2014 Global Temperatures

[chrisf97212]

I wonder how much of this is due to relatively stable weather over NH oceans. Wind and storm systems churn surface heat out, without any major action, surface temps start to heat up.

 

Three big storms in the Central Pacific 10-20 north, so we should see a change there.

[tacoman25]

Three big storms in the Central Pacific 10-20 north, so we should see a change there.

 

The north Pacific is also starting to get stormier, so expect cooling south of Alaska as well.

[The_Global_Warmer]

ENSO 1-2 and 3 have started to warm up again.  As well as the majority of the Indian Ocean except the far NW part.  So is South of Australia.

 

 

Weatherbell for the first 1/3rd of August come in at .157C+ or roughly a .71C Giss equivalent  The dailies are running between .10 and .20C. 

 

So we are at a record pace again for this month and the big warmup doesn't really come until September thru November.

 

 

[The_Global_Warmer]

Global SSTA have reached .418C+. This is the all time weekly record.

[nflwxman]

Global SSTA have reached .418C+. This is the all time weekly record

 

This really does solidify the fact that this fall will likely be a warm one.  It looks like a new EKW will reinforce a positive ENSO regime potentially leading to El Nino conditions by October.  As a side note, the warming since the major PDO tank in 2008 is becoming very clear and rapid.

[StudentOfClimatology]

Looking closely at the data, there is some evidence that OISST may be suffering from orbital drift or decay. While SSTAs are warm, it needs be noted that the IR-based OISST dataset is diverging significantly from the datasets used in the NESDIS/AMSU arsenal, derived via TMI, AMSR-E, and WINDSAT, which use microwave imagery.

The mismatch between the Reynolds SSTs and satellite-derived global temperatures is interesting, because they both rely on the same spectral network yet do not corroborate one another at this time. It's unlikely that both UAH and RSS are in error, in my opinion.

[nflwxman]

Do you have any graphics or evidence to support your position? I've seen no mention of OISST and orbital drift at all in peer reviewed literature. UAH and RSS could both be wrong as they essentially the same type of instrumentation to measure, in my opinion. Either way SSTs are climbing pretty quickly it seems recently.

In fact, Hadley which does not use OISST recorded the highest monthly anomaly in the history of HadSST3 in June of 2014. July has not come out yet.

 

Edit: July is the 2nd warmest SST in HadSST3 history, after June 2014.

[The_Global_Warmer]

Orbital drift?  Wow.  Can't accept reality. 

 

 

 

[GaWx]

 Earlier today, the attached land and ocean global temp. chart was posted by someone else. Is this accurate? If so, how can 2014 be on the way to being the warmest year on record when 1998 and 2010 would seem unreachable and beating 2002, 2003, and 2005 are no guarantee as of yet. I know it excludes July, 2014, but still..:

 

[The_Global_Warmer]

 Earlier today, the attached land and ocean global temp. chart was posted by someone else. Is this accurate? If so, how can 2014 be on the way to being the warmset year on record when 1998 and 2010 would seem unreachable and beating 2002, 2003, and 2005 are no guarantee as of yet. I know it excludes July, 2014, but still..:

 

 

 

 

1.  RSS covers the Lower Troposphere not the surface which is heavily influenced by ENSO.

 

2.  John Christy who is a denier or very very big skeptic says RSS is bias cold and needs to be corrected.

[GaWx]

1.  RSS covers the Lower Troposphere not the surface which is heavily influenced by ENSO.

 

2.  John Christy who is a denier or very very big skeptic says RSS is bias cold and needs to be corrected.

 

Friv,

 Thanks. I have some follow-up Q's:

 

1) Even if this actually is biased cold, is it more biased cold now than it was in 2010 and 1998? If not, why is 2014 not nearly as warm as 2010 and 1998?

 

2) Is the lower troposphere supposed to be warming or mainly only the surface? Is it possible that the lower troposphere would be a better measure of global warming since it is three dimensional vs. the two dimensional surface?

 

3) Please clarify about ENSO. Are you saying that the surface is more heavily influenced by ENSO or is it the lower troposphere? If it is the surface, is that a good reason to assume that the surface is better to look at than the lower trop.?

[Snow_Miser]

1.  RSS covers the Lower Troposphere not the surface which is heavily influenced by ENSO.

 

2.  John Christy who is a denier or very very big skeptic says RSS is bias cold and needs to be corrected.

 

I have major respect for John Christy after he acknowledged that.

 

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

 

"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. We have not used NOAA-15 for trend information in years…we use the NASA Aqua AMSU, since that satellite carries extra fuel to maintain a precise orbit."

[The_Global_Warmer]

I have major respect for John Christy after he acknowledged that.

 

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

 

"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. We have not used NOAA-15 for trend information in years…we use the NASA Aqua AMSU, since that satellite carries extra fuel to maintain a precise orbit."

 

 

Same here and I truly mean that.

 

It's pretty well documented that guys like Christy, Hansen, Spencer, Box, Wang and so on have highly different views.  Hansen, Christy, and Spencer have been vocal for decades about their views.  Jason Box the glaciologist has recently become a lot more like Hansen.  While I haven't really seen Wang's name in the public pressing of his views but he is well respected.  But so far I have seen nothing that indicates that has ever compromised their work. 

[skierinvermont]

Friv,

 Thanks. I have some follow-up Q's:

 

1) Even if this actually is biased cold, is it more biased cold now than it was in 2010 and 1998? If not, why is 2014 not nearly as warm as 2010 and 1998?

 

2) Is the lower troposphere supposed to be warming or mainly only the surface? Is it possible that the lower troposphere would be a better measure of global warming since it is three dimensional vs. the two dimensional surface?

 

3) Please clarify about ENSO. Are you saying that the surface is more heavily influenced by ENSO or is it the lower troposphere? If it is the surface, is that a good reason to assume that the surface is better to look at than the lower trop.?

 

1) Yeah that's the idea behind what John Christy said.. it is biased cold and growing more biased over time due to the drift of NOAA-15 satellite.

 

2) The lower troposphere is actually supposed to warm slightly faster than the surface. Both are equally valid but different, metrics of global warming. 

 

3) Tropospheric temperatures appear to be more influenced by ENSO. The lack of a major El Nino basically precludes 2014 breaking the records of 1998 and 2010, even when using UAH which may be more accurate over the last 15 years. Also, tropospheric temperatures lag ENSO by about 6 months, so if we do get a weak El Nino developing this fall, the troposphere would be much warmer in 2015 than 2014, but likely wouldn't break the record unless it was at least close to a moderate event. Surface temperatures only lag the ONI by 2-3 months so a global temperature record could be set in 2014 or 2015 (or both) on surface datasets. 

[nflwxman]

1) Yeah that's the idea behind what John Christy said.. it is biased cold and growing more biased over time due to the drift of NOAA-15 satellite.

 

2) The lower troposphere is actually supposed to warm slightly faster than the surface. Both are equally valid but different, metrics of global warming. 

 

3) Tropospheric temperatures appear to be more influenced by ENSO. The lack of a major El Nino basically precludes 2014 breaking the records of 1998 and 2010, even when using UAH which may be more accurate over the last 15 years. Also, tropospheric temperatures lag ENSO by about 6 months, so if we do get a weak El Nino developing this fall, the troposphere would be much warmer in 2015 than 2014, but likely wouldn't break the record unless it was at least close to a moderate event. Surface temperatures only lag the ONI by 2-3 months so a global temperature record could be set in 2014 or 2015 (or both) on surface datasets. 

 

Second the response by skier.  Surface datasets have a much more muted response to ENSO, thus even in an ENSO neutral year like 2014, we are on track to break the global temperature record (I'd put it at a 60/40 chance for most of the surface datasets)

[GaWx]

Thanks, skier, for the detailed reply and nflwxman for the additional reply.

[The_Global_Warmer]

Also remember the surface ssts have an immediate response.

 

So if ssts were 0.05C last week instead of .042C the Earths surface would be much cooler just because the surface of the oceans would be much cooler.

 

When looking at weatherbell for July the oceans are driving the anomaly for the most part.

[The_Global_Warmer]

Looking closely at the data, there is some evidence that OISST may be suffering from orbital drift or decay. While SSTAs are warm, it needs be noted that the IR-based OISST dataset is diverging significantly from the datasets used in the NESDIS/AMSU arsenal, derived via TMI, AMSR-E, and WINDSAT, which use microwave imagery.

The mismatch between the Reynolds SSTs and satellite-derived global temperatures is interesting, because they both rely on the same spectral network yet do not corroborate one another at this time. It's unlikely that both UAH and RSS are in error, in my opinion.

 

?????

[The_Global_Warmer]

Enso is surely going to be a lot warmer this Fall and Winter then 2013-14 was. 

 

 

[The_Global_Warmer]

Can we get some information on this "orbital drift" thing? 

 

Orbital decay on isle 5.  Can we please get some backup for this crackpot bs?  please?

[The_Global_Warmer]

Orbital decay must be getting worse.  The oceans continue to get warmer.  Somebody needs to get a hold of the people in charge of this data and let them know the satellite is wobbling all over the place.

 

 

[StudentOfClimatology]

Can we get some information on this "orbital drift" thing?

Orbital decay on isle 5. Can we please get some backup for this crackpot bs? please?

You need to relax. When I can get to a computer I'll post the email exchange I had with NOAA. Ok?

All SST sources are very warm right now. No one is denying that. Your commentary here is uncalled for.

[The_Global_Warmer]

Weatherbell has plummeted.  Monthlies down to .112C+ now.

 

 

[The_Global_Warmer]

July came in at .52C on GISS well below the weatherbell predictions.  Brings the 7 month average for the year to .64C.

 

This was driven by Arctic but mostly Antarctica.  NCDC and Hadley are probably going to be .10C warmer.

 

 

 

 

[nzucker]

July came in at .52C on GISS well below the weatherbell predictions.  Brings the 7 month average for the year to .64C.

 

This was driven by Arctic but mostly Antarctica.  NCDC and Hadley are probably going to be .10C warmer.

 

 

How does July rank in terms of the warmest months on record for GISS?

 

Interesting to see the cold anomalies in the areas, such as the Kara Sea, normally associated with a positive dipole which reduces the arctic sea ice. However, the Arctic was cold overall so it must have reduced the effect of the unfavorable pressure pattern. 

 

It seems that GISS, with another relatively cool result, is coming more into line with the global temperature sources showing less warming such as RSS. That's been the trend in the last year or so..

[nflwxman]

How does July rank in terms of the warmest months on record for GISS?

Interesting to see the cold anomalies in the areas, such as the Kara Sea, normally associated with a positive dipole which reduces the arctic sea ice. However, the Arctic was cold overall so it must have reduced the effect of the unfavorable pressure pattern.

It seems that GISS, with another relatively cool result, is coming more into line with the global temperature sources showing less warming such as RSS. That's been the trend in the last year or so..

It was 9th warmest. And no, RSS has been the cold outlier for a while.

Also GISS is at 0.64 for the year. That's not "relatively cold" by a long shot.

[StudentOfClimatology]

It was 9th warmest. And no, RSS has been the cold outlier for a while.

Also GISS is at 0.64 for the year. That's not "relatively cold" by a long shot.

I suspect the truth lies somewhere in between UAH and RSS.

I'm interested to see what Version 6 of UAH will look like when it's released. According to Dr. Spencer, Version 6 (supposedly) will look somewhat more like RSS after 1998, and will feature a variety of improvements in technology and interpolation.

That said, Dr. Spencer still believes RSS is undergoing spurious cooling due to a miscalculation in their equations accounting for the observed drift of NOAA16

[nflwxman]

I suspect the truth lies somewhere in between UAH and RSS.

I'm interested to see what Version 6 of UAH will look like when it's released. According to Dr. Spencer, Version 6 (supposedly) will look somewhat more like RSS after 1998, and will feature a variety of improvements in technology and interpolation.

That said, Dr. Spencer still believes RSS is undergoing spurious cooling due to a miscalculation in their equations accounting for the observed drift of NOAA16

Well yes, tropospheric temps and surface temps are different though. Just because UAH shows a particular slope or trend does not mean GISS has to. I'm still not sold on UAH or RSS period. The revision history is abundant and the equipment has been problematic. It is nice to have multiple measurements.

[The_Global_Warmer]

UAH nor GISS are relatively cool at all.

 

UAH in 2013 had it's 4th warmest year on record only behind 1998, 2005, and 2010.  With a yearly ONI of -0.345C.  So far this year UAH is running warmer then 2013 and is on pace for a shot at passing 2005 for the 3rd warmest on it's record.

 

That makes 2013 4th out of 34 years on UAH.  There is nothing cool about that.  If UAH went back to 1880 it would 4th out 133 years.

 

GISS being .64C is only slightly below .66C 2010 record.  We have the warmest part of the year still to come with record warm ssts.

 

This is when height anomaly's start to peak over the NH.  The anomalies are uniformly lopsided.  And global temps will start to rise in time for the big warmth in SOND.

 

 

[StudentOfClimatology]

Well yes, tropospheric temps and surface temps are different though. Just because UAH shows a particular slope or trend does not mean GISS has to. I'm still not sold on UAH or RSS period. The revision history is abundant and the equipment has been problematic. It is nice to have multiple measurements.

It doesn't really matter what you or I choose to "believe" regarding the validity of satellite measurements because the science has been clear on this for awhile.

The dynamics of radiative transfer interpolated via satellites are well understood, so global temperatures sourced via satellite are going to be fairly accurate and cover a lot more area than surface stations (which can be subject to a slew of anthropogenic contamination). The question(s) all lie in how the IR data is interpolated by us humans..

If you're concerned about differences in the datasets, give this a read. The divergence between UAH and RSS has been decreasing steadily since 2008 and it appears they will be in fairly good agreement once UAH is upgraded:

http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011AGUFM.A51A0130P

Three independent groups (NOAA STAR, UAH, and RSS) have constructed long-term temperature records for the troposphere using the polar orbiting microwave sounding unit (MSU), but these groups disagree on the magnitude of the trend since 1979. This is especially true over the tropics where the tropospheric temperature trend from UAH is smaller than the NOAA and RSS trends. In particular, the tropical tropospheric temperature trend from UAH is smaller than the observed surface trend, while NOAA and RSS show enhanced warming compared to the surface. These discrepancies result from different satellite calibration methods, which can lead to "jumps" or discontinuities in the temperature time series. For example, different methods for removing the "instrument body effect" can account for a large fraction of the trend differences. The diurnal adjustments for drifts in the local equatorial crossing time, which are large in the tropics, can also lead to spurious trends. Understanding the effects of dislocations and drifts in the temperature time series can help explain differences between the three satellite-derived estimates of the tropical tropospheric temperature trend. We attempt to assess the impact of jumps and spurious trends on the various satellite datasets using radiosonde data in order to constrain the tropical tropospheric temperature trend. This effort is important for understanding and testing global circulation models that predict that the tropical troposphere will warm more than the surface.