2014 Global Temperatures

[StudentOfClimatology]

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.

Was about to say, definitely am not a fan of F/R 2011.

If you adjust using an underlying ONI basis alone, the ENSO contribution since 2001 is actually pretty negligible.

There's one study (forget which) that tries to incorporate the PDO to account for this, but still fails to provide a mechanism explaining how the PDO forces global temperature.

[StudentOfClimatology]

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.

I think 2002 was warmer on RSS too, not sure about UAH but I could be mistaken on the former as well.

A lot depends on how quickly we lose the warm SSTs above 30N. They're cooling pretty quickly already, but recent history there suggests October is the month when the high latitude cooling becomes evident in the global aggregate(s).

If anything, I think the satellite data will warm through the Autumn, while the surface data cools.

[nflwxman]

Was about to say, definitely am not a fan of F/R 2011.

If you adjust using an underlying ONI basis alone, the ENSO contribution since 2001 is actually pretty negligible.

There's one study (forget which) that tries to incorporate the PDO to account for this, but still fails to provide a mechanism explaining how the PDO forces global temperature.

Really?  

 

Here is the data for ONI.  Please do some trends if you'd like since 2000, 2001, 2003, or really any year before 2008.  Tell me what you find.  Pretty sure a trend from +0.4 ONI to -0.5 ONI since 2001 is not negligible.   

 

http://www.cpc.noaa.gov/products/analysis_monitoring/ensostuff/ensoyears.shtml

[StudentOfClimatology]

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.

I'm not sure about that. What may appear to work on one timescale may not work on another.

Here is the ONI from 2008-present. It's essentially flat.

[bluewave]

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)

 

 

 

That almost looks like the OHC chart.

 

 

[nflwxman]

And we have warmed a big amount since 2008 despite 2010 being a nino year (and towards the beginning of the trend).  And that will probably open up more after a few more months in ONI positive.

 

http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/gistemp/from:2008/to:2015/trend

[StudentOfClimatology]

And we have warmed a big amount since 2008 despite 2010 being a nino year (and towards the beginning of the trend)

It begins in September 2008, after the 2008 La Niña...essentially in 2009. don't believe ENSO is responsible.

Here are global temperatures since then:

[Jonger]

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?

 

The warmest SSTs of the year have probably peaked, so as long as land continues to post unimpressive warmth figures, global temps should head back down.

[donsutherland1]

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.

I suspect the actual outcomes may have to do with the ocean-atmosphere coupling, which is not sufficiently understood. As the oceans store vast amounts of energy, as stronger El Niños develop, it's plausible that the warming would show up first on the land-ocean surface data rather than the lower atmosphere. Following the peak of an El Niño, the peak in lower tropospheric temperatures might occur a little after land-surface data following an ENSO peak. The two recent super El Niño events may hint at such an outcome:

 

1982-83:

ENSO Regions 1+2 and 3.4 began warming in March 1982. UAH bottomed out in March 1982 (-0.36°C) but fell back to (-0.35°C in October). GISS had a clear bottom in March 1982.

 

ENSO Region 1+2 peaked in December 1982 and Region 3.4 peaked in January 1983. UAH peaked in March 1983 and GISS peaked in January 1983.

 

1997-98

ENSO Region 1+2 began warming in April 1996 and Region 3.4 began warming in October 1995. UAH bottomed out in April 1997. GISS bottomed out in September 1996.

 

ENSO Region 1+2 peaked in August 1997 and Region 3.4 peaked in December 1997. UAH peaked in April 1998 while GISS peaked in February 1998.

 

I realize that there were some fluctuations, as ENSO Region warming was not in a straight-line fashion, but the experience with the super El Niños hints that such events may create outcomes that differ from the theory.

 

I haven't found any papers that try to address the differences in warming between what the theory suggests and what has occurred. Nevertheless, the experience with the super El Niños hints that ocean-atmosphere coupling may provide an explanation and perhaps the theory deals with oversimplified assumptions that are negated by such coupling.

[ORH_wxman]

You have to go back to mid-1999 to find a neutral ENSO trend longer than 10 years using linear regression. We've warmed at 0.08C per decade on GISS and 0.07C per decade on NCDC and Hadcrut4 since then.

[StudentOfClimatology]

The warmest SSTs of the year have probably peaked, so as long as land continues to post unimpressive warmth figures, global temps should head back down.

Yeah, they're definitely coming down now. If the warmth was ENSO-forced, I'd be predicting a new record for this year. I could see GISS maybe coming close, but I'd give the other datasets a 10% chance at best.

I'd still give 2015 a 50/50 chance of breaking the all-time record, assuming we don't fall into a La Niña.

[ORH_wxman]

I suspect the actual outcomes may have to do with the ocean-atmosphere coupling, which is not sufficiently understood. As the oceans store vast amounts of energy, as stronger El Niños develop, it's plausible that the warming would show up first on the land-ocean surface data rather than the lower atmosphere. Following the peak of an El Niño, the peak in lower tropospheric temperatures might occur a little after land-surface data following an ENSO peak. The two recent super El Niño events may hint at such an outcome:

 

1982-83:

ENSO Regions 1+2 and 3.4 began warming in March 1982. UAH bottomed out in March 1982 (-0.36°C) but fell back to (-0.35°C in October). GISS had a clear bottom in March 1982.

 

ENSO Region 1+2 peaked in December 1982 and Region 3.4 peaked in January 1983. UAH peaked in March 1983 and GISS peaked in January 1983.

 

1997-98

ENSO Region 1+2 began warming in April 1996 and Region 3.4 began warming in October 1995. UAH bottomed out in April 1997. GISS bottomed out in September 1996.

 

ENSO Region 1+2 peaked in August 1997 and Region 3.4 peaked in December 1997. UAH peaked in April 1998 while GISS peaked in February 1998.

 

I realize that there were some fluctuations, as ENSO Region warming was not in a straight-line fashion, but the experience with the super El Niños hints that such events may create outcomes that differ from the theory.

 

I haven't found any papers that try to address the differences in warming between what the theory suggests and what has occurred. Nevertheless, the experience with the super El Niños hints that ocean-atmosphere coupling may provide an explanation and perhaps the theory deals with oversimplified assumptions that are negated by such coupling.

 

It's definitely an interesting topic of discussion...hopefully some papers discuss it more in the coming years if the discrepency remains on the data. I would think the ocean-atmosphere coupling processes would likely have something to do with it too assuming our temp data is pretty robust.

[The_Global_Warmer]

Yeah it sure looks like we are losing those abnormal ssta confined to the Northern Lats.

 

 

 

Oh wait.

 

Right on track.

 

 

 

[bluewave]

I calculated where this year would finish on GISS with each September to December 

period since 2005 averaged out with January to August 2014.

 

2013....+66

2012....+65

2011....+61

2010....+64

2009....+65

2008....+63

2007....+62

2006....+66

2005....+67

[nflwxman]

I calculated where this year would finish on GISS with each September to December

period since 2005 averaged out with January to August 2014.

2013....+66

2012....+65

2011....+61

2010....+64

2009....+65

2008....+63

2007....+62

2006....+66

2005....+67

Yeah. I think what's unique about this year is 5/8 months have had anomalies over 0.7. Even before the NPac torch.

[Jonger]

Yeah, they're definitely coming down now. If the warmth was ENSO-forced, I'd be predicting a new record for this year. I could see GISS maybe coming close, but I'd give the other datasets a 10% chance at best.

I'd still give 2015 a 50/50 chance of breaking the all-time record, assuming we don't fall into a La Niña.

 

Doesn't matter much to me, global temps never really change too much... Its a snails pace upward. I expect it to take another 25+ years before we hit 1.0C on GISS.

[tacoman25]

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.

 

But at the same time, the sea surface temp is not air temperature.

[donsutherland1]

But at the same time, the sea surface temp is not air temperature.

Of course it isn't. But Goddard wrote, "Complete bull****. The oceans were much warmer in August 1998." He was contesting the ocean temperature figure.

[nflwxman]

Doesn't matter much to me, global temps never really change too much... Its a snails pace upward. I expect it to take another 25+ years before we hit 1.0C on GISS.

Lol this might happen within 3 years for a monthly anomaly. You realize 2007 had a 0.92 anomaly right?

[Jonger]

Lol this might happen within 3 years for a monthly anomaly. You realize 2007 had a 0.92 anomaly right?

I'm talking a full year.

[tacoman25]

Of course it isn't. But Goddard wrote, "Complete bull****. The oceans were much warmer in August 1998." He was contesting the ocean temperature figure.

 

Yeah, I have no comment on that. Other than, they probably weren't.

[stadiumwave]

Legit question: Is this true? Anyone checked?

 

 

 

Yes it's Goddard. He also posted something that does interest me from Gavin:

 

GAVIN"s 2011 Map For August:

 

 

 

GAVIN'S 2014 for AUGUST

 

 

 

Yet GAVIN's GISS data says:

 

 

 

"If" that is true that's suspicious. Not saying it is....but if so, why would Gavin do that?

[The_Global_Warmer]

Things are really going to get exciting now.  I just hope the forum can remain civil, cordial, and respectable while the hiatus is sinking like the titanic the next 15.34 months.

 

 

 

[StudentOfClimatology]

Way too early to make a call like that.

[The_Global_Warmer]

I calculated where this year would finish on GISS with each September to December 

period since 2005 averaged out with January to August 2014.

 

2013....+66

2012....+65

2011....+61

2010....+64

2009....+65

2008....+63

2007....+62

2006....+66

2005....+67

 

 

The only year 2014 will be close to for SOND is 2005 you can take that to the bank. 

 

So far 2014 has been completely driven by the oceans and the poles.

 

We have never had a non ENSO driven year this warm yet. 

 

 

The largest cold anomaly in 2014 on Earth is over land.  Right in our backyard centered over North America.

 

When the pattern flips.  Which it is in the process of doing over North America the land anomalies are going to swing much more than the ocean.

 

Beyond that an even larger region of the NPAC is expected to continue to warm sst wise plus increasing warmth from ENSO, the Indian Ocean, and South Central NATL.

 

On top of that the NPAC hasn't cooled off much at all so far.

 

 

[Jonger]

This upcoming pattern will probably pop a trough over the N Pac and start to eat away at the positive anomalies. 

[ORH_wxman]

Legit question: Is this true? Anyone checked?

 

 

 

 

Yes it's Goddard. He also posted something that does interest me from Gavin:

 

GAVIN"s 2011 Map For August:

 

 

 

 

GAVIN'S 2014 for AUGUST

 

 

 

 

Yet GAVIN's GISS data says:

 

 

 

"If" that is true that's suspicious. Not saying it is....but if so, why would Gavin do that?

 

The maps either may be calculated slightly differently or they are more updated than the text which is only updated once per month. The difference between those numbers is completely meaningless though...it is so small. 0.02C is smaller than the margin of error for GISS.

[donsutherland1]

The maps either may be calculated slightly differently or they are more updated than the text which is only updated once per month. The difference between those numbers is completely meaningless though...it is so small. 0.02C is smaller than the margin of error for GISS.

I agree that the difference is essentially meaningless. Any way, no matter the future adjustments, August 2014 will probably have ranked among the warmest ever Augusts on record (both GISS and NCDC).

 

It does seem that some such as Goddard and Bastardi are trying to push back unusually hard against the August data, as it undercuts the narrative that cooling is now underway. I'm not sure why there seems to be such an urgency right now. From Bastardi's tweets:

 

Heh NOAA There were 84 months at 0.2 or higher since 1978 in the UAH record - the highest being +0.69 in May 1998. Youre busted

 

First, NOAA released the NCDC dataset. It made no claims about any other dataset. Second, the NOAA reported that August 2014 was the warmest August on record in the NCDC dataset, not the warmest month on record. Third, UAH had a +0.20°C global anomaly (land and ocean) for August but the +0.69°C anomaly he referenced for May 1998 was a land anomaly on the UAH dataset.

 

His tweet immediately following the above one declared:

 

ONLY NOAA data which uses readjustments show warmest ever. Not in other data sets. The fox is guarding the henhouse

 

Actually, GISS also reported the warmest August on record (or 2nd warmest off the record by 0.01°C if the map is correct). So two major datasets are in very close agreement.

[ORH_wxman]

I agree that the difference is essentially meaningless. Any way, no matter the future adjustments, August 2014 will probably have ranked among the warmest ever Augusts on record (both GISS and NCDC).

 

It does seem that some such as Goddard and Bastardi are trying to push back unusually hard against the August data, as it undercuts the narrative that cooling is now underway. I'm not sure why there seems to be such an urgency right now. From Bastardi's tweets:

 

Heh NOAA There were 84 months at 0.2 or higher since 1978 in the UAH record - the highest being +0.69 in May 1998. Youre busted

 

First, NOAA released the NCDC dataset. It made no claims about any other dataset. Second, the NOAA reported that August 2014 was the warmest August on record in the NCDC dataset, not the warmest month on record. Third, UAH had a +0.20°C global anomaly (land and ocean) for August but the +0.69°C anomaly he referenced for May 1998 was a land anomaly on the UAH dataset.

 

His tweet immediately following the above one declared:

 

ONLY NOAA data which uses readjustments show warmest ever. Not in other data sets. The fox is guarding the henhouse

 

Actually, GISS also reported the warmest August on record (or 2nd warmest off the record by 0.01°C if the map is correct). So two major datasets are in very close agreement.

 

 

It seems he doesn't understand where the data comes from...both NCDC and GISS don't do a ton of adjustments on their own. Most adjustments or revisions (often from late data) come from GHCN...which is what both of those datasets use as a base land dataset before calculating their own anomalies.

 

Hadcrut4 is slighlty different in that they use a land dataset called CRUTEM4...it has some common stations it shares with GHCN, but also has many that are not common to GHCN. Hadcrut4 is also different in it uses the HadSST3 dataset for SSTs while both NCDC and GISS use ERSSTv3...they both used to use OISSTv2 but GISS switched in January 2013 while NCDC switched sometime in 2012.

 

 

And I agree...if people are going to criticize the data, they really need to learn where it comes from and how the data is analyzed in the first place. I think people get so caught up in the monthly rankings (which can differ at times depending on dataset) that they forget that most of the temp datatsets aren't that different when you stretch them out over a couple decades or longer.

[Isotherm]

An important point to remember is that the lower troposphere temperature datasets such as RSS and UAH utilize data above the oceans while the surface temperature datasets like GISS actually incorporate sea surface temperatures into the final numbers. So it's no surprise that the highly anomalous warm water across the NPAC and NATL has contributed to the GISS record. That excessive warmth in the SST's has not been realized in the lower troposphere as of yet. And as a number of us have discussed, the surface datasets are liable to decline in the coming months as the mean jet shifts equatorward and begins to upwell colder waters in the NPAC / NATL, and without forcing from a mod/strong El Nino, the peak on GISS is probably right now. RSS and UAH may not peak until mid or late winter depending upon the eventual timing / magnitude of the peak of this weak-mod el nino event. Their peak is liable to be lower than the surface temperature datasets due to the lesser heat release from a weaker ENSO event.