nflwxman Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 Any thoughts on where July falls on the GISS and UAH anomalies? It appears that we are in a neutral- mild El Nino pattern. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snow_Miser Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 Any thoughts on where July falls on the GISS and UAH anomalies? It appears that we are in a neutral- mild El Nino pattern. I think that the July 2012 anomaly will definitely be cooler than June 2012. Reasoning? July 2011 had the same anomaly as June 2012, and we have generally been running below 2011 on AQUA for July. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nflwxman Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 I think that the July 2012 anomaly will definitely be cooler than June 2012. Reasoning? July 2011 had the same anomaly as June 2012, and we have generally been running below 2011 on AQUA for July. Are there any papers on how AQUA C. 5 correlates to surface temperatures? Clearly they track reasonably well, but there are always surprises on the surface anomaly data sets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snow_Miser Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 Are there any papers on how AQUA C. 5 correlates to surface temperatures? Clearly they track reasonably well, but there are always surprises on the surface anomaly data sets. The surface radiates heat which is transferred to the atmosphere which is primarily how the atmosphere warms and cools. A fraction of the atmosphere absorbs sunlight (shortwave radiation) which also warms the atmosphere up. So change in the surface temperature would change the amount of longwave radiation leaving the surface, and thus changing the amount of radiation bein transferred to the atmosphere, so this, the atmospheric temperature. Since there is less radiation reaching higher altitudes temperature generally decreases as you go up in altitude. So to answer your question, they should usually be closely correlated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Global_Warmer Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 Are there any papers on how AQUA C. 5 correlates to surface temperatures? Clearly they track reasonably well, but there are always surprises on the surface anomaly data sets. I don't know. In June 2012 was quite a bit below 2010 on channel 5 data, like .15-18C cooler, but the monthly TLT was only .02C cooler than 2010. That has been going on for a few months now. From the surface to about a Kilometer below channel 5 is the most weighted part of the data each month. ftp://ftp.ssmi.com/msu/weighting_functions/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skierinvermont Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 Yes. It was an example to show that there are other analyses that disagree with Dr. Hansen on his paper. Hansen et. al 2011 has been refuted by Kramm and Dlugi 2012 In our comments we greatly welcome the attempt of Hansen et al. to evaluate various uncertainties inherent in geophysical data deduced by using different measuring concepts and observation methods. However, from a view of the energetic "cycle", this paper raises some questions which we will discuss. We will show that the energy imbalance of the entire Earth-atmosphere system is, indeed, based on these inherent uncertainties. We will demonstrate that the accuracy in the quantification of the global energy flux budget as claimed by Hansen et al. is, by far, not achievable in case of the entire Earth-atmosphere system. If Hansen is questioning the validity of the best sets of data for ocean heat content for 0-700 meters, he should seriously question the validity of an OHC dataset that goes down to 2000 meters, since the data is EXTREMELY poor down there. Levitus et. al contradicts Hansen et. al, as it finds a significantly smaller positive energy imbalance from 1955-2010 than Hansen finds. The Kramm paper is nonsense in a minor journal. Kramm and Dlugi do not even understand the greenhouse effect. Their paper has garnished zero attention in the mainstream scientific community. It's sad watching you lap up such poorly written papers that are completely outside the mainstream for no other reason than they fit your ideological ax. There are two papers, one written by well known scientists in a major journal, another by two nobodies in a minor journal that their peers did not even bother to read or respond to. Which paper does SNowlover choose to believe? Paper #2 of course. The Levitus paper does not contradict the Hansen paper. The Levitus energy imbalance was for the period 1955-2010. Hansen was for 2005-2010. Different periods. Apples to Oranges. Pretty basic stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snow_Miser Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 The Kramm paper is nonsense in a minor journal. Kramm and Dlugi do not even understand the greenhouse effect. Their paper has garnished zero attention in the mainstream scientific community. It's sad watching you lap up such poorly written papers that are completely outside the mainstream for no other reason than they fit your ideological ax. There are two papers, one written by well known scientists in a major journal, another by two nobodies in a minor journal that their peers did not even bother to read or respond to. Which paper does SNowlover choose to believe? Paper #2 of course. I find it sad that you can not debunk the Kramm paper from a scientific standpoint, so you instead look for things on a non-scientific standpoint. I have posted many papers that are highly cited by many other scientists. Kramm and Dlugi are atmospheric scientists with Ph.Ds, making them experts on this subject. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snow_Miser Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 Temperatures in the stratosphere are currently running at the 2nd warmest, whereas in the troposphere they are running in the middle of the pack/ running on the cool side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skierinvermont Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 I find it sad that you can not debunk the Kramm paper from a scientific standpoint, so you instead look for things on a non-scientific standpoint. I have posted many papers that are highly cited by many other scientists. Kramm and Dlugi are atmospheric scientists with Ph.Ds, making them experts on this subject. There are thousands of scientists with similar such expertise, none of whom have even considered Kramm and Drugi worthy of responding to. Nor would Kramm and Drugi be able to pass proper peer review. I did try to understand what Kramm and Drugi are saying. Some of the maths are above the expertise of most (or all) posters on this forum. But I did read the paper and it did not appear like they were disputing the OHC observational datasets. They don't talk about OHC at all really. They seem to be disputing that a top of the atmosphere energy imbalance necessarily leads to a surface temperature increase. Of course, even to a layman that sounds silly. And from the few responses I could find to the paper from other scientists, most other scientists found it silly as well. They've published several similar papers, all in minor journals, and none of which have garnished any attention from their peers. So again - the paper doesn't even talk about OHC. The paper wasn't even about what you said it was. As usual all you did was take a sentence from the abstract that you didn't really understand and cut and paste it to this forum. You've also failed to acknowledge that your comparison of the OHC trends from Levitus and Hansen was an apples to orange comparison between two different time periods (1955-2010 vs 2005-2010). When are you going to stop making such basic errors in your posts? That's such a basic elementary mistake it's like you make these mistakes willfully as long as they support your ideological ax. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonger Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 Temperatures in the stratosphere are currently running at the 2nd warmest, whereas in the troposphere they are running in the middle of the pack/ running on the cool side. Didn't we have a cold stratosphere in the winter? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nflwxman Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 Does anyone have any idea where joe bastardi is getting his information about global temperatures? He claims in a tweet.. "July finish according to NCEP .04 above 30 yr ave. US obvious land mass hot spot. Notice s Hem cold pic.twitter.com/2i8QcbbP" His maps, while visually appealing, never quite match up with GISS, NCDC, UAH. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alpha5 Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 Does anyone have any idea where joe bastardi is getting his information about global temperatures? He claims in a tweet.. "July finish according to NCEP .04 above 30 yr ave. US obvious land mass hot spot. Notice s Hem cold pic.twitter.com/2i8QcbbP" His maps, while visually appealing, never quite match up with GISS, NCDC, UAH. That map is from Dr. Ryan Maue's website. I dont know about the accuracy, but he has a lot of cool features on it http://www.weatherbellmodels.com/weather/gfs/gfs_globe.php'>http://www.weatherbellmodels.com/weather/gfs/gfs_globe.php http://www.weatherbellmodels.com/weather/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluewave Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 Does anyone have any idea where joe bastardi is getting his information about global temperatures? He claims in a tweet.. "July finish according to NCEP .04 above 30 yr ave. US obvious land mass hot spot. Notice s Hem cold pic.twitter.com/2i8QcbbP" His maps, while visually appealing, never quite match up with GISS, NCDC, UAH. The color scale is off on those maps. The blue starts at -0.5 while the orange begins at +3.5. Using that grey from +0.5 to +3.5 gives the visual illusion that the cold anomalies are greater than they really are. You can see the correct color scale that NOAA and most other sites use. http://www.esrl.noaa...data/getpage.pl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonger Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 Even as a semi-skeptic of AGW (I believe in warming, just not spiked warmth), I have been surprised how many record lows have kept pace with record highs in the U.S this month, http://www.wunderground.com/caster/ You have to scroll to the bottom to see the most recent records, kind of stupid arrangement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ben4vols Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 The color scale is off on those maps. The blue starts at -0.5 while the orange begins at +3.5. Using that grey from +0.5 to +3.5 gives the visual illusion that the cold anomalies are greater than they really are. You can see the correct color scale that NOAA and most other sites use. Why does one map have a torch at the South Pole and the other doesn't? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donsutherland1 Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 That map is from Dr. Ryan Maue's website. I dont know about the accuracy, but he has a lot of cool features on it http://www.weatherbe...s/gfs_globe.php http://www.weatherbe...ls.com/weather/ The features are nice, but the calculated anomalies are off. For example, for the January-June 2012 period, the maps indicated a negative global temperature anomaly (1981-2010 base period). Yet, both the NCDC and GISS data showed a positive anomaly against the January-June timeframe (using the 1981-2010 base period). The NCEP-NCAR re-analysis maps were consistent with a warm anomaly for the January-June period. The anomaly this time around will probably wind up closer to +0.15°C against the 1981-2010 base period on GISS rather than the +0.04°C figure shown on the maps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluewave Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 Why does one map have a torch at the South Pole and the other doesn't? It's easier to just use the Antarctica map. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tacoman25 Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 The features are nice, but the calculated anomalies are off. For example, for the January-June 2012 period, the maps indicated a negative global temperature anomaly (1981-2010 base period). Yet, both the NCDC and GISS data showed a positive anomaly against the January-June timeframe (using the 1981-2010 base period). The NCEP-NCAR re-analysis maps were consistent with a warm anomaly for the January-June period. The anomaly this time around will probably wind up closer to +0.15°C against the 1981-2010 base period on GISS rather than the +0.04°C figure shown on the maps. Are they using the same data source for temperature re-analysis? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluewave Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 The features are nice, but the calculated anomalies are off. For example, for the January-June 2012 period, the maps indicated a negative global temperature anomaly (1981-2010 base period). Yet, both the NCDC and GISS data showed a positive anomaly against the January-June timeframe (using the 1981-2010 base period). The NCEP-NCAR re-analysis maps were consistent with a warm anomaly for the January-June period. The anomaly this time around will probably wind up closer to +0.15°C against the 1981-2010 base period than the +0.04°C figure shown on the maps. Don, do you know if those anomalies on the Maue site are actually based off a GFS or CFS forecast? I know that we have seen the GFS raw 2m temp anomaly forecasts running too cool here in the US. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donsutherland1 Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 Are they using the same data source for temperature re-analysis? There's very likely a lot of overlap in the data. Nonetheless, with both GISS and NCDC consistently running warmer than the Policlimate maps and that warmer idea supported by the NCEP-NCAR re-analysis maps, it's very unlikely that the NCEP data is materially different from either GISS or NCDC. Otherwise, the NCEP-NCAR re-analysis maps would resemble the Policlimate maps, but they don't in that they are warmer. Whether the Policlimate maps are based on incomplete data, incorrect algorithms, resolution-related issues, incorporating model forecasts to fill dta gaps, other factors, or some combination of all those factors is unclear. Incomplete data could be playing a role. NCEP-NCAR's re-analysis maps are only out to July 29 (my speculation of an anomaly closer to +0.15°C against the 1981-2010 climatology is based on a very rough approximation from the NCEP-NCAR re-analysis map through July 29). This suggests that not all the data is available for those maps. Whatever the issue is, it's leading to a persistent difference in outcomes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donsutherland1 Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 Don, do you know if those anomalies on the Maue site are actually based off a GFS or CFS forecast? I know that we have seen the GFS raw 2m temp anomaly forecasts running too cool here in the US. That's a good question. I don't know the answer to it. There's definitely some model and/or ensemble data ingested in those maps, as they extrapolate ahead to the end of the month, even as data for July 31 is not yet in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluewave Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 That's a good question. I don't know the answer to it. There's definitely some model and/or ensemble data ingested in those maps, as they extrapolate ahead to the end of the month, even as data for July 31 is not yet in. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SVT450R Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 Why does one map have a torch at the South Pole and the other doesn't? Could also have to do with Policlimate goes to the 23rd while other is to the 29th. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Global_Warmer Posted August 3, 2012 Share Posted August 3, 2012 UAH July finished with a .28C anomaly. 5th behind 1998, 2009, 2010, 2011. 2012 7 G +0.28 NH+0.44 SH+0.11 TROPICS+0.33 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LakeEffectKing Posted August 7, 2012 Share Posted August 7, 2012 RSS down tick: 2011 7 0.328 0.233 0.538 0.213 0.583 0.608 1.426 0.415 0.238 2011 8 0.287 0.213 0.564 0.076 0.759 0.692 1.186 0.433 0.135 2011 9 0.288 0.154 0.521 0.191 1.000 0.926 0.256 0.381 0.190 2011 10 0.088 -0.063 0.355 -0.024 0.631 0.131 -0.078 0.203 -0.032 2011 11 0.032 0.024 0.101 -0.033 0.596 -0.010 0.324 0.074 -0.013 2011 12 0.116 0.028 0.236 0.087 0.577 -0.377 0.615 0.164 0.065 2012 1 -0.058 -0.112 -0.052 -0.004 0.632 -0.550 1.594 -0.076 -0.040 2012 2 -0.121 -0.157 -0.026 -0.182 1.206 -0.190 0.631 -0.073 -0.172 2012 3 0.073 -0.122 0.322 0.030 -0.088 0.113 3.298 0.141 0.002 2012 4 0.332 -0.120 0.916 0.225 1.422 -0.045 1.751 0.533 0.122 2012 5 0.232 -0.044 0.848 -0.110 1.339 -0.239 1.384 0.552 -0.102 2012 6 0.339 -0.023 0.832 0.224 1.829 -0.085 1.204 0.536 0.132 2012 7 0.292 0.236 0.598 0.027 0.759 -0.640 1.429 0.455 0.121 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snow_Miser Posted August 7, 2012 Share Posted August 7, 2012 RSS down tick: 2011 7 0.328 0.233 0.538 0.213 0.583 0.608 1.426 0.415 0.238 2011 8 0.287 0.213 0.564 0.076 0.759 0.692 1.186 0.433 0.135 2011 9 0.288 0.154 0.521 0.191 1.000 0.926 0.256 0.381 0.190 2011 10 0.088 -0.063 0.355 -0.024 0.631 0.131 -0.078 0.203 -0.032 2011 11 0.032 0.024 0.101 -0.033 0.596 -0.010 0.324 0.074 -0.013 2011 12 0.116 0.028 0.236 0.087 0.577 -0.377 0.615 0.164 0.065 2012 1 -0.058 -0.112 -0.052 -0.004 0.632 -0.550 1.594 -0.076 -0.040 2012 2 -0.121 -0.157 -0.026 -0.182 1.206 -0.190 0.631 -0.073 -0.172 2012 3 0.073 -0.122 0.322 0.030 -0.088 0.113 3.298 0.141 0.002 2012 4 0.332 -0.120 0.916 0.225 1.422 -0.045 1.751 0.533 0.122 2012 5 0.232 -0.044 0.848 -0.110 1.339 -0.239 1.384 0.552 -0.102 2012 6 0.339 -0.023 0.832 0.224 1.829 -0.085 1.204 0.536 0.132 2012 7 0.292 0.236 0.598 0.027 0.759 -0.640 1.429 0.455 0.121 LEK, how does this July compare to past Junes on RSS? As in, what place did it come in? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donsutherland1 Posted August 7, 2012 Share Posted August 7, 2012 LEK, how does this July compare to past Junes on RSS? As in, what place did it come in? July 2012 was tied with July 2004 for the 7th warmest July in the 1979-2012 period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Global_Warmer Posted August 10, 2012 Share Posted August 10, 2012 August is looking like another very warm month for the LT on UAH. It seems our Nino is finally making an impact. Which is not surprising since global SSTs are also way up. 2002-2009 are cooler than 2012 is, 2011 and 2010 are warmer at channel 5, but 2011 is about to plummet down, but still be warm enough for a +0.33 global LT anomaly on UAH. In other words 2012 is going to likely be warmer than 2011, we will see. Current channel 5 temps: 08/08 253.961 254.043 253.710 254.098 253.979 254.034 253.755 254.058 254.292 254.173 254.114 Despite any clamoring for a cooling Earth or atmosphere because the summer didn't reach the levels by some predicted here(me) and others or claims solar geomag stuff was cooling the Earth by the end of 2011, then September of 2012, I am sure the next prediction will be early 2013. The global temperature regimes are still running very warm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nzucker Posted August 11, 2012 Share Posted August 11, 2012 August is looking like another very warm month for the LT on UAH. It seems our Nino is finally making an impact. Which is not surprising since global SSTs are also way up. 2002-2009 are cooler than 2012 is, 2011 and 2010 are warmer at channel 5, but 2011 is about to plummet down, but still be warm enough for a +0.33 global LT anomaly on UAH. In other words 2012 is going to likely be warmer than 2011, we will see. We're pretty much in the middle of the pack on AMSU, and .18C colder than 2010, which was the warmest at Channel 5 at this date. This doesn't represent a significant change from the rest of the summer, so I don't see how you can ascertain that El Niño is making an impact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Global_Warmer Posted August 11, 2012 Share Posted August 11, 2012 We're pretty much in the middle of the pack on AMSU, and .18C colder than 2010, which was the warmest at Channel 5 at this date. This doesn't represent a significant change from the rest of the summer, so I don't see how you can ascertain that El Niño is making an impact. Yesterday channel 5 temps were 3rd warmest on AMSU behind 2011 & 2010, how is that middle of the pack? 08/09 253.916 254.062 253.761 254.064 253.979 254.071 253.673 254.049 254.288 254.132 254.150 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.