2014 Global Temperatures

[JBG]

"Climatologist Dr. Judith Curry warns of decades of possible global cooling: Suggests the ‘current cool phase will continue until the 2030s’"

http://www.climatedepot.com/2014/09/16/climatologist-dr-judith-curry-warns-of-decades-of-global-cooling-the-current-cool-phase-will-continue-until-the-2030s/

Le'ts all panic and convene a luxurious international conference for our leaders to attend. And confront global cooling.

[tacoman25]

Two glaring factual errors here.

 

1. I didn't that the rapid warming in the late 70s was not due to the +PDO+ENSO switch. Most of that warming likely was due to the +PDO+ENSO switch.

I did say that most of the lack of cooling 1946-1976 was due to aerosols and slow GHG forcing. 

 

And I don't think pointing out pressure averages in the pacific proves the direction of causality between PDO - ENSO - IOD any more than your first attempt did. Most believable to me is that it is some positive reinforcement from all 3 variables. It's as much of a +ENSO 'phase' as it is a +PDO 'phase.'

 

2. Your statement: ""The literature" (why is this even in quotation marks?) does not conclusively prove anything in regards to aerosol influence on temperature trends."

 

is blatantly false.

 

The literature conclusively shows that aerosols rose rapidly 1946-1976 and that this had a cooling effect upon the globe. The only debate is to exactly how much. There are papers on both sides of exactly how much.

 

1. Was going by what you have said previously. Didn't know you've changed your view on that.

 

And you still don't understand what I've pointed out about the PDO phases. -ENSO produces greater -PDO during -PDO phases, and vice versa. It's not just that pressure rises in the north pacific are greater, though that would fit with the causality. 

 

2. So what you're saying is that the literature doesn't conclusively prove how much cooling was due to aerosols. Some says very little. Which was my point - there is no conclusive statement to make about it, as you have.

[tacoman25]

She's just wrong.  You don't need to be a statistician to see global temperature correlation to the PDO is weak in a multidecadal sense.  In fact, solar irradiance is a much better explanation for long term (10+ year trends) prior to 1950 when AGW became strong enough to overwhelm most natural factors over a multi-decadal time frame.  All this PDO talk will probably stop in the next few years.  At the end of the day, this is a lot of scrambling in the climatological and skeptic community to explain a completely reasonable flatline of global temperatures between 2008-2013.

 

Right, because the fact that temps haven't met GCM projections should just be ignored.

 

C'mon, that has produced plenty of scrambling as well.

[The_Global_Warmer]

Things are rather "benign" over the Pacific equatorial region. 

 

 

It appears some warming along the equatorial Atlantic just North of South America could happen this week.

 

Easterlies over the Indian ocean and just North of Australia are forecast to strengthen which will help the Indian ocean warm up quite a bit more. 

 

Things are being yawn over the equatorial Pacific tho. 

 

 

 

[The_Global_Warmer]

The NPAC is just nuts.  ENSO 1-2 and Eastern parts of ENSO shows some pretty warm water surfacing.  The far NPAC from the SOO to the NEPAC is still rocking the 2C+ anomalies over "relatively" large regions.

 

But the craziness is the NPAC from the Equator to 40N.  Basin wide.

 

Most of that is 1.0C+ which is nuts for such a large area.  

 

Thanks to a large ridge over the Central NPAC.  It's expected to slowly weaken but come back much stronger after day 4.

 

Big ridging is starting to develop over the Sub-Tropical/Central NATL and ssts are responding. 

 

Trading the far Northern lats being well above normal for the central and sub-tropical NH waters is much worse.

 

 

[donsutherland1]

From the NCDC:

 

 

• The combined average temperature across global land and ocean surfaces for August 2014 was record high for the month, at 0.75°C (1.35°F) above the 20^th century average of 15.6°C (60.1°F), topping the previous record set in 1998.
• The global land surface temperature was 0.99°C (1.78°F) above the 20^th century average of 13.8°C (56.9°F), the second highest on record for August, behind 1998.
• For the ocean, the August global sea surface temperature was 0.65°C (1.17°F) above the 20^th century average of 16.4°C (61.4°F). This record high departure from average not only beats the previous August record set in 2005 by 0.08°C (0.14°F), but also beats the previous all-time record set just two months ago in June 2014 by 0.03°C (0.05°F).

[donsutherland1]

The full NCDC release can be found at: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/2014/8

[chubbs]

From the NOAA site - average NOAA global temperature to date for 5 warmest years. 2014 is currently 3rd trailing 1998 and 2010, but 1998 and 2010 had already peaked due to developing La Nina. On its current trajectory 2014 is headed for roughly 0.7 comfortably above the previous NOAA record.

[The_Global_Warmer]

This really stands out to me:

 

 

For the ocean, the August global sea surface temperature was 0.65°C (1.17°F) above the 20^th century average of 16.4°C (61.4°F). This record high departure from average not only beats the previous August record set in 2005 by 0.08°C (0.14°F), but also beats the previous all-time record set just two months ago in June 2014 by 0.03°C (0.05°F).

 

 

 

This is the first time as far I can recall that the global sea surface temperatures are driving the global surface temperatures to records.

 

2014 for NCDC only needs to average for SOND the top 10 warmest years on record for those months to break the record.

 

I think NCDC will finish at least at .69C+ possible .70C+

 

The record is 2010 at .66C+ for NCDC

[donsutherland1]

This really stands out to me:

 

 

 

 

This is the first time as far I can recall that the global sea surface temperatures are driving the global surface temperatures to records.

 

2014 for NCDC only needs to average for SOND the top 10 warmest years on record for those months to break the record.

 

I think NCDC will finish at least at .69C+ possible .70C+

 

The record is 2010 at .66C+ for NCDC

Already, the disinformation is being disseminated: http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2014/09/18/us-government-agencies-just-cant-stop-lying/

 

What's interesting is that the Goddard site uses lower tropospheric temperatures to argue that NCDC's sea surface temperatures are inaccurate. The lower troposphere is part of the atmosphere. It is not the same thing as sea surface.

[AvantHiatus]

Already, the disinformation is being disseminated: http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2014/09/18/us-government-agencies-just-cant-stop-lying/

 

What's interesting is that the Goddard site uses lower tropospheric temperatures to argue that NCDC's sea surface temperatures are inaccurate. The lower troposphere is part of the atmosphere. It is not the same thing as sea surface.

Disseminated is probably a poor choice of word here. I stopped reading his site/denier pseudo skeptic blog a long time ago. Lower troposphere temperatures probably support an even greater warming down the road.

 

These trends are appearing on WxBell CFS so I would conclude that NCDC is not lieing, what a ridiculous claim to make.

[ORH_wxman]

Why would anyone read or care what he says?

[The_Global_Warmer]

Disseminated is probably a poor choice of word here. I stopped reading his site/denier pseudo skeptic blog a long time ago. Lower troposphere temperatures probably support an even greater warming down the road.

 

These trends are appearing on WxBell CFS so I would conclude that NCDC is not lieing, what a ridiculous claim to make.

 

 

Weatherbell dailies as of 06z today are back up to 0.22C+ with the monthly holding at 0.180C+.

 

 

I'm telling ya if we continue on this path we could be pushing 0.40C+ by early next week.  Maybe even hitting 0.50C+ if things really come together well.

 

 

 

Looks like the tropical Atlantic is also going to warm up.  That covers the Sub-tropical and tropical NATL, tropical an subtropical Indian ocean, and almost the entire NPAC running warm.

 

 

 

 

 

[donsutherland1]

Why would anyone read or care what he says?

One who is informed shouldn't. But casual readers who encounter his charts that could be spread through parts of the social media, might well not realize that they're viewing lower tropospheric temperature anomalies, not sea surface temperature anomalies. Readers, especially when glancing quickly at charts, often miss such nuances.

[chubbs]

The current hiatus is more muted than 1940-75 with La Nina minima still trending upward. This is consistent with GHG forcing which is increasing at a faster rate now. Going to be very difficult to keep the current hiatus going much longer.

[ORH_wxman]

One who is informed shouldn't. But casual readers who encounter his charts that could be spread through parts of the social media, might well not realize that they're viewing lower tropospheric temperature anomalies, not sea surface temperature anomalies. Readers, especially when glancing quickly at charts, often miss such nuances.

 

 

I agree, but social media and the blogosphere are filled with such misinformation from both sides of the extreme...Goddard's realscience temperature brigade is just one example. If I tried to keep track of all the misinformation posted on sites like climateprogress, etc...I'd probably go crazy. Every time there is an extreme weather event, there's examples of such shoddy claims that surface all over social media (and even mainstream news unfortunately) that aren't supported scientifically.

 

I guess I just view it as too much effort to try and worry about. There's just so many echo chambers these days in the blogosphere that it's more worth trying to find the real literature...though I share your sentiment that it is not easy for the casual reader to do so, which is unfortunate.

[StudentOfClimatology]

The current hiatus is more muted than 1940-75 with each successive La Nina minima still trending upward. This is consistent with GHG forcing which is increasing at a faster rate now. Going to be very difficult to keep the current hiatus going much longer.

It depends on the dataset you use. Some (like GISS and UAH) are definitely more muted, others like HADCRUT, NCDC, and RSS aren't as muted.

[StudentOfClimatology]

Oh, and LOL @ Steven Goddard and his ignorant, brainwashed followers.

[Isotherm]

And laugh out loud at Hansen and his followers, while we're at it. Predicting a super el nino 564 times since 2000 in attempt to drive global temperatures through the roof.

[AvantHiatus]

And laugh out loud at Hansen and his followers, while we're at it. Predicting a super el nino 564 times since 2000 in attempt to drive global temperatures through the roof.

Looks like we didn't even need a super el nino to accomplish that. The irony is just through the roof.

[Isotherm]

Looks like we didn't even need a super el nino to accomplish that. The irony is just through the roof.

 

 

Strongly disagree on this year's temperatures being defined as through the roof in comparison to 15 years ago, and given where we were progged to be by numerous GCM's. We're essentially running along the bottom edge of the "temperature cone" of model forecasts.

[chubbs]

It depends on the dataset you use. Some (like GISS and UAH) are definitely more muted, others like HADCRUT, NCDC, and RSS aren't as muted.

HADCRUT plotted below is similar to GISS in terms of relative hiatus strength. Would expect NCDC to track the other surface series (not available at this site). UAH+RSS aren't available prior to 1979.

[chrisf97212]

One who is informed shouldn't. But casual readers who encounter his charts that could be spread through parts of the social media, might well not realize that they're viewing lower tropospheric temperature anomalies, not sea surface temperature anomalies. Readers, especially when glancing quickly at charts, often miss such nuances.

Ok, I'm a casual reader and have questions on this.  I've asked a couple of times before and not gotten a response.  Why isn't the troposphere warming?  Isn't that where the CO2 is?  Didn't the GCM's predict warming there?  I have no agenda one way or the other.

 

[ORH_wxman]

Ok, I'm a casual reader and have questions on this.  I've asked a couple of times before and not gotten a response.  Why isn't the troposphere warming?  Isn't that where the CO2 is?  Didn't the GCM's predict warming there?  I have no agenda one way or the other.

 

It is warming....just not as fast the surface temperature datasets.

 

One of the datasets could be a bit off...or there is some other unknown mechanism that is preventing the lower troposphere from warming as fast (or faster actually) than the surface which is what should happen in theory.

[StudentOfClimatology]

HADCRUT plotted below is similar to GISS in terms of relative hiatus strength. Would expect NCDC to track the other surface series (not available at this site). UAH+RSS aren't available prior to 1979.

hiatus_hadcrut.png

The ENSO-calibrated "pause" technically began in 2001, not 1997. I doubt it continues, but there isn't enough time to statistically analyze it yet, relative to the last one.

[StudentOfClimatology]

Looks like we didn't even need a super el nino to accomplish that. The irony is just through the roof.

We're still running below 1997-98 and 2009-10 at this time...and both of those Niños strengthened significantly from here on out.

While those warm years were ENSO-forced, 2014's "surface warmth" is being driven by warm high latitude SSTs. What happens when we lose those warm waters to ever-increasing vertical mixing?

[ORH_wxman]

We're still running below 1997-98 and 2009-10 at this time...and both of those Niños strengthened significantly from here on out.

While those warm years were ENSO-forced, 2014's "surface warmth" is being driven by warm high latitude SSTs. What happens when we lose those warm waters to ever-increasing vertical mixing?

 

 

2002 was driven by warm SSTs as well...not quite as much as this year, but the same thing happened. 2002 was almost as warm as 1998, but it had no El Nino...just like 2014. (well both had developing El Ninos...but they aren't felt until very late in the year) The bizzare thing that about that sequence was that 2003 then came in slightly colder than 2002...despite coming off a moderate El Nino. At least according to the surface temps. I'd bet 2003 came in warmer on UAH/RSS.

[nflwxman]

The ENSO-calibrated "pause" technically began in 2001, not 1997. I doubt it continues, but there isn't enough time to statistically analyze it yet, relative to the last one.

That's kind of a misnomer.  The pause is largely an artifact of ENSO itself.  The ENSO calibrated dataset shows mostly a fairly constant upward trend through 2011.  Solar certainly contributed to the pause as well, but that impact was likely less than that of ENSO (especially to 2013)

 

[ORH_wxman]

That's kind of a misnomer.  The pause is largely an artifact of ENSO itself.  The ENSO calibrated dataset shows mostly a fairly constant upward trend through 2011.  Solar certainly contributed to the pause as well, but that impact was likely less than that of ENSO (especially to 2013)

 

 

 

 

Ahh, the ol' Foster and Rahmsdorf 2011 graph...which was criticized pretty strongly in Tung et al 2013. There's obviously different interpretations on how to adjust for each of these variables.

[nflwxman]

Ahh, the ol' Foster and Rahmsdorf 2011 graph...which was criticized pretty strongly in Tung et al 2013. There's obviously different interpretations on how to adjust for each of these variables.

She's a classic, ain't she?

 

I'll always be a fan of statistical methods to remove the "noise," but regardless my point stands.  This "pause" is largely ENSO driven, whether the trend starts from 2001, 2002, 2003, 2005, or 1998.  I'm sure we can spend days debating on the magnitude.