2011 Global Temperatures

[BethesdaWX]

The above is the comment which lead to this latest off topic debacle. This was an attempt to tie the current La Nina cooling to the larger issue surrounding AGW. Every thread in this climate change forum is discussed amidst the backdrop of the overriding issue of climate change or global warming. When someone implies AGW to be called into question based on a relatively short term trend of cooling, particularly when confusing a short term measure of internal variability for a long term measure of climate change, then they should be corrected for the sake of passers by who may just be lurking. I shouldn't have to stand by idly when I feel incorrect information is being put forth which may suggest to some that a La Nina somehow invalidates AGW or when the science is being mocked.

This is supposed to be fun and entertaining. NO ONE should come here to learn about climate change. Some people are taking things to seriously. Debate and exercise your brain, and if you are careful you could actually learn a few things or be pointed to reliable sources for information.

Agreed, although I think LEK was being somewhat sarcastic/lighthearted.

I think we all know the La Nina dropping temps has nothing to do with the validity of the AGW hypothesis, La Nina would drop global temps no matter the temperature of the globe...presumably.

[skierinvermont]

I got it to work, thanks Clifford. Here's a version of Clifford's chart I have made so I should be able to provide CH5 updates in addition to his relatively easily.

I included a centered 30-day average, which appears to indicate we have essentially bottomed out.

I also included a trend line since Jan 20 which is still slightly positive (contrary to Bethesda's claim it had gone negative). It will likely go slightly negative in the next few days though.

Regardless, I think my point still stands that we have generally "bottomed out." That is of course unless the recent -.3C anomalies persist for a significant period.

[BethesdaWX]

Don't fool yourself, its a friggin cooling trend...ok? 1 step up, 2 steps down has been the pattern.

If anoms bounce back in the next week, then there would be more merit to your argument...but the future is irrelavant at this point. If they don't, then the trend will be well negative once again, as it is beginning to do so now.

But for now, since we cannot predict the future, we need to look at the trend and current anom...its negative.

[nzucker]

Don't fool yourself, its a friggin cooling trend...ok? 1 step up, 2 steps down has been the pattern.

If anoms bounce back in the next week, then there would be more merit to your argument...but the future is irrelavant at this point. If they don't, then the trend will be well negative once again, as it is beginning to do so now.

But for now, since we cannot predict the future, we need to look at the trend and current anom...its negative.

Yeah it clearly looks as if it's continuing to drop based on skier's chart. I don't agree with his assessment that we've bottomed out because when the last few weeks are integrated into the 30-day trend line, you're likely to see a significant decline. The drop we've witnessed in global temperatures on AMSU has occurred at a time when averages are generally rising sharply, so staying this cold globally means we'll fall even further below the norm for the past decade or so. I can't imagine it won't start to rise however, given the warmer SSTs than 2008. Sure, we have some extremely cold airmasses over continental landmasses like Northern Canada/Greenland and Antarctica, but the warmer SSTs are bound to drive us towards a warmer climate eventually.

[LakeEffectKing]

Agreed, although I think LEK was being somewhat sarcastic/lighthearted.

I think we all know the La Nina dropping temps has nothing to do with the validity of the AGW hypothesis, La Nina would drop global temps no matter the temperature of the globe...presumably.

It was tongue in cheek....a bit....kinda going to Rusty's point of it being a little lighthearted....but certainly at times (when these threads get contentious) such trivial jabbing seems to go over like a fart in church.... I think what we all need sometimes is a "common ground" thread....where us climate battlers can go and chill for awhile.....completely away from climate/political discussions.

[VAwxman]

I included a centered 30-day average, which appears to indicate we have essentially bottomed out.

Really? There is zero way just based on that graph that you could make a claim either way yet. You might wind up right, but it would be based on a wild guess, and not this graph.

[skierinvermont]

I don't agree with his assessment that we've bottomed out because when the last few weeks are integrated into the 30-day trend line, you're likely to see a significant decline.

The last several weeks are part of the centered 30-day average.

[skierinvermont]

Really? There is zero way just based on that graph that you could make a claim either way yet. You might wind up right, but it would be based on a wild guess, and not this graph.

I'm not saying I know it as a fact. But the fact is the temps have been flat for over 7 weeks now and this is also when we would expect to be bottoming based on a 5 month SST lag and is when most previous Ninas bottomed out.

[BethesdaWX]

I'm not saying I know it as a fact. But the fact is the temps have been flat for over 7 weeks now and this is also when we would expect to be bottoming based on a 5 month SST lag.

Look at Mid-Late DEC, I could have said we bottomed out then...but we didn't. This set of anoms looks almost identical, except with a bigger drop at the end.

Although I agree that we are due for a Major turnaround based on SST anoms....If temps do not bounce back significantly in the 7-10 days, we will have a new "bottom".

Some adivce...you will get a hard ribbing from everyone on the board if you are wrong, its the risk that comes with thinking you can predict the future.

[skierinvermont]

Look at Mid-Late DEC, I could have said we bottomed out then...but we didn't. This set of anoms looks almost identical, except with a bigger drop at the end.

Although I agree that we are due for a Major turnaround....If temps do not bounce back significantly in the 7-10 days, we will have a new "bottom".

Some adivce...you will get a hard ribbing from everyone on the board if you are wrong, its the risk that comes with thinking you can predict the future.

The previous longest plateau was only 5 weeks.. this plateau is longer and it is when we would expect temps to be bottoming based on 5 month SST lag.

I've already said there is a distinct possibility that I could be wrong, especially given the magnitude of this recent drop. If people want to "rib" me for making a probablistic guess, then perhaps they should grow up. I for one will have no problem admitting I am wrong if the centered 30-day average goes .05C+ below the previous low.

[Clifford]

Here are some La Niña TMT (Ch 5) temperature comparisons.

Graph starts in an El Niño year to show transition periods.

It is odd that most years seem to show a minimum in late January, early February. Then a spike in temperatures followed by another minimum in March.

I'm voting for a 1983/1998 comparison of a strong, solitary El Niño followed by the La Niña.

After late March, none of the La Niña comparison years show a significant downward trend for the rest of the year, although 1983 did hit an additional minimum in September.

A couple of the years also hit low temperatures the following winter.

[BethesdaWX]

The previous longest plateau was only 5 weeks.. this plateau is longer and it is when we would expect temps to be bottoming based on 5 month SST lag.

I've already said there is a distinct possibility that I could be wrong, especially given the magnitude of this recent drop. If people want to "rib" me for making a probablistic guess, then perhaps they should grow up. I for one will have no problem admitting I am wrong if the centered 30-day average goes .05C+ below the previous low.

Guess what? The 3 week average is cooling, so is the 4 week average, so is the 5 week average, so is the 8,9,10,11...etc. this isn't a plateau, its a cooling trend.....except when you pick the Coldest January anom you can find.

You ribbed nzucker constantly for his predictions...even bringing up stuff from December. I guess you need to grow up too?

[skierinvermont]

You ribbed nzucker constantly for his predictions...even bringing up stuff from December.

I didn't rib them. I pointed out they were wrong and got ribbed in response. I ribbed him for his inability to admit when he is wrong, not for actually being wrong which I don't think is a big deal (he has since admitted privately that some of the things he claimed to be right about he was wrong about). Unlike zucker, I will have no problem pointing out I was wrong if the centered average goes more than .05C below the previous low. If it's .05-.09C below the previous low I would say I was wrong, but not terribly so. If it's .1C+ below the previous low, I'd say I was quite wrong as we would have experienced a substantial and sustained drop in temps. Pretty straightforward.

[BethesdaWX]

Dude I'm tired of arguing with you. You are the only one denying nzucker nailed his predictions, and that you can say we've bottomed out before it has happened.

I'm done.

[skierinvermont]

Here are some La Niña TMT (Ch 5) temperature comparisons.

Graph starts in an El Niño year to show transition periods.

It is odd that most years seem to show a minimum in late January, early February. Then a spike in temperatures followed by another minimum in March.

I'm voting for a 1983/1998 comparison of a strong, solitary El Niño followed by the La Niña.

After late March, none of the La Niña comparison years show a significant downward trend for the rest of the year, although 1983 did hit an additional minimum in September.

A couple of the years also hit low temperatures the following winter.

Excellent chart. However, in terms of ONI we were closest to the 87 Nino, not 98 or 83 which were super-Ninos of a different breed altogether.

It does seem like the two stronger Ninos (98, 83) took longer to cool off in temperature. This is probably related to the fact that the ONI remained above .5 until MJJ in '83, and AMJ in '98. By comparison, in 2010 the last period of >.5 ONI was MAM. So this Nino subsided 1-2 months earlier than '98 or '83. It is however, a later end than '88 or '07 which ended 2 months earlier than the 2010 Nino.

So in terms of when the Nino faded and in terms of strength, this Nino was about halfway between the two super-Ninos ('98 '83) and the moderate/strong Ninos ('88 '07). So from that perspective somewhere between the two scenarios seems likely.

In terms of when the Nina peaked though, this year was quite early, having already reached its maximum trimonthly value by SON. This is 1-3 months early than any of the other 4 Ninas on your chart.

'83-84 is also a bad comparison because it initially only went into a weak Nina, which then strengthened to a moderate Nina the next year. I'd probably throw out '83-84 entirely because it was a Nino-weak Nina-moderate Nina progression, which is quite different from ours.

07 and 88 had essentially bottomed by January. 98 was also mostly bottomed out although it did have one more significant decline at the end of the year. Based on this, the in-between Nino end date, and the fact that our current Nina peaked 1-3 months before any of the other 4, I would have expected UAH temps to bottom by January.

[nzucker]

I didn't rib them. I pointed out they were wrong and got ribbed in response. I ribbed him for his inability to admit when he is wrong, not for actually being wrong which I don't think is a big deal (he has since admitted privately that some of the things he claimed to be right about he was wrong about). Unlike zucker, I will have no problem pointing out I was wrong if the centered average goes more than .05C below the previous low. If it's .05-.09C below the previous low I would say I was wrong, but not terribly so. If it's .1C+ below the previous low, I'd say I was quite wrong as we would have experienced a substantial and sustained drop in temps. Pretty straightforward.

Most of the predictions were correct, and you just didn't want to admit it because it conflicted with your inherent bias. I would certainly consider digging up every old prediction/comment to criticize as "ribbing" but you seem to see things differently. There was absolutely no need for you to re-quote everything I'd said in the last 2 months and grade it according to your standards. Everyone is sick of this argumentative, arrogant side you show on these forums, enough is enough. Stop! You shouldn't be mentioning my name in threads in which I'm not participating...I've seen snide remarks about me in the Wahl thread, and it's very inappropriate. If I'm not involved in the argument, I don't want to see you making reference to me.

The AMSU data clearly shows further cooling in March. I don't think the current drop can be disputed especially when you consider it's occurring at a time many years started to warm.

[skierinvermont]

There was absolutely no need for you to re-quote everything I'd said in the last 2 months and grade it according to your standards.

I think given I disagreed with the initial predictions you made, it was quite fair to go back and simply point out that they were incorrect. which they were and you have admitted in private. (Such as predicting the second half of Feb would be colder than the first half on the satellites).

Apparently I can expect everybody to rib me if any predictions I've made are wrong but I cannot even post the results to any disputes I've had without being accused of being an egotistical maniac.

[nzucker]

I think given I disagreed with the initial predictions you made, it was quite fair to go back and simply point out that they were incorrect. which they were and you have admitted in private. (Such as predicting the second half of Feb would be colder than the first half on the satellites).

Apparently I can expect everybody to rib me if any predictions I've made are wrong but I cannot even post the results to any disputes I've had.

A lot of them were correct: February was cooler than January, we got the big drop from Channel 5, etc. But these weren't the things you wanted to harp on...interesting!

It's amazing how dependent you are on stroking your ego; you need to go back for verification to prove your forecasting skills were better than mine, even though it served no educational purpose in the thread, but it was a way for you to feed your ego. Plenty disgusting, in my opinion. No one cares about the results of disputes you had weeks or months ago, it's just not something that needs to be rehashed constantly. Honestly, you'd be better off forgetting about these arguments and actually doing something instead of wasting hours posting in these threads.

[skierinvermont]

A lot of them were correct: February was cooler than January, we got the big drop from Channel 5, etc. But these weren't the things you wanted to harp on...interesting!

It's amazing how dependent you are on stroking your ego; you need to go back for verification to prove your forecasting skills were better than mine, even though it served no educational purpose in the thread, but it was a way for you to feed your ego. Plenty disgusting, in my opinion. No one cares about the results of disputes you had weeks or months ago, it's just not something that needs to be rehashed constantly. Honestly, you'd be better off forgetting about these arguments and actually doing something instead of wasting hours posting in these threads.

I posted corrections out of genuine interest for the outcomes. In return I have been the recipient of endless character assassination, posting of my private life on the internet and harassment.

[BethesdaWX]

To get back on topic, we've gone another day of cooling away from the average on AMSU. The temperature has remained flat, but the average is rising during this time, so we continue to cool as of latest update.

Does anyone Know if UAH monthly has the same "spike" in the Averages that AMSU has? AMSU data-table was implemented in 2002, so I don't know if we'd be as Cold on the final UAH anomaly in the end. The 2002-2010 avg is warmer, so we'd be warmer on the final UAH if it is indeed the 2002-2010 avg and not the 1979-2010 avg, not to mention the spike in the 2002-2010 avg. Or is it the 1979-2010 avg implemented in? Or is it the base used by UAH alone?

I think this is a big reason why April 2008 turned out so warm (compared to what was shown on AMSU beforehand), maybe the spike on the 2002-2010 data at AMSU doesn't exist as strongly on the UAH Longer Term anomaly?

[skierinvermont]

I think this is a big reason why April 2008 turned out so warm (compared to what was shown on AMSU beforehand), maybe the spike on the 2002-2010 data at AMSU doesn't exist as strongly on the UAH Longer Term anomaly?

I thinks this is likely, this is what I was saying the other day. Although I don't think this effect could be particularly large, as 8 years is a decent sample size, and the spikes are only parts of the month.. late March even has a weird sort of dip when theoretically the 'true average' would be rising.

[BethesdaWX]

As is no surprise, AMSU temperature anomaly rose in todays update. The first 1/2 of March has averaged around -0.35C below avg on AMSU, so for it to average out just to normal, the 2nd 1/2 would need to avg +0.35C, or in other words, an 0.6C Jump Now, and stay up.

I think its a good bet that MAR 2011 will end up colder than JAN/FEB before APR turns out warmer. Big question now is, how quickly does ENSO go Neutral, and what does the global SST do. Knowing the fact that we recently came out of a strong El Nino (the reason the La Nina didn't drop global SST's as heavily), I would not expect a huge jump in the SST's this summer with less forcing to do so (remaining warmth from the old Nino still present and dying). With what could be an Active hurricane Season in both the Western Pacific, and Atlantic, it could be a battle. Not sure about Eastern pacific yet.

[nzucker]

As is no surprise, AMSU temperature anomaly rose in todays update. The first 1/2 of March has averaged around -0.35C below avg on AMSU, so for it to average out just to normal, the 2nd 1/2 would need to avg +0.35C, or in other words, an 0.6C Jump Now, and stay up.

I think its a good bet that MAR 2011 will end up colder than JAN/FEB before APR turns out warmer. Big question now is, how quickly does ENSO go Neutral, and what does the global SST do. Knowing the fact that we recently came out of a strong El Nino (the reason the La Nina didn't drop global SST's as heavily), I would not expect a huge jump in the SST's this summer with less forcing to do so (remaining warmth from the old Nino still present and dying). With what could be an Active hurricane Season in both the Western Pacific, and Atlantic, it could be a battle. Not sure about Eastern pacific yet.

I wouldn't necessarily assume ENSO will go neutral, many multi-year cold ENSO like 1954-1957 events have stayed in weak Niña conditions throughout the summer, and this one probably won't be an exception. Despite some warmth in the subsurface, trades are strengthening and the MJO should be moving into a state more typical of La Niña. March 11th had an SOI of +34.94, indicative of the strong trades that are keeping that warmth away from the ENSO regions. These trades should keep pounding away for the next week or so.

Agree with your thoughts about an active hurricane season in the Atlantic. SSTs are way above normal near Cape Verde and the African coast...we might have a better chance of getting an East Coast landfall this season with the upper ridge being a bit less dominant, and more variable in positioning, than during Summer 2010. I'm still expecting to see a lot of La Niña like qualities to the summer.

[BethesdaWX]

I wouldn't necessarily assume ENSO will go neutral, many multi-year cold ENSO like 1954-1957 events have stayed in weak Niña conditions throughout the summer, and this one probably won't be an exception. Despite some warmth in the subsurface, trades are strengthening and the MJO should be moving into a state more typical of La Niña. March 11th had an SOI of +34.94, indicative of the strong trades that are keeping that warmth away from the ENSO regions. These trades should keep pounding away for the next week or so.

Agree with your thoughts about an active hurricane season in the Atlantic. SSTs are way above normal near Cape Verde and the African coast...we might have a better chance of getting an East Coast landfall this season with the upper ridge being a bit less dominant, and more variable in positioning, than during Summer 2010. I'm still expecting to see a lot of La Niña like qualities to the summer.

I'm definitely not sold on anything more than a Weak La Nina in 2011.

But Yeah the one thing I've noticed since the -PDO developed in 2007 Climate Models have always underestimated La Nina, (CFS is a major Exception this yr though), so they could be running warm, which would suggest at another La Nina, or redevelopment of the current one after a relaxing this summer? NOAA has been performing terribly lately, both on winter forecasts, ENSO predictions models, etc. They seem to be using analogues occuring during +PDO timeframes. Although the -PDO has not Matured yet (only 4 years into its 30 year cycle), it has had huge impacts on the US winters, so that could be playing a role in the ENSO models used to kake forecasts. Check this out.

This seals the deal on what the PDO/AMO really do to US temperatures. The anomaly also has a strong Correlation to the Upcoming hurricane season.

Cold PDO 1946-1976

+PDO 1977-2007....Perfect Flip!

The AMO Phases show as well.

-AMO 1963 - 1993

+AMO 1994-present

One thing to note:

The current unfinished +AMO phase had been coupled witha +PDO until a few years ago, so the anoms have are warmer.

The -AMO from 1963-1993 was 1/2 filled with +PDO, the other is the -PDO, so its more neutral based in terms of temps.

[Clifford]

One thing to note:

The current unfinished +AMO phase had been coupled witha +PDO until a few years ago, so the anoms have are warmer.

The -AMO from 1963-1993 was 1/2 filled with +PDO, the other is the -PDO, so its more neutral based in terms of temps.

Hmmm

Warm +PDO from 1977 to 2007

Warm +AMO from 1994 to 2010

It kind of makes one wonder... if some of the recent US and Northern Hemisphere warming was related to the +PDO and +AMO, rather than other causes.

Or, perhaps a combination of +PDO, +AMO, & AGW... if we only knew the right proportions to attribute to each.

[BethesdaWX]

Hmmm

Warm +PDO from 1977 to 2007

Warm +AMO from 1994 to 2010

It kind of makes one wonder... if some of the recent US and Northern Hemisphere warming was related to the +PDO and +AMO, rather than other causes.

Or, perhaps a combination of +PDO, +AMO, & AGW... if we only knew the right proportions to attribute to each.

I don't think it's as important to try and solve the correlation..but rather that it is just "there".

The PDO/AMO do not impact long term trends in global temperatures, they are just mechanisms of balance in the earths climate. The data, however, debunks any idea that the AMO is a "minor" driver...it dominates the Arctic, and has major impacts in N america, and Eurasia. The PDO has a large impact as well, but it is magnified by its dominance over ENSO. If you build up enough La Nina as a base, the temps fall, as global SST's drop in response to the -PDO regimine.

However...Geomagnetic activity on the Sun correlates almost 100% to the warming seen in the past 150yrs...its actually pretty amazing, MUCH better than CO2 by a long shot! Oscillations such as the PDO/AMO broke the trend a bit in the late 1950's/1960's, and again a Bit from the mid 1990's thru the mid 2000's, but its there nonetheless.

US temps are also somewhat of a seperate story, because they do not represent the globe.

But yeah, agreed here basically...whatever the cause of the warming, whether CO2 or Sun, or Both, is only part of the story, the PDO/AMO have direct correlations to US temperature.

Look at the winters in the US since the PDO went cold in 2007! Its actually the Coldest stretch of winters since the mid/late 1970's.

[LakeEffectKing]

GISS for Feb. drops .02 from Jan:

2011 46 44************************************************** ********* 44*************** 2011

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec J-D D-N DJF MAM JJA SON Year

[BethesdaWX]

GISS for Feb. drops .02 from Jan:

2011 46 44************************************************** ********* 44*************** 2011

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec J-D D-N DJF MAM JJA SON Year

And this is why GISS needs to be trashed...thats pretty much impossible to only drop .02C given not only surface data from Ryan Maue's site & the ECMWF pay site, but every other freakin measurement system out there, including UAH, RSS, and even NSIDC I think.

When you inaccurately extrapolate anomalies on 1/3 of the globe, sh*t happens.

And yet they will not release pre-gridded data.

[Clifford]

It looks like the RSS Numbers have come in:

ftp://ftp.ssmi.com/m...ly_time_series/

TLT Land and Ocean:

Global Dec 0.220, Jan 0.084 Feb 0.051

N Polar Dec 1.401, Jan 1.801, Feb -0.110

S Polar Dec 0.165, Jan -0.098, Feb -0.580

USA Dec -0.853, Jan -0.792, Feb -0.563

TLT Land

Global Dec 0.340, Jan 0.076, Feb -0.174

S Polar Dec 0.277 Jan 0.908, Feb -1.426

TLT Ocean

Global Dec 0.162, Jan 0.088, Feb 0.160

Don't jump on the 0.02 difference.

By RSS, it was only 0.03 difference for the Global Land & Ocean.

Global Ocean actually increased.

UAH Global TLT dropped from -0.010 in January to -0.018 in February...

I.E. a 0.008 degree drop (not even 0.01).

[BethesdaWX]

Don't jump on the 0.02 difference.

By RSS, it was only 0.03 difference for the Global Land & Ocean.

Global Ocean actually increased.

UAH Global TLT dropped from -0.010 in January to -0.018 in February...

I.E. a 0.008 degree drop (not even 0.01).

The Issue is Surface Vs LT. The whole issue/debate I was having with Andrew, was the Surface. There is no plausible way the surface would drop 0.02C when all data indicates otherwise

Also crazy it took GISS 2 weeks to get the FEB data out.