2014 Global Temperatures

[Isotherm]

UAH was the 4th warmest June, with 1998, 2002, and 2010 ahead of this year. 2011, 2012, and 2013 were all very close to June 2014, however. Definitely among the group of the top 7-10 warmest Junes, though still lower than the all time warmest June by a significant amount.

[Jonger]

We've had some bursts of 97-99 degree heat down in DC, and are running above avg this summer...but nothing too sustained yet.

You NE'ers don't get heat like we do

I have in law relatives in Manassas, we get Facebook updates of the heat, they hate it. In fact, I think this is the week that they spend in the UP of Michigan to cool off at a family cabin. Tuesday supposed to be a high of 55 there.

[tacoman25]

NASA comes in at 0.64 for June. Which is good for the 2nd warmest June. As many pointed out throughout the years, June appears to be the month that has warmed the slowest historically.

GISS would have to register 0.68 the rest of the year to break a record. At this point, this seems like a greater than 50% probability

As blizzard said best above, this is consistent with a non warming world

 

And GISS is one data source.

 

Still waiting for a year to break the temperature records across the board. The last one was 1998.

[tacoman25]

is it just me, or does it seem like the north-east could be heading towards one of the coolest summers on record.

 

Way too early to say, but the eastern 2/3 of the U.S. has certainly seen one of the cooler years to date.

 

 

[nflwxman]

And GISS is one data source.

 

Still waiting for a year to break the temperature records across the board. The last one was 1998.

It doesn't always work like that, you know there is a lag between surface temperatures and sat temps.  You need a perfectly timed El Nino event to get all datasets to break the 2010 record.

[tacoman25]

It doesn't always work like that, you know there is a lag between surface temperatures and sat temps.  You need a perfectly timed El Nino event to get all datasets to break the 2010 record.

 

It worked like that in 1998 and most record years prior to that.

 

Let's see GISS, RSS, UAH, and HadCRU all break their records together again. Then we can say it was unequivocally the warmest year on record.

[nflwxman]

It worked like that in 1998 and most record years prior to that.

 

Let's see GISS, RSS, UAH, and HadCRU all break their records together again. Then we can say it was unequivocally the warmest year on record.

What if 2014 is broken on GISS and HadCrut, but 2015 on the sat datasets?

[tacoman25]

What if 2014 is broken on GISS and HadCrut, but 2015 on the sat datasets?

 

I would count it. But all data sets haven't set records even in a 2 year period since 1998 either.

[nflwxman]

I would count it. But all data sets haven't set records even in a 2 year period since 1998 either.

Roy spencer thinks that RSS is undergoing alot of spurious cooling, so I would not hold out hope for that dataset.

[tacoman25]

Roy spencer thinks that RSS is undergoing alot of spurious cooling, so I would not hold out hope for that dataset.

 

Could be, I suppose. Any reason why? And what defines "spurious"? Given that GISS has had more record warm years since 1998 than any other source, for example. If I remember right, they've had 3 (2005, 2007, 2010), while UAH, RSS, and HadCRU have all just had one.

[Snow_Miser]

Could be, I suppose. Any reason why? And what defines "spurious"? 

 

http://www.drroyspencer.com/2011/07/on-the-divergence-between-the-uah-and-rss-global-temperature-records/

 

From the link: 

"Anyway, my UAH cohort and boss John Christy, who does the detailed matching between satellites, is pretty convinced that the RSS data is undergoing spurious cooling because RSS is still using the old NOAA-15 satellite which has a decaying orbit, to which they are then applying a diurnal cycle drift correction based upon a climate model, which does not quite match reality."

[StudentOfClimatology]

I have in law relatives in Manassas, we get Facebook updates of the heat, they hate it. In fact, I think this is the week that they spend in the UP of Michigan to cool off at a family cabin. Tuesday supposed to be a high of 55 there.

I've spent time in Phoenix, Miami, and Boston...I'm 100% sure that there's something special about the heat in DC. The combination of downsloping off the apps, the Bay/River induced humidity, and all the concrete/asphalt/buildings makes Phoenix feel like heaven relative to DC

[Snow_Miser]

 

RSS had a .3448C June.  Not sure how RSS ranks on the year.  But I would assume it's one of the warmer Junes on record.

 

The fourth warmest June on record for RSS, in line with the ranking for UAH. 

[tacoman25]

http://www.drroyspencer.com/2011/07/on-the-divergence-between-the-uah-and-rss-global-temperature-records/

 

From the link: 

"Anyway, my UAH cohort and boss John Christy, who does the detailed matching between satellites, is pretty convinced that the RSS data is undergoing spurious cooling because RSS is still using the old NOAA-15 satellite which has a decaying orbit, to which they are then applying a diurnal cycle drift correction based upon a climate model, which does not quite match reality."

 

Gotcha, thanks.

[Snow_Miser]

NASA comes in at 0.64 for June. Which is good for the 2nd warmest June. As many pointed out throughout the years, June appears to be the month that has warmed the slowest historically.

GISS would have to register 0.68 the rest of the year to break a record. At this point, this seems like a greater than 50% probability

As blizzard said best above, this is consistent with a non warming world

 

Could you post a link to where you have GISS data for June? It hasn't updated yet for me. 

 

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata_v3/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt

[StudentOfClimatology]

Could be, I suppose. Any reason why? And what defines "spurious"? Given that GISS has had more record warm years since 1998 than any other source, for example. If I remember right, they've had 3 (2005, 2007, 2010), while UAH, RSS, and HadCRU have all just had one.

It looks like UAH may be biased warm, based on the results Dr. Spencer has recently obtained in developing the Version-6 dataset, though I'm still skeptical:

As we finish up our new Version 6 of the UAH dataset, it looks like our anomalies in the 2nd half of the satellite record will be slightly cooler, somewhat more like the RSS dataset

http://www.drroyspencer.com/2014/06/uah-global-temperature-update-for-may-2014-0-33-deg-c/

[The_Global_Warmer]

http://www.drroyspencer.com/2011/07/on-the-divergence-between-the-uah-and-rss-global-temperature-records/

 

From the link: 

"Anyway, my UAH cohort and boss John Christy, who does the detailed matching between satellites, is pretty convinced that the RSS data is undergoing spurious cooling because RSS is still using the old NOAA-15 satellite which has a decaying orbit, to which they are then applying a diurnal cycle drift correction based upon a climate model, which does not quite match reality."

 

Damn.  Christy being a scientist, I love it.  I am glad to see in the end these Men with hardened beliefs still being legit.

 

Your posting style or perspective has changed.  What has changed to bring this on?

[Snow_Miser]

Your posting style or perspective has changed.  What has changed to bring this on?

 

A year ago I would have argued that solar variability could explain most of the warming over the 20th Century. However, it's become increasingly apparent that it is no longer a dominant factor. While it probably played an important role in the 1880-1910 cooling, and the early-20th century warming trend, it lost importance during the late-20th Century. This can be seen with the continued energy imbalance, continued rising sea levels, and continued ocean heat content gain even during low solar activity. There is no plausible explanation for this if solar variability were a dominant factor in late-20th Century climate change. That's why, according to Ogurtsov et al., that a factor had perturbed the climate system over the last 20 or so years that had not been previously active over the past 1000 years. The best explanation for that, is the rise in greenhouse gas emissions and other anthropogenic forcings.

 

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1468-0459.2011.00002.x/abstract

[Snow_Miser]

Could you post a link to where you have GISS data for June? It hasn't updated yet for me. 

 

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata_v3/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt

 

Bump for nflwxman.

[Snow_Miser]

The GISS data was on the website around 3 PM on Friday, but is no longer there? A few on nevens website noted a 0.64 as well- so I'm not full of it heh.

Very strange. We'll see how the revised June figures compare to the initial 0.64 figure.

[The_Global_Warmer]

A year ago I would have argued that solar variability could explain most of the warming over the 20th Century. However, it's become increasingly apparent that it is no longer a dominant factor. While it probably played an important role in the 1880-1910 cooling, and the early-20th century warming trend, it lost importance during the late-20th Century. This can be seen with the continued energy imbalance, continued rising sea levels, and continued ocean heat content gain even during low solar activity. There is no plausible explanation for this if solar variability were a dominant factor in late-20th Century climate change. That's why, according to Ogurtsov et al., that a factor had perturbed the climate system over the last 20 or so years that had not been previously active over the past 1000 years. The best explanation for that, is the rise in greenhouse gas emissions and other anthropogenic forcings.

 

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1468-0459.2011.00002.x/abstract

 

 

That is awesome to see.  While AGW warming could end up relatively weak or strong.  The link it pretty strong.

 

I think solar has probably had a hand in the last decade or so since the big max in the early to mid 2000s in helping off set a bit of AGW.

You add in the unknown amount of Asian/Indian aerosols and the -PDO and together they would fit really well in the slowing of GHG forcing. 

 

It goes even further when we consider China is on a mission to reduce their aerosol output by 50% from 2012 to 2015 + the solar ramping up a bit and we have seen a bit of an OHC break thru.

 

That is all speculation on my part tho.

 

 

For me one of the simple ways to view GHGs was asking my self the enormity of nature needing millions, tens of millions, hundreds of millions of years to create these fossil fuels naturally and humans come along and have torn estimated half of them out of the Earth in 150 years. 

 

 

 

 

[The_Global_Warmer]

Global ssta weeklies have dropped in response to the La Nada after a brief jump to NINO level.

 

.31C is nothing to sneeze at.  But it wil be harder to jump up into the .40C+ range without a nino.  But we are still almost 6-7 weeks out from the natural peak during our Summer.

 

As long as it is around .30C+ global temps will likely stay in the top 5 for monthlies.

 

 

It is unlikely we drop again next week.

 

[nflwxman]

GISS updated the anomaly on their website.  June comes in now at 0.62C.  Perhaps last Friday was a premature release?  Anyway, It's still good for 3rd warmest June.  After 6 months, the average is 0.65C above the 1951-1980 mean.  

 

 

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec J-D D-N DJF MAM JJA SON Year
2001 41 46 58 51 57 53 59 48 53 48 68 52 53 51 38 55 54 56 2001
2002 72 74 89 56 62 54 59 53 63 55 58 42 61 62 66 69 55 59 2002
2003 72 54 55 52 61 47 54 65 63 73 52 73 60 57 56 56 55 63 2003
2004 56 67 63 59 41 40 23 40 50 61 70 47 51 53 65 54 34 60 2004
2005 68 55 67 67 61 64 62 60 74 77 72 64 66 64 57 65 62 74 2005
2006 53 65 59 45 44 60 50 66 59 66 69 74 59 58 61 49 59 65 2006
2007 93 66 67 71 64 55 58 57 61 56 54 46 62 65 78 67 57 57 2007
2008 22 31 69 48 46 44 54 38 59 62 62 51 49 49 33 55 45 61 2008
2009 56 48 49 57 59 61 66 61 64 58 71 57 59 58 52 55 63 64 2009
2010 65 74 87 81 70 59 56 59 56 65 74 44 66 67 66 79 58 65 2010
2011 45 44 57 60 47 53 69 68 52 60 50 47 54 54 44 55 64 54 2011
2012 38 43 52 61 71 58 50 56 67 72 69 46 57 57 43 61 55 69 2012
2013 62 52 60 47 55 60 52 61 71 61 75 60 60 58 53 54 57 69 2013
2014 68 43 68 71 76 62****************************** ********* 57 72********** 2014

[Mallow]

To all:

 

I have gone over the last several pages and hidden many posts, mostly related to the CFS/WeatherBell tangent. While it is not out of line to discuss non-standard datasets in this thread, the resulting discussion was unprofessional, at best. Even the post that initiated the discussion came attached with a cheap insult. Especially unwelcome are the conspiratorial undertones in the explicit or implied accusations directed at individual climate scientists, and at climate science (and science) as a whole.

 

This forum is here for discussion of climate science, and while many viewpoints are welcome and open to discussion, for the reputation of the board, a line needs to be drawn somewhere. And conspiracy theories about climate science are where I've chosen to draw that line. I have not and cannot be consistent here, as there are just too many threads and posts for me and I don't have enough time... but this thread is a major one and I'm doing what I can to keep it a little cleaner.

 

We can re-start the discussion on the CFS/WeatherBell dataset if and only if the discussion is professional, and with no conspiratorial undertones or cheap insults. This is a science board--conspiracies belong in Off Topic/All Politics.

 

I apologize if you put a lot of time/effort into your posts only to have them hidden.

[The_Global_Warmer]

GISS updated the anomaly on their website.  June comes in now at 0.62C.  Perhaps last Friday was a premature release?  Anyway, It's still good for 3rd warmest June.  After 6 months, the average is 0.65C above the 1951-1980 mean.  

 

 

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec J-D D-N DJF MAM JJA SON Year

2001 41 46 58 51 57 53 59 48 53 48 68 52 53 51 38 55 54 56 2001

2002 72 74 89 56 62 54 59 53 63 55 58 42 61 62 66 69 55 59 2002

2003 72 54 55 52 61 47 54 65 63 73 52 73 60 57 56 56 55 63 2003

2004 56 67 63 59 41 40 23 40 50 61 70 47 51 53 65 54 34 60 2004

2005 68 55 67 67 61 64 62 60 74 77 72 64 66 64 57 65 62 74 2005

2006 53 65 59 45 44 60 50 66 59 66 69 74 59 58 61 49 59 65 2006

2007 93 66 67 71 64 55 58 57 61 56 54 46 62 65 78 67 57 57 2007

2008 22 31 69 48 46 44 54 38 59 62 62 51 49 49 33 55 45 61 2008

2009 56 48 49 57 59 61 66 61 64 58 71 57 59 58 52 55 63 64 2009

2010 65 74 87 81 70 59 56 59 56 65 74 44 66 67 66 79 58 65 2010

2011 45 44 57 60 47 53 69 68 52 60 50 47 54 54 44 55 64 54 2011

2012 38 43 52 61 71 58 50 56 67 72 69 46 57 57 43 61 55 69 2012

2013 62 52 60 47 55 60 52 61 71 61 75 60 60 58 53 54 57 69 2013

2014 68 43 68 71 76 62****************************** ********* 57 72********** 2014

 

 

Looks like GISS has updated cooler again this year.

 

looks like 2005 and 2010 are once again tied for 1st.

[tacoman25]

Perhaps last Friday was a premature release?  

 

Those are always unfortunate.

[The_Global_Warmer]

AMSU channel 6 temps are now slightly below 2010 for the warmest on record.

 

 

 

http://ghrc.nsstc.nasa.gov/amsutemps/data/amsu_daily_85N85S_ch06.r003.txt

[blizzard1024]

So what is wrong with the CFS dataset???  Nobody addressed it and I can't seem to find anything on it.

Also what is wrong with the cloud cover dataset from ISCCP? That seems to mirror temperature trends well

on the satellite data. That could be an explanation for the observed short term variations in climate since

the early 1980s? These are important questions that nobody seems to have any good answers for. Please share.

[Mallow]

So what is wrong with the CFS dataset???  Nobody addressed it and I can't seem to find anything on it.

Also what is wrong with the cloud cover dataset from ISCCP? That seems to mirror temperature trends well

on the satellite data. That could be an explanation for the observed short term variations in climate since

the early 1980s? These are important questions that nobody seems to have any good answers for. Please share.

 

I think the hint that there is something wrong with the CFS dataset is that it doesn't jibe with all the other datasets. Occam's razor and all that (it's either this single dataset is flawed, or pretty much all the other ones are). Why, physically, the discrepancy? I can't say, I'm not an expert on the matter. But I can say that if all the well-known, well-regarded, and independently calculated datasets show one thing, and the CFS consistently shows something else entirely, then I'm going to consider the CFS dataset as the outlier... I think any reasonable scientist would do the same.

[Snow_Miser]

Also what is wrong with the cloud cover dataset from ISCCP? 

 

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2006GL028083/abstract

 

From the paper:

"Here we show that trends observed in the ISCCP data are satellite viewing geometry artifacts and are not related to physical changes in the atmosphere. Our results suggest that in its current form, the ISCCP data may not be appropriate for certain long-term global studies, especially those focused on trends.”