2017 Global Temperatures

[chubbs]

Below are Pacific SST between 30S and 30N since 1987. The warming in the subtropical Pacific over the past 5 years is notable, particularly over the east. The recent brief nina had limited cooling impact off the equator.

[WidreMann]

Yeah, seriously. What happened? It seems unlikely that we can blame this solely on climate change. But it's quite odd all the same.

[chubbs]

On 5/20/2017 at 2:50 PM, WidreMann said:

Yeah, seriously. What happened? It seems unlikely that we can blame this solely on climate change. But it's quite odd all the same.

Relaxed trade winds are probably contributing. Trade winds were unusually strong during the hiatus.

[WidreMann]

So the question now is whether this giant heat burst dissippates (presumably slower due to CO2 and water vapor) or is it part of a rapid climate shift that could put us in deep trouble in even just a few years.

[chubbs]

6 hours ago, WidreMann said:

So the question now is whether this giant heat burst dissippates (presumably slower due to CO2 and water vapor) or is it part of a rapid climate shift that could put us in deep trouble in even just a few years.

The spike in warming in the past few years is probably a recovery from the relatively cool hiatus period. The long-term warming trend hasn't changed much.

[WidreMann]

14 hours ago, chubbs said:

The spike in warming in the past few years is probably a recovery from the relatively cool hiatus period. The long-term warming trend hasn't changed much.

I would still expect some flattening as there are oscillations on the multi-year and decadal level that should keep us from being on a straight up warming track year after year. All the same, it's quite jarring.

The CFS dailies on WeatherBell are showing some reduction in global temps, especially NH, which has been so warm. This is, I think, the longest period since before the Nino that we've been this cool. We'll see if it lasts.

[chubbs]

UAH6 spiked up to 0.45 in May. Noisy, but on average still running above the pre-nino values - 2017 mean 0.31.

[skierinvermont]

I don't remember this being posted here. Has it already been discussed? Maybe I just forgot.

RSS came out with a new version that uses a new diurnal drift adjustment similar to the UW Po Chedley version previously published. The TMT trend is increased more than 50% from .080C/decade to .129C/decade for TMT (mid troposphere).

http://www.remss.com/blog/RSS-TMT-updated

 

[AfewUniversesBelowNormal]

This is cool. If you can visualize the Earth as a pulsating being, see that equilatoral regions are probably the strongest of consistencyperception. When the ENSO regions are warm for a few years, this becomes the Earth warm for 20 years, in flux, but as an overall mean. I did research a few years back that showed subsurface temperatures in ENSO regions actually had positive effect on the surface in time, meaning it could predict the future of the surface, and was also more accurate correlated to the global pattern than surface. What if the Earth is warming actually on a region below the surface, perhaps something like permeated consciousness from broad energy field of internet, cell phones, technology, and this global warming event is just shallower density (like something broken up), measurable? I do remember as a child in the early 90s, my body felt different than it does today, less stimulus, much less. Even as I post this now there is a constant buzzing.... makes sense? 

[LithiaWx]

53 minutes ago, StormchaserChuck said:

This is cool. If you can visualize the Earth as a pulsating being, see that equilatoral regions are probably the strongest of consistencyperception. When the ENSO regions are warm for a few years, this becomes the Earth warm for 20 years, in flux, but as an overall mean. I did research a few years back that showed subsurface temperatures in ENSO regions actually had positive effect on the surface in time, meaning it could predict the future of the surface, and was also more accurate correlated to the global pattern (NAO, PNAetc) than surface. What if the Earth is warming actually on a region below the surface, perhaps something like permeated consciousness from broad energy field of internet, cell phones, technology, and this global warming event is just shallower density, like something broken up, measurable? I do remember as a child in the early 90s, my body felt different than it does today, less stimulus, much less. Even as I post this now there is a constant buzzing.... makes sense? 

Dude....  can you please send me some of what you've been smoking recently?

[AfewUniversesBelowNormal]

28 minutes ago, LithiaWx said:

Dude....  can you please send me some of what you've been smoking recently?

Turn off your phone for a week and go live 12,000ft on a mountain. Come back and tell me you don't understand global warming. 

[chubbs]

RSS TLT has updated to version 4 -  with more warming, in-line with the surface temperature series now.

http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/JCLI-D-16-0768.1

[bluewave]

15 hours ago, chubbs said:

RSS TLT has updated to version 4 -  with more warming, in-line with the surface temperature series now.

http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/JCLI-D-16-0768.1

Not much of a surprise since this new study shows what we have suspected all along.

 

 

https://www.carbonbrief.org/major-correction-to-satellite-data-shows-140-faster-warming-since-1998

Researchers from Remote Sensing Systems (RSS), based in California, have released a substantially revised version of their lower tropospheric temperature record.

After correcting for problems caused by the decaying orbit of satellites, as well as other factors, they have produced a new record showing 36% faster warming since 1979 and nearly 140% faster (i.e. 2.4 times larger) warming since 1998. This is in comparison to the previous version 3 of the lower tropospheric temperature (TLT) data published in 2009.

As Mears tells Carbon Brief:

By correctly accounting for the changes in satellite measurement times, the new satellite data are in better agreement with the surface data.

As these satellites circle the Earth, their orbits slowly decay over time due to drag from the upper atmosphere. While the satellites are designed to fly over the same spot on the Earth at the same time every day – a precondition to accurately estimating changes in temperatures over time – this orbital decay causes their flyover time to change.

[nflwxman]

6 hours ago, bluewave said:

Not much of a surprise since this new study shows what we have suspected all along.

 

 

https://www.carbonbrief.org/major-correction-to-satellite-data-shows-140-faster-warming-since-1998

Researchers from Remote Sensing Systems (RSS), based in California, have released a substantially revised version of their lower tropospheric temperature record.

After correcting for problems caused by the decaying orbit of satellites, as well as other factors, they have produced a new record showing 36% faster warming since 1979 and nearly 140% faster (i.e. 2.4 times larger) warming since 1998. This is in comparison to the previous version 3 of the lower tropospheric temperature (TLT) data published in 2009.

As Mears tells Carbon Brief:

By correctly accounting for the changes in satellite measurement times, the new satellite data are in better agreement with the surface data.

As these satellites circle the Earth, their orbits slowly decay over time due to drag from the upper atmosphere. While the satellites are designed to fly over the same spot on the Earth at the same time every day – a precondition to accurately estimating changes in temperatures over time – this orbital decay causes their flyover time to change.

 

Pretty much confirms why the satellite data sets always had much larger sigma bands associated with their inherent uncertainty.  There amount of change in RSS even in just in the last 5 years is flabbergasting.  In 2014, on this exact board, we were debating the significance of RSS v.3 and it's slight negative warming rate between 1998 and 2014.  The newest release has the warming rate at 0.14C/decade between 1998 and 2014...

[nzucker]

3 hours ago, nflwxman said:

 

Pretty much confirms why the satellite data sets always had much larger sigma bands associated with their inherent uncertainty.  There amount of change in RSS even in just in the last 5 years is flabbergasting.  In 2014, on this exact board, we were debating the significance of RSS v.3 and it's slight negative warming rate between 1998 and 2014.  The newest release has the warming rate at 0.14C/decade between 1998 and 2014...

The 1998 to 2014 warming rate of .14C/decade would still indicate a brief hiatus compared to the long term trend of .18C/decade, but it brings us closer to expectations.

I believe that basic physics tells us that the lower troposphere (TLT measurement) should warm faster than the surface, so this finally brings the data in line with the theory.

It also shows that the hiatus centered around 2008-2009, while not entirely significant, had a very minor effect on the overall trend and long-term projections. Having said that, with a larger cold pool in the North Pacific, as well as extended periods of low solar activity/TSI/low sunspots, there may be reason to expect another hiatus, perhaps a bit more significant, but unlikely to affect the long term anthropogenic warming trend aroumd 0.15C-0.2C/decade, increasing towards the latter part of 21st century.

 

 

 

 

 

[chubbs]

19 hours ago, nzucker said:

The 1998 to 2014 warming rate of .14C/decade would still indicate a brief hiatus compared to the long term trend of .18C/decade, but it brings us closer to expectations.

I believe that basic physics tells us that the lower troposphere (TLT measurement) should warm faster than the surface, so this finally brings the data in line with the theory.

It also shows that the hiatus centered around 2008-2009, while not entirely significant, had a very minor effect on the overall trend and long-term projections. Having said that, with a larger cold pool in the North Pacific, as well as extended periods of low solar activity/TSI/low sunspots, there may be reason to expect another hiatus, perhaps a bit more significant, but unlikely to affect the long term anthropogenic warming trend aroumd 0.15C-0.2C/decade, increasing towards the latter part of 21st century.

 

 

 

 

 

Below is GISS with a 5-year and a 15-year running mean. The 5-year running mean rises in a series of stair steps, while almost all natural variability is smoothed in the 15-year mean. I would also expect a relatively flat "tread" in the 5-year mean when the current "riser" ends. However we probably should wait for a change in the 15-year running mean before getting too excited one way or the other.

[chubbs]

Mears has a published a FAQ on the RSS update including a comparison with radiosonde data showing less bias than UAH6.

http://www.remss.com/blog/faq-about-v40-tlt-update

 

[donsutherland1]

2 hours ago, chubbs said:

Mears has a published a FAQ on the RSS update including a comparison with radiosonde data showing less bias than UAH6.

http://www.remss.com/blog/faq-about-v40-tlt-update

 

I am not surprised. UAH v6.0 appears to have  a spurious statistical cooling trend. Has it been peer reviewed yet?

[chubbs]

6 hours ago, donsutherland1 said:

I am not surprised. UAH v6.0 appears to have  a spurious statistical cooling trend. Has it been peer reviewed yet?

There was a publication last this year. I don't have a reference - it was a relatively obscure journal  the Asia Pacific Journal of Atmospheric Sciences. The article was mainly material from Spencer's initial blog post on UAH6.

edit: found it

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs13143-017-0010-y

[chubbs]

RSS TLT 0.71 in August, topping previous August record of 0.63 in 2010 and 2016.

 

[nzucker]

39 minutes ago, chubbs said:

RSS TLT 0.71 in August, topping previous August record of 0.63 in 2010 and 2016.

 

Woah, that's seriously warm for a neutral ENSO state, though it may reflect the push towards Nino in the spring as it has 5-6 months lag. Temperature never really dropped much following the monster 2015-16 El Nino, however.

[nzucker]

UAH August 2017: +0.41C

UAH July 2017: +0.28C

Sizable increase though much lower than RSS.

 

[chubbs]

UAH was a record 0.54 in September. The previous record was 0.45 in 2015.

 

[WidreMann]

I was expecting continued cooling, but I guess not. I wonder what's causing the uptick? Surface temp anomalies are steady or trending slowly downward. Perhaps it's from the early-year heat build up.

[WidreMann]

Yep, this map tells the story. If this recovers, I imagine we'll see a big cooldown, but it may just be the new regime. It's unprecedented in the period of record. Even 97/98 doesn't hold a candle to this, both in strength and longevity.

 

[WidreMann]

I think we hit the tipping point...

[chubbs]

On 10/9/2017 at 5:25 PM, bluewave said:

Very warm start to October.

https://mobile.twitter.com/MJVentrice/status/917335766820409344?p=p

gfs must think its 2015

[Vice-Regent]

While I accept that my permanent el nino theory didn't quite verify this cycle 100%, we are nearing some threshold in the system that resembles permanent el nino. Occasionally the trade winds will upwell cold water to the surface independent of the anthropogenic ENSO cycle, due to changes elsewhere in the system which have yet to be determined.

[WidreMann]

12 hours ago, chubbs said:

gfs must think its 2015

I can never figure out exactly what that graph is showing. It has lines and it has dots. The title says GFS vs CFSR. Both lines and dots go into the future. Which one is GFS and which one is CFSR? Does it include the actual historical temps or is this only model forecasts? Or is it historical temps up till the present, then model forecasts? I don't understand why this can't be better labelled and it's really annoying.

[chubbs]

11 hours ago, WidreMann said:

I can never figure out exactly what that graph is showing. It has lines and it has dots. The title says GFS vs CFSR. Both lines and dots go into the future. Which one is GFS and which one is CFSR? Does it include the actual historical temps or is this only model forecasts? Or is it historical temps up till the present, then model forecasts? I don't understand why this can't be better labelled and it's really annoying.

Graph shows gfs model temperatures for entire year. Past data is zero hour model starting point i.e a proxy for observed. The forecast for the next week is also shown. CFSR refers to the baseline "normal" temps used to calculate the temperature anomaly. Main use is to check recent and near-term trends.