2011 Global Temperatures

[skierinvermont]

waaaaaaaat? I never said that. The anoms are listed on the images.

You claimed to be able to see that GISS looks warmer in the arctic. It doesn't. I see many pixels of the darkest red on HadCRUT where GISS has normal red in Siberia. There's a cold spot north of Svalbard on HadCRUT which GISS lacks but there are also many spots in the arctic where HadCRUT is warmer. Which makes sense considering they have essentially the same global anomaly of .48 and .49C.

Where GISS doesn't extrapolate, then yes. it is still colder than HADCRUT in the Arctic,and southern ocean.

[nzucker]

Meanwhile, AMSU Channel 5 global temperatures are taking another dive...if this continues, we will cross 2008 and become the coldest year on the chart...We're running .65C below last year for the daily anomaly and continue to fall....February should come in colder than January on UAH if Channel 5 is accurate. Very impressive.

[skierinvermont]

Meanwhile, AMSU Channel 5 global temperatures are taking another dive...if this continues, we will cross 2008 and become the coldest year on the chart...We're running .65C below last year for the daily anomaly and continue to fall....February should come in colder than January on UAH if Channel 5 is accurate. Very impressive.

2008 peaked at -.30C on UAH in the month of January.. last month was -.01C and for the first 9 days of February Ch. 5 is running nearly exactly the same as January did (slightly above actually). So we're not really dropping, and were .29C warmer than 2008 last month.

I think this month will probably come in around -.05 to -.1C on UAH (new baseline) even though Ch 5 hasn't dropped. That would still be much warmer than 2008's -.25C in February.

Given global SSTs have been consistently higher than 2008 the last 3 months, I'd be very surprised if 2011 were as cool as 2008.

2008 came in at -.04C on UAH (new baseline). In the other thread I guessed 2011 would come in at .03C (your guess was -.1C) but now that I think about it more even that might be too cold.

[Clifford]

Meanwhile, AMSU Channel 5 global temperatures are taking another dive...if this continues, we will cross 2008 and become the coldest year on the chart...We're running .65C below last year for the daily anomaly and continue to fall....February should come in colder than January on UAH if Channel 5 is accurate. Very impressive.

The Near Surface temps have been bouncing around for a while.

The ocean surface temps seem to be looking more average... And, the La Niña currents may be driving some of this "cold snap", and it could be waning by mid-year, although it is not uncommon for El Niño/La Niña cycles to rebound without going through a transition.

The sun has also been going through a flurry of activity lately... The most active since February last year, but still in line with the 1966 cycle 24 solar minimum.

The ice progression has been struggling a bit, but still in line with 2005, 2006, 2007, and 2010, but still somewhat less than 2008.

I'm doubting that we'll have a heat-wave, but it will probably progress as a mild year.

Any idea if UAH is going to start publishing information on the other channels again?

[BethesdaWX]

You claimed to be able to see that GISS looks warmer in the arctic. It doesn't. I see many pixels of the darkest red on HadCRUT where GISS has normal red in Siberia. There's a cold spot north of Svalbard on HadCRUT which GISS lacks but there are also many spots in the arctic where HadCRUT is warmer. Which makes sense considering they have essentially the same global anomaly of .48 and .49C.

Where did I say that? "read the anomalies, looks like GISS is warmer" is what I would have been implying if I ever stated such.

Yes, there are places where HADCRUT is warmer, but overall, GISS has more of them. GISS is too warm in the arctic, HADCRUT is too Cold in the Arctic. UAH would be a good middle road to use.

[skierinvermont]

Where did I say that? "read the anomalies, looks like GISS is warmer" is what I would have been implying if I ever stated such.

Yes, there are places where HADCRUT is warmer, but overall, GISS has more of them. GISS is too warm in the arctic, HADCRUT is too Cold in the Arctic. UAH would be a good middle road to use.

UAH is colder than either GISS or HadCRUT.

In addition, there are numerous flaws in the satellite analysis. See Fu et al. Vinnikov et al. and Thorne et al. Newer analyses such as STAR find more warming from the same MSU satellite data.

For the surface, I prefer some sort of compromise between GISS and HadCRUT, probably leaning towards GISS since HadCRUT leaves out the rapid warming we know has occurred in the arctic the last 15 years.

[tacoman25]

2008 peaked at -.30C on UAH in the month of January.. last month was -.01C and for the first 9 days of February Ch. 5 is running nearly exactly the same as January did (slightly above actually). So we're not really dropping, and were .29C warmer than 2008 last month.

I think this month will probably come in around -.05 to -.1C on UAH (new baseline) even though Ch 5 hasn't dropped. That would still be much warmer than 2008's -.25C in February.

Given global SSTs have been consistently higher than 2008 the last 3 months, I'd be very surprised if 2011 were as cool as 2008.

2008 came in at -.04C on UAH (new baseline). In the other thread I guessed 2011 would come in at .03C (your guess was -.1C) but now that I think about it more even that might be too cold.

Why do you think that might be too cold? This Nina didn't peak until the past month, and it remains pretty robust. Anomalies should remain pretty cold for at least the next 6 months, and the coldest anomalies are likely ahead.

[skierinvermont]

Why do you think that might be too cold? This Nina didn't peak until the past month, and it remains pretty robust. Anomalies should remain pretty cold for at least the next 6 months, and the coldest anomalies are likely ahead.

We'll see I guess. I'd probably still go with about .03C. A lot will depend on what the Nina does this spring.

[nzucker]

2008 peaked at -.30C on UAH in the month of January.. last month was -.01C and for the first 9 days of February Ch. 5 is running nearly exactly the same as January did (slightly above actually). So we're not really dropping, and were .29C warmer than 2008 last month.

I think this month will probably come in around -.05 to -.1C on UAH (new baseline) even though Ch 5 hasn't dropped. That would still be much warmer than 2008's -.25C in February.

Given global SSTs have been consistently higher than 2008 the last 3 months, I'd be very surprised if 2011 were as cool as 2008.

2008 came in at -.04C on UAH (new baseline). In the other thread I guessed 2011 would come in at .03C (your guess was -.1C) but now that I think about it more even that might be too cold.

Of course you couldn't actually admit we're cooling...couldn't be!

I just said that we'd begun another drop, yes the first few days of the month had warmed from January, but we'll see where this next move takes us. If you follow the logic of the 5-month lag, you'd think the coldest anomalies would occur in springtime given that La Niñas peak in early winter...but of course, the satellites do have a seasonal bias so you won't see the lowest actual temperatures recorded during the spring/summer. It still surprises me that the minimum temperature anomaly in 2008 was in January given that the La Niña had essentially just begun.

Remember we do have a +AMO right now, which is going to make it harder for us to be as cold as 2008 which had much more neutral conditions in the North Atlantic. All those super warm waters near Greenland are driving up global SSTs for sure...now that we've entered a +NAO regime, we'll begin to see if those anomalies start to disappear and pave the way for a true plunge, although that will be against the backdrop of the La Niña fading seasonally. The big factors to watch to determine how cold this year will be are the AMO/NAO and whether the -ENSO regime redevelops this summer.

[skierinvermont]

Of course you couldn't actually admit we're cooling...couldn't be!

I just said that we'd begun another drop, yes the first few days of the month had warmed from January, but we'll see where this next move takes us. If you follow the logic of the 5-month lag, you'd think the coldest anomalies would occur in springtime given that La Niñas peak in early winter...but of course, the satellites do have a seasonal bias so you won't see the lowest actual temperatures recorded during the spring/summer. It still surprises me that the minimum temperature anomaly in 2008 was in January given that the La Niña had essentially just begun.

Remember we do have a +AMO right now, which is going to make it harder for us to be as cold as 2008 which had much more neutral conditions in the North Atlantic. All those super warm waters near Greenland are driving up global SSTs for sure...now that we've entered a +NAO regime, we'll begin to see if those anomalies start to disappear and pave the way for a true plunge, although that will be against the backdrop of the La Niña fading seasonally. The big factors to watch to determine how cold this year will be are the AMO/NAO and whether the -ENSO regime redevelops this summer.

Where on earth do you get off saying I don't "admit" we are cooling? Of course we have cooled over the last 6 months.. I have never failed to "admit" that. But so far the first 10 days of Feb have been no cooler than January was. I suppose there has been a tiny tick down the last few days of maybe .05C. But I'm not all that interested in day-to-day ticks. If we see a trend over a few weeks of cooling then that might mean something. A tick down of .05C does not make "intersecting 2008" imminent as you said it did because it will likely just tick back up again. You also stated that based on CH5 Feb would come in colder than Jan. Considering the first 10 days of the month are averaging warmer than January did on CH5 I do not see any basis for this claim. I would not be surprised if UAH were lower in Feb than Jan, but not because of CH5.

The AMO has no detectable correlation to global temperatures over the last 100 years.. I see no reason why it will suddenly start correlating in 2011. If it had the effect you are saying it does, there would be strong very obvious correlation, which there isn't.

You are also just plain wrong about the AMO in 2008. The AMO was quite positive in 2008 at .163. January's value was .184.

It's also important to remember that as the earth warming accelerates due to AGW, the AMO will become more positive because it only uses linear detrending. So saying the warming is due to the +AMO does not preclude the fact that it is ultimately due to AGW, because AGW has the ability to drive the AMO more positive with time.

This is unlike the PDO which uses and EOF analysis instead of simple linear detrending. So AGW will not drive the PDO more positive (at least not directly via warming, but perhaps indirectly through changes in ocean patterns).

You also say that a "+NAO will pave the way for a true plunge." There is no detectable effect of the NAO on global temperatures that I am aware of. While a +NAO might rid us of the warm anomalies near Greenland, it is also associated with warm anomalies elsewhere in the Atlantic. Moreover, this is an extremely regional phenomenon.

[nzucker]

Where on earth do you get off saying I don't "admit" we are cooling? Of course we have cooled over the last 6 months.. I have never failed to "admit" that. But so far the first 10 days of Feb have been no cooler than January was. I suppose there has been a tiny tick down the last few days of maybe .05C. But I'm not all that interested in day-to-day ticks. If we see a trend over a few weeks of cooling then that might mean something. A tick down of .05C does not make "intersecting 2008" imminent as you said it did because it will likely just tick back up again. You also stated that based on CH5 Feb would come in colder than Jan. Considering the first 10 days of the month are averaging warmer than January did on CH5 I do not see any basis for this claim. I would not be surprised if UAH were lower in Feb than Jan, but not because of CH5.

The AMO has no detectable correlation to global temperatures over the last 100 years.. I see no reason why it will suddenly start correlating in 2011. If it had the effect you are saying it does, there would be strong very obvious correlation, which there isn't.

You are also just plain wrong about the AMO in 2008. The AMO was quite positive in 2008 at .163. January's value was .184.

I just think you take pride in being the "skeptic who went back to science" or something gross like that...it's patently obvious. Remember, February averages higher on the satellites than January, so even if the actual global temperature remained static on AMSU, the anomaly would be cooler, given the seasonal effect. We also are about to intersect 2008; 2008 is the yellow line on AMSU, and the red line which represents 2011 is about to hit it. Does it get any simpler than that? Of course, that doesn't mean the year is averaging colder than 2008; that's not what I claimed. But given that 2008 had such a large upcoming spike, the fact that we're starting another drop and about to intersect it suggests the coming part of the year may average colder than that La Niña.

High SSTs make the globe warmer...you just said that 2011 having higher SSTs than 2008 makes it likely that the globe will be warmer. The AMO is an index concerning how warm SSTs are, so it follows from your comment that the higher AMO should make the globe milder. And then you go on to deny the very thing you just said! All based on your obsession with "statistics" and "correlation." You just can't see the forest for the trees sometimes, Andrew, and it's quite evident.

We had a record high AMO this summer/fall...that's what the satellites are picking up on now...it's lagged, remember?

[skierinvermont]

This AMO fascination is really quite absurd and silly. The reasons this year will probably come in warmer than 2008 is the fact that globally SSTs are significantly warmer (even excluding the AMO region which is too small to make a large difference). The Pacific, Southern Atlantic, and Southern Oceans were all significantly colder in 2008.

It's quite laughable the attention that is being payed to a relatively minuscule area of ocean near Greenland.

[BethesdaWX]

UAH is colder than either GISS or HadCRUT.

In addition, there are numerous flaws in the satellite analysis. See Fu et al. Vinnikov et al. and Thorne et al. Newer analyses such as STAR find more warming from the same MSU satellite data.

For the surface, I prefer some sort of compromise between GISS and HadCRUT, probably leaning towards GISS since HadCRUT leaves out the rapid warming we know has occurred in the arctic the last 15 years.

DUDE!

'

There are even larger flaws/margin of errors in GISS/HADCRUT than there is in satellite. I cannot believe you are saying GISS analysis of the arctic should be taken over everything else...satellite...everything.....have you gone crazy?!?!?

I thought you said HADCRUT has no warming? If you are going to use specific stations, or "points of data", be sure to say so.

new low for you mr. Hansen

[skierinvermont]

I just think you take pride in being the "skeptic who went back to science" or something gross like that...it's patently obvious. Remember, February averages higher on the satellites than January, so even if the actual global temperature remained static on AMSU, the anomaly would be cooler, given the seasonal effect. We also are about to intersect 2008; 2008 is the yellow line on AMSU, and the red line which represents 2011 is about to hit it. Does it get any simpler than that? Of course, that doesn't mean the year is averaging colder than 2008; that's not what I claimed. But given that 2008 had such a large upcoming spike, the fact that we're starting another drop and about to intersect it suggests the coming part of the year may average colder than that La Niña.

High SSTs make the globe warmer...you just said that 2011 having higher SSTs than 2008 makes it likely that the globe will be warmer. The AMO is an index concerning how warm SSTs are, so it follows from your comment that the higher AMO should make the globe milder. And then you go on to deny the very thing you just said! All based on your obsession with "statistics" and "correlation." You just can't see the forest for the trees sometimes, Andrew, and it's quite evident.

We had a record high AMO this summer/fall...that's what the satellites are picking up on now...it's lagged, remember?

I guess you didn't read my post. The AMO is a tiny area and is not really any warmer than in 2008. The reason global SSTs are higher really has nothing to do with the AMO. Global SSTs are higher because the Southern Atlantic, the Pacific, and Southern Oceans were all significantly colder in 2008.

As I said in my last post, this absurd fascination with the AMO is quite laughable. Give something a three letter abbreviation that sounds smart, and suddenly it becomes the center of attention.

Regarding CH5, I am aware of the seasonal trends and my comments were based in ANOMALIES not raw data. The anomaly for the first 10 days is higher than in Jan. We've had a bit of dip now, while 2008 has a bit of a spike. But to conclude from these little blips that we are going to pass 2008 is really quite silly.

[BethesdaWX]

This AMO fascination is really quite absurd and silly. The reasons this year will probably come in warmer than 2008 is the fact that globally SSTs are significantly warmer (even excluding the AMO region which is too small to make a large difference). The Pacific, Southern Atlantic, and Southern Oceans were all significantly colder in 2008.

It's quite laughable the attention that is being payed to a relatively minuscule area of ocean near Greenland.

Your ideas on the matter are laughable....

The AMO is a carbon copy of the Pacific PDOs....only it has a different "niche"in the climate system. The PDO contributes its dominance through the Control of ENSO, and the resulting global wavelengths.

The AMO has very significant impacts on the Arctic, Europe, Asia, and North America. Those land masses being warm (landmases) contributes significantly to the global temperature anomaly.

Yes...the PDO will overwhelm the AMO in terms of noticable effects...but a record warm AMO will prevent us from reaching 2008 anomaly.

[BethesdaWX]

FYI, 2 things

1) We came out of a Strong El Nino this yr

2) This La Nina is not as strong as the 2008 ENSO in terms of actual temperature

And yet, we still saw the fastest 4 month drop ever recorded in the satellite era

[skierinvermont]

FYI, 2 things

1) We came out of a Strong El Nino this yr

2) This La Nina is not as strong as the 2008 ENSO in terms of actual temperature

And yet, we still saw the fastest 4 month drop ever recorded in the satellite era

I agree with your first point I think that is the primary reason we will not be as cold this year.

Regarding your second point, I think the CPC says this Nina was slightly stronger but yes they are basically the same.

[nzucker]

I guess you didn't read my post. The AMO is a tiny area and is not really any warmer than in 2008. The reason global SSTs are higher really has nothing to do with the AMO. Global SSTs are higher because the Southern Atlantic, the Pacific, and Southern Oceans were all significantly colder in 2008.

As I said in my last post, this absurd fascination with the AMO is quite laughable. Give something a three letter abbreviation that sounds smart, and suddenly it becomes the center of attention.

Regarding CH5, I am aware of the seasonal trends and my comments were based in ANOMALIES not raw data. The anomaly for the first 10 days is higher than in Jan. We've had a bit of dip now, while 2008 has a bit of a spike. But to conclude from these little blips that we are going to pass 2008 is really quite silly.

It's just one part of the picture...other notable areas of warmer SSTs are the ENSO regions and South Atlantic. 2008 was quite impressive in terms of cold SSTs, but of course it didn't follow a strong El Niño, whose effect takes time to reverse. I still think with the upcoming "classic" La Niña/-PDO pattern we'll see widespread cooling in the GoA and East Pacific, and the recent strong lows in the N. Atlantic should hammer at the warmth up there. So it'll be interesting to see if we start tanking below '08 in the next few weeks.

[BethesdaWX]

I agree with your first point I think that is the primary reason we will not be as cold this year.

Regarding your second point, I think the CPC says this Nina was slightly stronger but yes they are basically the same.

yea.....make me feel like an ass with your civilized response

[nzucker]

I agree with your first point I think that is the primary reason we will not be as cold this year.

Regarding your second point, I think the CPC says this Nina was slightly stronger but yes they are basically the same.

I think this Niña was stronger but that 2008 may held on longer into the spring.

Interestingly, 2008 Niña faded pretty fast and we had a borderline weak Niña the next winter but many models are showing this La Niña to remain in moderate status for Winter 11-12 after a brief hiatus over the summer.

[BethesdaWX]

I think this Niña was stronger but that 2008 may held on longer into the spring.

Interestingly, 2008 Niña faded pretty fast and we had a borderline weak Niña the next winter but many models are showing this La Niña to remain in moderate status for Winter 11-12 after a brief hiatus over the summer.

Are you going by MEI or ONI?

[nzucker]

Are you going by MEI or ONI?

ONI...

[BethesdaWX]

ONI...

Are you sure the ONI is lower this yr then?

I asked because some people say using the MEI is a better indicator of the atmospheric mode.

[superjames1992]

There's three things you an always count on in life:

1. Death.

2. Taxes.

3. Skier and Bethesda going at it in every single thread in the climate forum.

It will be interesting to see where February comes in. It seems like it should come in colder than January.

[BethesdaWX]

There's three things you an always count on in life:

1. Death.

2. Taxes.

3. Skier and Bethesda going at it in every single thread in the climate forum.

It will be interesting to see where February comes in. It seems like it should come in colder than January.

hehe, yeah pretty much.

Febuary is coming in colder if this keeps up. On AMSU, the current anom is about to drop lower than 2008....unless it somehow reverses and changes course.

The drop has been alot faster with more "oomph" this yr.

[skierinvermont]

It is of note that CH5 briefly was lower than 2008 for a couple days around Jan 4, and yet January as a month ended up .29C warmer than 2008.

This is why I really don't care about each and every little tick.

And it's why I am sticking with my prediction of -.05 to -.1C for February, well warmer than 2008's -.25C.

[BethesdaWX]

It is of note that CH5 briefly was lower than 2008 for a couple days around Jan 4, and yet January as a month ended up .29C warmer than 2008.

This is why I really don't care about each and every little tick.

yes, but this is a bit different. This one has a chance to make it quite far lower than 2008 for a 2-3 week period. Not to mention, 2008 la nina weakened earlier/faster, than this one has/will.

GFS on Ryan Maue's site has the temperature at day 7 at -.35C....ECMWF weeklies drop it to near -.4C at week 3, (was told that thru email, not sure of the validity)

[nzucker]

yes, but this is a bit different. This one has a chance to make it quite far lower than 2008 for a 2-3 week period. Not to mention, 2008 la nina weakened earlier/faster, than this one has/will.

Yeah 2008 had a big spike coming up so we could shave off a bunch of the difference between 2011 and 2008 if we keep cooling.

You seem rather pleasant...dinner date went well? Got lucky?

[BethesdaWX]

Yeah 2008 had a big spike coming up so we could shave off a bunch of the difference between 2011 and 2008 if we keep cooling.

You seem rather pleasant...dinner date went well? Got lucky?

ha, yeah I got some...had been several weeks Apparently I contribute alot of "global warming".

As for 2008, now that I look more carefully, we could remain below 2008 for over a month...the spike hit then and it stayed up.

[nzucker]

ha, yeah I got some...had been several weeks

As for 2008, now that I look more carefully, we could remain below 2008 for over a month...the spike hit then and it stayed up.

2008 had another dip against climo in mid March, but it stayed high for most of February and early March. We could put quite a bit of distance between 2011 and 2008 if the cooling trend continues, but it might be hard to maintain given that SSTs are generally running a bit milder this year.