2011 Global Temperatures

[BethesdaWX]

The SSWs are in the stratosphere... and wouldn't alter TLT directly. What effect they have globally as they propagate downwards I really don't know. Which is why I ask do you have a correlation.

Yes, they do not directly correlate to the LT, however, SSWings actually signal future changes in the overall tropopause, even though they occur in the Stratosphere. What are you specifically asking for correlations for? SSWings? NAO/HLB? Yes there is no direct correlation, because the effects will vary depending on the specific situation.

I am still a rookie at predicting these type of things, but I think I hit this one pretty good.

http://discover.itsc...h?amsutemps+002

[BethesdaWX]

It just struck me how cold Global SST's were during the 2000/2001 La Nina. And how this year's global temps were/are the exact same anomaly during this time...

A Third Year La Nina.....Frigid -PDO/-AMO/-IOD.......But High Solar Activity. Anomalies from That time period and this one are the same.

Amazing how these two time periods can feature such similar temps...5 month lag anom from JAN20 2001 (June 2001) are warmer than one would expect.....I'll be looking at June 2011 very closely.

For the 5 month Lag

[BethesdaWX]

CFS 6 month forecsthas global temps staying below normal through its entire Forecast? Never seen it do this consistantly with when forecasting a Weak El Nino.

Not saying I have any faith in this, more for the laughs right now. But it has been doing this for over a month now, and I couldn't help but post it.

Yes, I have a cold Bias...if the CFS was showing record warmth, I would call it BS and not post it. Just to clear that up

MAY 2011

AUG 2011

NOV 2011

[skierinvermont]

Yes, they do not directly correlate to the LT, however, SSWings actually signal future changes in the overall tropopause, even though they occur in the Stratosphere. What are you specifically asking for correlations for? SSWings? NAO/HLB? Yes there is no direct correlation, because the effects will vary depending on the specific situation.

I am still a rookie at predicting these type of things, but I think I hit this one pretty good.

http://discover.itsc...h?amsutemps+002

So you are hypothesizing that the temp drops when the NAO goes negative?

It seems to have worked this time, but other times the NAO go negative temps are stable or rising. So I'm not really sure there is any correlation or causation. Maybe there is. In fact there probably is (no idea whether the correlation is positive or negative). But I want to see the stats. Or at least a qualitative comparison.

[BethesdaWX]

So you are hypothesizing that the temp drops when the NAO goes negative?

It seems to have worked this time, but other times the NAO go negative temps are stable or rising. So I'm not really sure there is any correlation or causation. Maybe there is. In fact there probably is (no idea whether the correlation is positive or negative). But I want to see the stats. Or at least a qualitative comparison.

In this instance yes, but not in general, or even usually. The temp will likely resume warming before the NAO goes positive again.

If I knew how to show you the stats, I would. I'm such a rookie in my Stratospheric observations, I wouldn't know what values to plug in and correlate. I just look for changes in the Stratosphere that are being caught onto by enembles in HLB, which if persistant, signals a change in the tropopause.

Again, I'm a newbie at this, so I might be waay off and just got lucky.

[skierinvermont]

It just struck me how cold Global SST's were during the 2000/2001 La Nina. And how this year's global temps were/are the exact same anomaly during this time...

A Third Year La Nina.....Frigid -PDO/-AMO/-IOD.......But High Solar Activity. Anomalies from That time period and this one are the same.

Amazing how these two time periods can feature such similar temps...5 month lag anom from JAN20 2001 (June 2001) are warmer than one would expect.....I'll be looking at June 2011 very closely.

Yes it was discussed earlier in the thread how warm the 1999-2001 period was on UAH relative to the year 2008 (and most likely this year as well). By warm I mean, not any cooler. The reason for it is pretty clearly the solar cycle in my opinion. Also, keep in mind 1999 and 2000 are fairly comparable in terms of ENSO to 2008 and 2011. However, 2001 was following only a weak Nina. Although, as you point out, global SSTs got quite cold in January 2001, that was quite short-lived. Late 2000 they were much warmer, and they had warmed back up again by spring 2001. It's really only right around October-January they got so cold.

UAH annual:

1999: -.048

2000: -.056

2001: +.113 (However, 2001 was following only a weak Nina and global SSTs were higher for most of the 5-month lagged period, except January as you point out when they got frigid)

2008: -.040

The surface indices show 2008 and the start of 2011 as being warmer.

[skierinvermont]

In this instance yes, but not in general, or even usually. The temp will likely resume warming before the NAO goes positive again.

If I knew how to show you the stats, I would. I'm such a rookie in my Stratospheric observations, I wouldn't know what values to plug in and correlate. I just look for changes in the Stratosphere that are being caught onto by enembles in HLB, which if persistant, signals a change in the tropopause.

Again, I'm a newbie at this, so I might be waay off and just got lucky.

I do actually notice some qualitative relationship between the NAO/AO and the LT temps. The NAO spikes around Jan 10 and Feb 1 both corresponded to a rise in LT CH5 temps. But it could just be luck... the drop in LT temps in late Feb doesn't correspond to a drop in the NAO.

[BethesdaWX]

Yes it was discussed earlier in the thread how warm the 1999-2001 period was on UAH relative to the year 2008 (and most likely this year as well). By warm I mean, not any cooler. The reason for it is pretty clearly the solar cycle in my opinion. Also, keep in mind 1999 and 2000 are fairly comparable in terms of ENSO to 2008 and 2011. However, 2001 was following only a weak Nina. Although, as you point out, global SSTs got quite cold in January 2001, that was quite short-lived. Late 2000 they were much warmer, and they had warmed back up again by spring 2001. It's really only right around January they got so cold.

UAH annual:

1999: -.048

2000: -.056

2001: +.113 (However, 2001 was following only a weak Nina and global SSTs were higher for most of the 5-month lagged period, except January as you point out when they got frigid)

2008: -.040

The surface indices show 2008 and the start of 2011 as being warmer.

Agree on the Short Lifespan of cold SST's, although I'd think 2001 following a Nina instead of a Nino would help with cooling somewhat, since our JAN & 2008 JAN followed El Ninos.

Yeah, the "big" drop in SST's was very Short Lived (only 8 weeks)...but when they rebounded, they were similar to our current SST's for a bit, since we still have some El Nino Juice Left Over.

Maybe I'm missing something though

[nzucker]

CFS 6 month forecsthas global temps staying below normal through its entire Forecast? Never seen it do this consistantly with when forecasting a Weak El Nino.

MAY 2011

NOV 2011

That's just a totally beautiful look for the East Coast if the November 2011 pattern were to become the one that prevailed in Winter 11-12: weak El Niño, massive Alaska block (-EPO), east-based NAO/Iceland block, and cold global temperatures. Although it doesn't mean much given it's the CFS in the long-range, that's exactly what I am hoping for. We can get our most bitter arctic outbreaks when we have a weak Niño creating a huge -EPO block that teams up with a perfectly placed NAO block that isn't too west-based to chew up Canada's cold pipeline...this was the scenario in January 1977 when we saw one of the coldest month's in our region's history. This could also be a snowy pattern given the tendencies for the STJ to ramp up in Niño. Here was the Jan 1977 500mb and temps:

Certainly seeing some very interesting tendencies for next winter given the sub-surface ENSO warmth and persistently cold global temperatures, as well as the resurgence of the -NAO late this March and the dropping QBO. Could a third historic season be in the making? By the way, AMSU Channel 5 has dropped again significantly, although still only a few days into the decline, and we are once again below 2008.

Agree on the Short Lifespan of cold SST's, although I'd think 2001 following a Nina instead of a Nino would help with cooling somewhat, since our JAN & 2008 JAN followed El Ninos.

Maybe I'm missing something though

What base climatology was being used for SSTs in the January 2001 map? It might be a very warm base period if it includes the 1998 Super El Niño as well as the +ENSO dominated 80s and early 90s. Since 1998 we've had more Niñas that may have made the SST climo a bit more neutral. Not sure if this has any merit but just checking.

[skierinvermont]

What base climatology was being used for SSTs in the January 2001 map? It might be a very warm base period if it includes the 1998 Super El Niño as well as the +ENSO dominated 80s and early 90s. Since 1998 we've had more Niñas that may have made the SST climo a bit more neutral. Not sure if this has any merit but just checking.

Pretty sure all those NOAA SST maps (both current and the 2001 one he posted) use a 1985-1993 base climatology omitting 1991 and 1992 due to Pinatubo aerosol contamination.

http://coralreefwatch.noaa.gov/satellite/methodology/methodology.html#clim

[Clifford]

Pretty sure all those NOAA SST maps (both current and the 2001 one he posted) use a 1985-1993 base climatology omitting 1991 and 1992 due to Pinatubo aerosol contamination.

http://coralreefwatc...ology.html#clim

I've wondered if there has been an attempt to balance the data rather than using pure anomaly data.

In the past, there have been jumps in the data.

Between 9/9/2000 and 9/12/2000, there was a jump to indicate colder temperatures.

http://www.osdpd.noaa.gov/data/sst/anomaly/2000/anomnight.9.9.2000.gif

http://www.osdpd.noaa.gov/data/sst/anomaly/2000/anomnight.9.9.2000.gif

Likewise, between 2/20/2001 and 2/23/2001 there was a jump to indicate warmer temperatures.

http://www.osdpd.noaa.gov/data/sst/anomaly/2001/anomnight.2.20.2001.gif

http://www.osdpd.noaa.gov/data/sst/anomaly/2001/anomnight.2.23.2001.gif

Although, perhaps the two jumps in opposite directions were correcting an error.

[BethesdaWX]

Pretty sure all those NOAA SST maps (both current and the 2001 one he posted) use a 1985-1993 base climatology omitting 1991 and 1992 due to Pinatubo aerosol contamination.

http://coralreefwatc...ology.html#clim

Well thi data only goes back to 1996, but the base hasn't changed thankfully, I also believe it is 1985-1993, although I cannot remember where I read that, it was like 2 years ago.

I'd pay 5K of my own money for all measurement systems to start using the same base, Its a nightmare to see UAH change their base again, GISS with its 1950-1980, and Hadley with the 1961-1990.

I'd perfer all systems to use 1961-1990, since we get both phases ob both the PDO and AMO.

[BethesdaWX]

I've wondered if there has been an attempt to balance the data rather than using pure anomaly data.

In the past, there have been jumps in the data.

Between 9/9/2000 and 9/12/2000, there was a jump to indicate colder temperatures.

http://www.osdpd.noa...ht.9.9.2000.gif

http://www.osdpd.noa...ht.9.9.2000.gif

Likewise, between 2/20/2001 and 2/23/2001 there was a jump to indicate warmer temperatures.

http://www.osdpd.noa...t.2.20.2001.gif

http://www.osdpd.noa...t.2.23.2001.gif

Although, perhaps the two jumps in opposite directions were correcting an error.

2/23 looks suspicious, definitelty an error. I saw something like that in 2009, appears to be measurement error on one of its trips around the globe.

Look at the ENSO/Pacific....definitely had a hiccup.

[skierinvermont]

I've wondered if there has been an attempt to balance the data rather than using pure anomaly data.

In the past, there have been jumps in the data.

Between 9/9/2000 and 9/12/2000, there was a jump to indicate colder temperatures.

http://www.osdpd.noa...ht.9.9.2000.gif

http://www.osdpd.noa...ht.9.9.2000.gif

Likewise, between 2/20/2001 and 2/23/2001 there was a jump to indicate warmer temperatures.

http://www.osdpd.noa...t.2.20.2001.gif

http://www.osdpd.noa...t.2.23.2001.gif

Although, perhaps the two jumps in opposite directions were correcting an error.

Wow.. that's interesting. There's definitely some sort of error occurring there which was then corrected in February.

That's why Bethesda and I saw Oct-Jan as so cold.. almost certainly some kind of satellite error. I'll look into it more.

[skierinvermont]

2/23 looks suspicious, definitelty an error. I saw something like that in 2009, appears to be measurement error on one of its trips around the globe.

Look at the ENSO/Pacific....definitely had a hiccup.

I think it's most likely the error is when it suddenly went cold on 9/12 and then it was corrected on 2/23. You also see that "hiccup" look in the Pacific on 2/20 before it goes warm. Then by 2/27 the "hiccup" look is gone, and it remains warm for the rest of the year.

[skierinvermont]

Well thi data only goes back to 1996, but the base hasn't changed thankfully, I also believe it is 1985-1993, although I cannot remember where I read that, it was like 2 years ago.

I'd pay 5K of my own money for all measurement systems to start using the same base, Its a nightmare to see UAH change their base again, GISS with its 1950-1980, and Hadley with the 1961-1990.

I'd perfer all systems to use 1961-1990, since we get both phases ob both the PDO and AMO.

There is satellite SST data available back to 1985 (or earlier). NOAA just hasn't made daily SST maps out of it. You can still get the monthly maps though.

1985-1993 (minus 1991-1992) is definitely the satellite SST base period used by NOAA. It says so in their methodology: http://coralreefwatch.noaa.gov/satellite/methodology/methodology.html#ssta

Here's the monthly anomalies for 1985-1998:

http://www.osdpd.noaa.gov/ml/ocean/sst/monthly_mean_sst_anom.html

[BethesdaWX]

There is satellite SST data available back to 1985 (or earlier). NOAA just hasn't made daily SST maps out of it. You can still get the monthly maps though.

1985-1993 (minus 1991-1992) is definitely the satellite SST base period used by NOAA. It says so in their methodology: http://coralreefwatc...ology.html#ssta

Here's the monthly anomalies for 1985-1998:

http://www.osdpd.noa...n_sst_anom.html

Oh, thanks then. I agree I'd think that if SST anoms were to drop that much, the globe would be a pretty chilly place.

Looking at ENSO data back in 2001, the original satellite anoms do seem to be getting the ENSO portion correct, but again, something look wierd about that.

[Clifford]

I'd perfer all systems to use 1961-1990, since we get both phases ob both the PDO and AMO.

We don't have reliable satellite data before December 1978. And even so, the satellites and analyses have changed.

When looking at overall numbers, the baseline just affects the overall magnitude of the number, and not the trends. However, warm/cold charts might be affected by failing to average in certain cycles.

At this point, while we build the baselines.... The best we can hope for is some uniformity.

Perhaps start with January 1979 to December 2010.

Then expand the baseline (and re-work all the old data) every decade. So, in 10 years, change it to 1979 to 2020. At some point, one might choose to use all 21st century data.

[skierinvermont]

We don't have reliable satellite data before December 1978. And even so, the satellites and analyses have changed.

When looking at overall numbers, the baseline just affects the overall magnitude of the number, and not the trends. However, warm/cold charts might be affected by failing to average in certain cycles.

At this point, while we build the baselines.... The best we can hope for is some uniformity.

Perhaps start with January 1979 to December 2010.

Then expand the baseline (and re-work all the old data) every decade. So, in 10 years, change it to 1979 to 2020. At some point, one might choose to use all 21st century data.

I think this makes things unnecessarily complicated. There is so much scholarly work on climate it is a lot easier to keep the baselines the same as often as possible.

At least right now I've got it all figured out.

GISS>> HadCRUT = +.07

UAH>> RSS = ~~+.1C

GISS>> RSS = -.23C

GISS>> UAH = -.32C

What you are proposing then there will be papers written in a half dozen different base periods for each of them. How do I convert GISS 1951-1980 to UAH 1979-2030? How do I convert GISS 1951-2020 to UAH 1979-2020?

What makes that even more complicated is the conversion from GISS 1951-2020 to 1951-2040 would not be the same as the UAH conversion. There would literally be 100s of possible conversions... all different. You'd either have to calculate every time .. or keep massive tables.

UGH

[ORH_wxman]

There's no reason for the satellites to change the base period again. They did it this time because it gave them 30 years which is a standard base period. 20 years is usually deemed to not be statistically significant enough in climate studies but a lot of that tends to run subjectively on what type of confidence interval warrants "acceptable" in the science.

[BethesdaWX]

That's just a totally beautiful look for the East Coast if the November 2011 pattern were to become the one that prevailed in Winter 11-12: weak El Niño, massive Alaska block (-EPO), east-based NAO/Iceland block, and cold global temperatures. Although it doesn't mean much given it's the CFS in the long-range, that's exactly what I am hoping for. We can get our most bitter arctic outbreaks when we have a weak Niño creating a huge -EPO block that teams up with a perfectly placed NAO block that isn't too west-based to chew up Canada's cold pipeline...this was the scenario in January 1977 when we saw one of the coldest month's in our region's history. This could also be a snowy pattern given the tendencies for the STJ to ramp up in Niño. Here was the Jan 1977 500mb and temps:

Certainly seeing some very interesting tendencies for next winter given the sub-surface ENSO warmth and persistently cold global temperatures, as well as the resurgence of the -NAO late this March and the dropping QBO. Could a third historic season be in the making? By the way, AMSU Channel 5 has dropped again significantly, although still only a few days into the decline, and we are once again below 2008.

What base climatology was being used for SSTs in the January 2001 map? It might be a very warm base period if it includes the 1998 Super El Niño as well as the +ENSO dominated 80s and early 90s. Since 1998 we've had more Niñas that may have made the SST climo a bit more neutral. Not sure if this has any merit but just checking.

Heck yeah that is a Fantastic Look for Us. The Weak EL Nino Progged get some juicy STJ in there, QBO goes east based, get the weaker +AMO...could be a sexy year winter.

Given the CFS forecasted the current drop in Global temps quite well, (MAR2011 could come i wicked cold). It has a colder look in 2011 through November, with a Period of Warmth from May, June, and July.

[WeatherRusty]

There's no reason for the satellites to change the base period again. They did it this time because it gave them 30 years which is a standard base period. 20 years is usually deemed to not be statistically significant enough in climate studies but a lot of that tends to run subjectively on what type of confidence interval warrants "acceptable" in the science.

About 14 years is required to reach the 95% confidence level.

[BethesdaWX]

About 14 years is required to reach the 95% confidence level.

95% confidence interval for what?

[Clifford]

About 14 years is required to reach the 95% confidence level.

95% confidence interval for what?

Certainly within a decade or so you could get a pretty good shape of the annual temperature cycle. However, there would still be a lot of noise which you could presumably smooth out without degrading from the temperature cycles.

But, 14 years doesn't tell you much when you have multi-decadal oscillations.

And, since some of the annual temperature curves don't follow a sine-wave like curve, but rather more of a "W" shaped annual curve, the actual relation of the peaks could vary depending on oscillations. Likewise, you wouldn't necessarily capture the essence of North/South oscillations.

14 years does not determine what the "normal" temperature of Earth is, or should be. In many senses that is a very subjective measurement based on current conditions.

And...

I doubt you could arrive at anywhere near a 95% confidence interval of answering the simple question on whether the Earth has been warming or cooling between March 26, 1997 and March 25, 2011. The variability in the measurements is just too great.

There is just too much variability in the measurements, piled on top of changing equipment and uncertainty in some of the measurements.

[WeatherRusty]

95% confidence interval for what?

That the temperature trend as measured from a beginning point to an end point is representative of the long term trend to 95% confidence. If you have 15 years of data you can assume with better than 95% confidence that the trend you measure is representative of the longer term trend. 13 years would not represent enough data to reach the required level of statistical significance.

I have lost the paper that demonstrated this, but this is my recollection.

[Clifford]

That the temperature trend as measured from a beginning point to an end point is representative of the long term trend to 95% confidence. If you have 15 years of data you can assume with better than 95% confidence that the trend you measure is representative of the longer term trend. 13 years would not represent enough data to reach the required level of statistical significance.

I have lost the paper that demonstrated this, but this is my recollection.

Ok...

Here is a 14 year "Running Trend Line" Slope Comparison. The red line is indicative of the slope of the 14 year trendline centered at that point.

UAH TLT Data, 1978 to Feb 2011.

So,

Depending on the 14 year data range chosen over the last 30+ years, you would end up with a slope of your trendline between -0.0036 to 0.034 degrees C / year.

And, this ignores the fact that there were instrument changes in 1998, and various PDO, AMO weather cycles.

So...

The question remains what you are 95% confident in?

[BethesdaWX]

Anyone have any Guesses as to the UAH MAR Anomaly? I'm thinking it should be at least 0.1C colder than FEB.

[skierinvermont]

Anyone have any Guesses as to the UAH MAR Anomaly? I'm thinking it should be at least 0.1C colder than FEB.

My guess is -.12C based on a prediction that the current MTD CH5 anomaly of -.26C rises to -.22C and then one applies the average CH5 to UAH conversion of +.1C. Should almost certainly be within -.02C and -.22C.

[BethesdaWX]

My guess is -.12C based on a prediction that the current MTD CH5 anomaly of -.26C rises to -.22C and then one applies the average CH5 to UAH conversion of +.1C. Should almost certainly be within -.02C and -.22C.

I'm thining along the same lines. AMSU has resumed warming, although more slight....although this could reverse to a hard Drop...If the GFS is correct in its SSW prediction 2 weeks from now, and a PV split/retrograding PNA to neutral? Thats an Insane SSW for April.

If the forecast begins to Isolate a SSC once the SSW runs its course, perhaps a Massive Warming Spike in Mid April.

[Clifford]

Anyone have any Guesses as to the UAH MAR Anomaly? I'm thinking it should be at least 0.1C colder than FEB.

By eye-balling my graphs...

http://vortex.nsstc....2/tmtglhmam_5.4

UAH TMT (Global)... Jan: -0.147, Feb: -0.145, Mar Predicted: -0.24

http://vortex.nsstc....t2lt/uahncdc.lt

UAH SST (Global)... Jan: 0.00, Feb: +0.07, Mar Predicted: +0.10

http://vortex.nsstc....t/tltglhmam_5.4

UAH TLT (Global)... Jan: -0.010, Feb -0.018, Mar Predicted: -0.020

I don't think the TLT will be following the TMT as closely as one might expect.

According to the Maue JRA-25 (unfortunately he no longer has daily charts).

http://www.coaps.fsu...e_anomalies.jpg

There was a plunge at the end of the February, followed by warmer temperatures throughout March.

The UAH SST seems to indicate a moderate increase in temperatures since about the end of October, beginning of November, although the pattern seems to be a little different in the uahncdc.lt file.

This seems to be similar to the Maue GFS which also seems to indicate a sharp increase in temperature in early March.