2019 Temperatures

[LibertyBell]

22 hours ago, banshee8 said:

Did you see the post I was responding to? He was saying we should be colder given the Alaskan blocking, and then referenced the weather in his backyard.

The western 2/3 of the country was very cold last month, including the all-time record for October.

Part of the reason for that is the higher elevation in the West.

Look at the wildfires in California, which now happen year-round rather than seasonally.

 

[chubbs]

From ZHausfather's twitter. Every possible trend to present, CMIP5 vs obs. Warming has picked-up in the past decade or so and is now faster than CMIP5 models. 

[lookingnorth]

On 11/11/2019 at 4:40 PM, LibertyBell said:

It did?  As far as I'm aware the coldest temp ever recorded in the lower 48 is still -70 at Wolf Creek Pass.

 

Did you not read that it was just a record for October.

[LibertyBell]

4 minutes ago, lookingnorth said:

Did you not read that it was just a record for October.

In the original unedited post that wasn't mentioned.  Either way, this "cold streak" was an island of cold in a sea of warmth.  Unprecedented warmth was surrounding it on all sides.

 

[donsutherland1]

On 11/13/2019 at 6:43 PM, LibertyBell said:

In the original unedited post that wasn't mentioned.  Either way, this "cold streak" was an island of cold in a sea of warmth.  Unprecedented warmth was surrounding it on all sides.

 

Globally, October 2019 was the second warmest on record on GISS. Only October 2015 was warmer.

[donsutherland1]

In terms of global temperatures, the October GISS data is now in. Despite parts of the Northern Rockies experiencing the coldest October on record, October 2019 ranked as the second warmest October on record with a +1.04°C anomaly. Only 2015 with a +1.09°C anomaly was warmer. As a result, 2019 has a year-to-date anomaly of +0.97°C, which is the second warmest at this point in time. 2019 remains on course to be the second warmest year on record on that dataset. That last time a two-month period was cool enough to avoid such an outcome was June-July 2014 with a +0.63°C anomaly. The last time November-December was cool enough was in 2012 with a +0.66°C anomaly.

[bdgwx]

Here are the YTD rankings (Jan - Oct) from Berkeley Earth.

2016 = +0.99

2019 = +0.91

2017 = +0.86

2015 = +0.80

2018 = +0.79

2014 = +0.70

And here are the annual rankings (Jan - Dec) from Berkeley Earth.

2016 = +0.97

2017 = +0.86

2015 = +0.83

2018 = +0.79

2014 = +0.70

A top 3 finish looks like a good bet at this point. Nov and Dec need to come in at a combined +0.62 to rank above 2017's +0.86 finish and capture 2nd place. Based on the latest GFS monthly analysis + 7 day forecast (up to Nov 26th) it appears that Nov should finish strong and end well above the +0.62 threshold.

http://berkeleyearth.lbl.gov/auto/Global/Land_and_Ocean_complete.txt

http://www.karstenhaustein.com/climate.php

 

[bdgwx]

Here is the average ONI for each of the last 6 years. Note that because the global mean temperature response tends to lag ENSO by a few months I have computed each year's average ONI using an offset. It seems as though this lag is typically in the range of 3 to 6 months so I've included two values. The first is the 3-month lag and the second is the 6-month lag. For example the 6-month lag value of +1.7 in 2016 is computed from 2015-07 to 2016-06.

2019 = +0.6, +0.6

2018 = -0.4, -0.5

2017 = -0.1, -0.2

2016 = +1.2, +1.7

2015 = +1.0, +0.6

2014 = -0.1, -0.2

[chubbs]

GISS - the current spike has fully corrected the hiatus, but the 11-year mean hasn't turned up much --- yet.

http://www.columbia.edu/~mhs119/Temperature/

[banshee8]

On 11/13/2019 at 4:43 PM, LibertyBell said:

In the original unedited post that wasn't mentioned.  Either way, this "cold streak" was an island of cold in a sea of warmth.  Unprecedented warmth was surrounding it on all sides.

Well, what is interesting is that trends in the U.S. don't always follow the global ones. For the lower 48, since 2007 we've seen a shift to colder continental patterns during the cold season that has been opposite of global trends.

Compare the winters since 2007 to the decade that preceded. Complete anomaly reversal, and definitely colder overall.

 

[bdgwx]

5 hours ago, banshee8 said:

Well, what is interesting is that trends in the U.S. don't always follow the global ones. For the lower 48, since 2007 we've seen a shift to colder continental patterns during the cold season that has been opposite of global trends.

Compare the winters since 2007 to the decade that preceded. Complete anomaly reversal, and definitely colder overall.

That's pretty typical. Regional trends often do not align with global trends. Another example...Siberia cooled even more than the upper great plains in the CONUS during this same period. Yet...the planet is warmer overall now than in the previous decade. I asked the question above...is this a result of a systematic shift via WACKy, quasi resonant amplification of the polar jet, or something else? Or is it just another chaotic artifact that will disappear in the following decade? Lots of questions...

[adiabatic14]

19 hours ago, bdgwx said:

That's pretty typical. Regional trends often do not align with global trends. Another example...Siberia cooled even more than the upper great plains in the CONUS during this same period. Yet...the planet is warmer overall now than in the previous decade. I asked the question above...is this a result of a systematic shift via WACKy, quasi resonant amplification of the polar jet, or something else? Or is it just another chaotic artifact that will disappear in the following decade? Lots of questions...

Most likely chaotic artifact, it's repetitive in the same way a whirlpool that follows an oar dip is repetitive in nature but chaotic in origin, the human temporal scale is so granular that momentary idiosyncracies are often mistaken for meaningful patterns...which of course begs the question: what events are meaningful in a climate change context? well, I'd personally answer that with "we simply do not have enough knowledge to answer that"...there are obvious candidates: die off blue-green algae, expansion of Gobi to all of central China, death of Gulf Stream and resultant "siberification" of Europe, but for all of the threats we can name, I'm betting the one that writes the history of our species will be one that we aren't able to foresee

[LibertyBell]

On 11/20/2019 at 10:54 AM, banshee8 said:

Well, what is interesting is that trends in the U.S. don't always follow the global ones. For the lower 48, since 2007 we've seen a shift to colder continental patterns during the cold season that has been opposite of global trends.

Compare the winters since 2007 to the decade that preceded. Complete anomaly reversal, and definitely colder overall.

 

I wonder if that's because the Arctic has become warmer that the balance of heat has shifted to make it colder overall in the mountainous west and in the Great Plains.  Also, as you can see, it's become warmer along the east coast, so this may be nature's way of trying to balance things out because of a warmer Arctic.

Could also have a Pac influence here as the ice melts in the Arctic, driving downstream changes.

 

[LibertyBell]

On 11/21/2019 at 11:45 AM, adiabatic14 said:

Most likely chaotic artifact, it's repetitive in the same way a whirlpool that follows an oar dip is repetitive in nature but chaotic in origin, the human temporal scale is so granular that momentary idiosyncracies are often mistaken for meaningful patterns...which of course begs the question: what events are meaningful in a climate change context? well, I'd personally answer that with "we simply do not have enough knowledge to answer that"...there are obvious candidates: die off blue-green algae, expansion of Gobi to all of central China, death of Gulf Stream and resultant "siberification" of Europe, but for all of the threats we can name, I'm betting the one that writes the history of our species will be one that we aren't able to foresee

well it could also be considered as an effect of climate change, as we are having more extremes now and nature is still trying to balance things out (downstream changes from a warmer Arctic.)

 

[LibertyBell]

On 11/20/2019 at 4:09 PM, bdgwx said:

That's pretty typical. Regional trends often do not align with global trends. Another example...Siberia cooled even more than the upper great plains in the CONUS during this same period. Yet...the planet is warmer overall now than in the previous decade. I asked the question above...is this a result of a systematic shift via WACKy, quasi resonant amplification of the polar jet, or something else? Or is it just another chaotic artifact that will disappear in the following decade? Lots of questions...

I think nature is still trying to balance out what's going on in the Arctic by making changes elsewhere in response.

[bdgwx]

From the early arrivals...CFSR and UAH for November came in 0.10 and 0.09 higher than October respectively. I would imagine the conventional surface station datasets like GISTEMP and Berkeley Earth and the like will be at least as warm as October if not warmer. This would position 2019 with very high odds of being the 2nd warmest on record.

[donsutherland1]

From the ECMWF's Copernicus Program:

Globally, November 2019 was one of the three warmest Novembers on record, differing only marginally from November 2015 and 2016. Most land areas saw above average temperatures, with the exception of much of the eastern USA and Canada and a central Asian region extending from Siberia to the Iranian coast. Europe saw an autumn (September-November) temperature 1.1°C above the 1981-2010 average, a value that since at least 1979 has been exceeded only in 2006, 2015 and 2018.

https://climate.copernicus.eu/surface-air-temperature-november-2019

[chubbs]

GISS vs CMIP5 forcing (source for forcing # below, volcanoes*0.25 reflecting observed response to short duration activity). Observed TCR is roughly 1.8 inline with model estimates.

https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1029/2018JD028481

[chubbs]

Strong ocean warming since the end of the hiatus. The 2016 super nino spike was completely erased by the following la nina. It's the non-super nino periods that have been killing us. Most recently we have warmed in the past year even though 3.4 temps have cooled.

[chubbs]

Off the charts surface melting so far this summer in Antarctica aided by the September SSW with temperatures above normal since late September.

http://climato.be/cms/index.php?climato=the-2020-melt-season-over-antarctica-as-simulated-by-marv3-10

 

 

 

[donsutherland1]

According to the GISS dataset, November 2019 ranked as the second warmest November on record with a +1.02°C anomaly. Only 2015 with a +1.06°C anomaly was warmer. As a result, 2019 has a year-to-date anomaly of +0.97°C, which is the second warmest at this point in time. 2019 is extremely likely to wind up as the second warmest year on record on that dataset.

To wind up cooler than 2017 (+0.92°C annual anomaly), which currently ranks as the second warmest year on record, December would need a temperature anomaly of +0.37°C. The last month with a temperature anomaly of +0.37°C or less was January 2008, which had a temperature anomaly of +0.30°C. The last time December was at least as cool occurred in 2000 when the monthly anomaly was +0.28°C. The coolest anomaly so far this year is +0.86°C, which occurred in May.

[bdgwx]

And with reanalysis running warmer through the first half of December I think it's a near certainty that 2019 is going to clinch 2nd place in most datasets. 

[chubbs]

19 hours ago, bdgwx said:

And with reanalysis running warmer through the first half of December I think it's a near certainty that 2019 is going to clinch 2nd place in most datasets. 

Very strong warming the past 5-6 years. The warm departure from the trend-line has stayed more prominent than the cool departure during the hiatus.

 

 

[donsutherland1]

As per the EU’s Copernicus, 2019 was the second warmest year on record:

https://climate.copernicus.eu/surface-air-temperature-december-2019

[lookingnorth]

It was the third warmest year on record in the UAH dataset:

https://www.drroyspencer.com/2020/01/uah-global-temperature-update-for-december-2019-0-56-deg-c/

[FPizz]

This is a general question that just popped into my head when looking at my weather channel calendar.  The one fact on it for Jan 25th was stating that the global land/ocean surface temp in Jan 2019 tied 2007 for the 3rd warmed (going back to 1880).  How many global stations (I'm not sure what they are really called) were there in 1880 compared to now? Was there 1000 stations back then, and 10000 now?  Do they try to use the same number?  I'm guessing if they are using that stat, they aren't using sat temps?  Thanks for the input in advance. 

[donsutherland1]

On GISS, 2019 was easily the second warmest year on record with an annual temperature anomaly of +0.98 degrees C. December was also the second warmest December with a monthly temperature anomaly of +1.11 degrees C.

[TriPol]

On 11/16/2019 at 3:35 PM, donsutherland1 said:

Globally, October 2019 was the second warmest on record on GISS. Only October 2015 was warmer.

"On record."

[etudiant]

On 1/13/2020 at 12:28 PM, frankdp23 said:

This is a general question that just popped into my head when looking at my weather channel calendar.  The one fact on it for Jan 25th was stating that the global land/ocean surface temp in Jan 2019 tied 2007 for the 3rd warmed (going back to 1880).  How many global stations (I'm not sure what they are really called) were there in 1880 compared to now? Was there 1000 stations back then, and 10000 now?  Do they try to use the same number?  I'm guessing if they are using that stat, they aren't using sat temps?  Thanks for the input in advance. 

It is a serious issue that the researchers recognize by widening the error bars on the older data.

There are so many changes to take into account, in the instrumentation as well as the environmental transformation over the past 140 years. Add to this that many places were not monitored consistently, so putting it all together is a massive task involving lots of judgments. For instance, a site that has a continuous record since 1880 is valuable, as there are not that many, but that location may have gone from rural to midtown during that interval.

There has been an effort to select a relatively small number of stations, in the 1000 range iirc, which are deemed representative, so many fewer stations are used for the more recent data than are available. 

[TriPol]

8 minutes ago, etudiant said:

It is a serious issue that the researchers recognize by widening the error bars on the older data.

There are so many changes to take into account, in the instrumentation as well as the environmental transformation over the past 140 years. Add to this that many places were not monitored consistently, so putting it all together is a massive task involving lots of judgments. For instance, a site that has a continuous record since 1880 is valuable, as there are not that many, but that location may have gone from rural to midtown during that interval.

There has been an effort to select a relatively small number of stations, in the 1000 range iirc, which are deemed representative, so many fewer stations are used for the more recent data than are available. 

But how accurate were those thermometers back then in the 1,000 stations in 1880?