all year that have functional reliable working thermometers.

 

These sources can be easily validated. 

 

Of course they would have to be accounted for moving around.  But GISS already is pretty low res for the meshed together final product.

 

It certainly can't be worse than using such a small amount of reporting stations over such a large region that happens to be warming faster than any place else on Earth.

 

I am not sure if GiSS has dramatically changed the way they report arctic temps.

 

But there are hundreds of buoys up there, ships, moorings, and so on in the arctic all year that have functional reliable working thermometers.

 

These sources can be easily validated. 

 

Of course they would have to be accounted for moving around.  But GISS already is pretty low res for the meshed together final product.

 

It certainly can't be worse than using such a small amount of reporting stations over such a large region that happens to be warming faster than any place else on Earth.

 

You can't have stations that are moving around.. calibrating the data would be an impossible task. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

UAH and RSS have undergone major revisions, their result is more dependent upon certain assumptions and methodlogy, and as a consequence they have larger statistical error bars than GISS and HadCRUT4. So i give some preference to the surface datasets over the satellites.

Also, IIRC the difference between GISS and HadCRUT4 is not so much how SST data is incorporated, but that they have different sources of SST data.

In the end though, i agree the best method is to blend GISS/HadCRUT4/NCDC outside of the arctic, and then to infill the arctic with satellite data.

I agree. Another problem with satellites is they're measuring a part of the atmosphere that is very sensitive (thermally) to long term changes in latent heat flux/MJO-mean period frequency, and the Brewer-Dobson O^3 flux, while the surface is not as thermally sensitive to these forcings, from a macroscale standpoint...so satellite data may show more ups and downs on 4-7yr timescales as opposed to the more stable surface data.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So our situation is very awesomely unique.

 

The oncoming nino is relatively in-sync with 1997 in terms of el nino development.

 

2014 is a little bit behind but they are very comparable at this point.

 

Below is the graphic for 1997 versus 2014 for the most recent week.

 

 

Two things stand out.  The 1997 NINO was starting with warming off the SA coast.  Like we are seeing this week. 

 

 

The other is how much warmer the rest of the Earths oceans are now.

 

 

F0PAm3U.gif

 

 

Below is global ssta for the 1997 NINO progression versus Jan 2012 to present below it.

 

 

Global SSTA in late April of 1997 were around 0.12 to 0.15C+.  Currently global ssta are 0.321C+.  We are running almost .20C+ warmer then this time in 1997.

 

Where it gets crazy is this.  Below both of these time series is a graphic of the first week 1997 matched our Current GLOBAL SSTA. 

 

 

yW8jG5f.png

 

HE16SRu.png?1

 

It was the first week of September.  Ironically 1st week of Sept 1997 was .32C+ While the first week of 2013 is .33C+.

 

It is below the 1997 graphic.

 

 

And one more time below 2013 is our most recent week.

 

We can see the SH is driving our current major anomaly.  SH SSTA on the weeklies are warmer or as warm as any other SH Fall except 1997 and 2010 because of ENSO. 

 

 

But the NH is 0.302C+ this past week and has been above .30C+ for two weeks in a row.

 

 

The only two compatible years are 1998, 2005 and 2010.  They reached .285C+, .295c+ and .30C+ respectively around this time in April.

 

Both of those years were ENSO positive coming into Spring.  2010 and 1998 maor NINOs that were quickly weakening in Spring.

 

 

 

 

lN9c5bd.png

 

Sb5GTZS.png

 

 

95cwem3.png

 

 

 

 

 

 

By every measure we have.  It looks like we are about have a run of record temps and ssta.

 

 

What is really crazy is that if the NINO lasts thru the year and fades in late Winter/Spring of 2015.

 

JAN thru at least MARCH would probably have a solid chance to break the 1.0C+ monthly mark on GISStemp.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So our situation is very awesomely unique.

 

The oncoming nino is relatively in-sync with 1997 in terms of el nino development.

 

2014 is a little bit behind but they are very comparable at this point.

 

Below is the graphic for 1997 versus 2014 for the most recent week.

 

 

Two things stand out.  The 1997 NINO was starting with warming off the SA coast.  Like we are seeing this week. 

 

 

The other is how much warmer the rest of the Earths oceans are now.

 

 

F0PAm3U.gif

 

 

Below is global ssta for the 1997 NINO progression versus Jan 2012 to present below it.

 

 

Global SSTA in late April of 1997 were around 0.12 to 0.15C+.  Currently global ssta are 0.321C+.  We are running almost .20C+ warmer then this time in 1997.

 

Where it gets crazy is this.  Below both of these time series is a graphic of the first week 1997 matched our Current GLOBAL SSTA. 

 

 

yW8jG5f.png

 

HE16SRu.png?1

 

It was the first week of September.  Ironically 1st week of Sept 1997 was .32C+ While the first week of 2013 is .33C+.

 

It is below the 1997 graphic.

 

 

And one more time below 2013 is our most recent week.

 

We can see the SH is driving our current major anomaly.  SH SSTA on the weeklies are warmer or as warm as any other SH Fall except 1997 and 2010 because of ENSO. 

 

 

But the NH is 0.302C+ this past week and has been above .30C+ for two weeks in a row.

 

 

The only two compatible years are 1998, 2005 and 2010.  They reached .285C+, .295c+ and .30C+ respectively around this time in April.

 

Both of those years were ENSO positive coming into Spring.  2010 and 1998 maor NINOs that were quickly weakening in Spring.

 

 

 

 

lN9c5bd.png

 

Sb5GTZS.png

 

 

95cwem3.png

 

 

 

 

 

 

By every measure we have.  It looks like we are about have a run of record temps and ssta.

 

 

What is really crazy is that if the NINO lasts thru the year and fades in late Winter/Spring of 2015.

 

JAN thru at least MARCH would probably have a solid chance to break the 1.0C+ monthly mark on GISStemp.

Great thought provoking analysis.  I'm with you on SSTs and the expectation next year or so of temps.  While SSTs can cool off even with a developing Nino, the ocean surface has a lot more thermal inertia than land temperatures, meaning short term drastic cool down is likely not in the cards.  The fact that we've sat around 0.3C for over a month is very telling. A moderate Nino will almost certainly push us over 0.4C+.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

UAH is out for April.

 

Big changes are coming.
 

 

The global, hemispheric, and tropical LT anomalies from the 30-year (1981-2010) average for the last 16 months are:

YR MON GLOBAL NH SH TROPICS
2013 1 +0.497 +0.517 +0.478 +0.386
2013 2 +0.203 +0.372 +0.033 +0.195
2013 3 +0.200 +0.333 +0.067 +0.243
2013 4 +0.114 +0.128 +0.101 +0.165
2013 5 +0.082 +0.180 -0.015 +0.112
2013 6 +0.295 +0.335 +0.255 +0.220
2013 7 +0.173 +0.134 +0.211 +0.074
2013 8 +0.158 +0.111 +0.206 +0.009
2013 9 +0.365 +0.339 +0.390 +0.190
2013 10 +0.290 +0.331 +0.249 +0.031
2013 11 +0.193 +0.160 +0.226 +0.020
2013 12 +0.266 +0.272 +0.260 +0.057
2014 1 +0.291 +0.387 +0.194 -0.029
2014 2 +0.170 +0.320 +0.020 -0.103
2014 3 +0.170 +0.337 +0.002 -0.001
2014 4 +0.190 +0.359 +0.020 +0.092

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tbh, it's probably more like 0.65C on WxBell. Climate Renayalyzer topped out around 0.74C in April and that was about 0.45C on WxBell.

 

That is pretty big for May isn't it? Probably most months. If it actually verifies, would be record-breaking May heat and not just by a small margin. Also, why has UAH been so cold this year when we are warmer than 2013 on all other datasets?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tbh, it's probably more like 0.65C on WxBell. Climate Renayalyzer topped out around 0.74C in April and that was about 0.45C on WxBell.

 

That is pretty big for May isn't it? Probably most months. If it actually verifies, would be record-breaking May heat and not just by a small margin. Also, why has UAH been so cold this year when we are warmer than 2013 on all other datasets?

 

 

RSS is also running a bit colder than last year. So its not strange.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One noob question tho. Does NCDC just use data directly from GISS? Besides both of them of being surface measurements with different calibrations?

 

 

 

 

Yes, they all (GISS, Hadcrut4, and NCDC) use GHCN temp data...they just all slightly fill in the gaps in different ways.

 

And the base period is different for each set. For NCDC its 1901-2000, Hadcrut is 1961-1990 and GISS is 1951-1980.

 

 

I should add that Hadcrut uses a different SST dataset than NCDC and GISS too. But the land based temps are derived from GHCN data.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...