Support the Arctic Sea Ice Forum and Blog

Author Topic: Global Surface Air Temperatures  (Read 519045 times)

oren

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 4419
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 848
  • Likes Given: 1270
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #750 on: January 28, 2016, 05:28:36 PM »
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/
Graphs, also the Maps tool. Apart from the arctic ocean all very good. What else would you need?

Thanks! I'll go have a look.

Steven

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 553
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 129
  • Likes Given: 16
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #751 on: January 28, 2016, 06:04:37 PM »
In case you haven't seen it, here is Tamino's updated version that removes volcanoes and solar variations as well as El Nino
...
https://tamino.wordpress.com/2016/01/24/weather-and-climate/


Thanks for the link. 

Tamino posted another blog post about this subject yesterday:

https://tamino.wordpress.com/2016/01/27/el-nino-and-the-2015-record-breaking-heat/


Quote from: Tamino

...

So, I’ve added these elements to the mix of factors by which el Niño can influence global temperature. The best model I’ve found so far (there’s a lot more to test) involves a linear el Niño effect which lags only 2 months behind the el Niño itself, a nonlinear el Niño effect which lags 10 months, and a seasonal effectiveness of the el Niño impact. In agreement with the research of Kosaka and Xie, the el Niño impact is strongest in northern-hemisphere winter and weakest in northern-hemisphere summer.

...

We can also plot the impact of el Niño on each year’s temperature:



My result indicates that el Niño led to 0.08 deg.C warmer temperature in 2015. That’s hardly enough to explain the record heat, which was mainly due to global warming. Note, however, that el Niño caused fully 0.2 deg.C warming in 1998, so the record heat of that year — which the deniers love to point to as the “end” of global warming — really was due to el Niño.
...
https://tamino.wordpress.com/2016/01/27/el-nino-and-the-2015-record-breaking-heat/

AbruptSLR

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 17394
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 584
  • Likes Given: 222
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #752 on: January 28, 2016, 06:27:12 PM »
Thanks for the link. 

Tamino posted another blog post about this subject yesterday:

https://tamino.wordpress.com/2016/01/27/el-nino-and-the-2015-record-breaking-heat/

Tamino's analyses are a valuable asset when trying to assess climate trends.  Unfortunately, I am concerned that such experts spend so much time & effort battling denialist babble that they do not provide adequate notice about coming climate risks.  For instance the plot that Tamino provides (with both linear & nonlinear corrections) shows (w.r.t. GMST Anom) that the 82 El Nino contributed less than the 97 El Nino; which contributed less than did the 15 El Nino.  Furthermore, Hadley has only forecast that 2016 will only be about 0.08C hotter than 2015; while Tamino's plot shows that the el nino influence contributed more than 0.15C to the subsequent years for both 1982 and 1997; thus empirically one would expect 2016 to be at least 0.15C hotter than 2015.

I understand that if authorities like Hadley, NOAA, NASA or the Met Office do not err on the side of least drama, that the denalists will make so much hay about their bullish forecasts that doubts will creep into the public mind.  Unfortunately, as I have shown the data that Tamino presents shows an increasing climate contribution in the first year of two-year Super El Nino events, and that the world is running a serious risk of seeing much greater global damage in 2016 than was experienced in either 83 or 98.
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

crandles

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 2497
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 85
  • Likes Given: 46
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #753 on: January 28, 2016, 07:52:52 PM »
Quote
The best model I’ve found so far (there’s a lot more to test) involves a linear el Niño effect which lags only 2 months behind the el Niño itself, a nonlinear el Niño effect which lags 10 months, and a seasonal effectiveness of the el Niño impact

10 months is a long lag.

Steven

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 553
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 129
  • Likes Given: 16
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #754 on: January 28, 2016, 09:04:54 PM »
10 months is a long lag.

Yes, it's strange.  Tamino's model seems to involve lots of parameters (i.e. multiple lags and multiple coefficients in linear and non-linear regressions), so it may be prone to overfitting?  Hopefully he will describe the precise details of his calculation later in a paper or at his blog.
« Last Edit: January 28, 2016, 10:51:59 PM by Steven »

AbruptSLR

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 17394
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 584
  • Likes Given: 222
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #755 on: January 29, 2016, 04:52:38 PM »
Tamino has again updated his review of the influence of correcting for more than just El Nino (to include volcanic & solar activity).  While Tamino shows cases for NASA, Hadley, Cowtan & Way, in the attached plot I show the Tamino corrected NOAA Global Mean Surface Temperature Anoms through 2015 (under the possibly incorrect assumption that NOAA tracks the ONI so who knows ENSO better than them).

https://tamino.wordpress.com/2016/01/29/correcting-for-more-than-just-el-nino/

Extract: "My corrected data show a lot less wiggling around. For example, my correction accounts for the 1998 heat nicely, showing that it’s extremity was entirely due to el Niño, while Gavin’s still has 1998 well above the trend line even after correction. Also, mine doesn’t show some of the dips in Gavin’s curve, such as the extreme cooling in 1992.
There are two reasons for the differences. One is that I’ve used a more complex model of the el Niño effect, one which matches the 1998 outburst (and others too) much better. The other is that I’ve corrected for more than just el Niño; I’ve adjusted for solar variations and volcanic aerosols too, so my correction removes the 1992 dip which was because of the eruption of the Mt. Pinatubo volcano. The result of correcting for three factors instead of just one, and of a more sophisticated el Niño correction, is a much steadier warming for about the last forty years. We can see this more clearly by plotting just the corrected data (black lines are a piecewise-linear fit by change-point analysis):

..

When it comes to preparing for the climate change to come, it’s the 2015 heat that tells the most important tale. But when it comes to denier propaganda, the big story is that the 1998 mega-heat really was due to el Niño, and with that factor accounted for 1998 is shown to be just another year on the trend line, part of the continuing march of temperatures upward.
If 2016 shows a similar outburst (as it well may), expect it to awaken many people to the reality and risk of man-made climate change. But you should also expect it to revive the deniers when, a few years later, they begin to crow about how its mega-heat was the end of global warming. It’ll be the 1998 story all over again — not the end of global warming, just a lot of extra heat from el Niño and a lot of hot air from the usual suspects."


While Tamino very reasonably points to the clearly linear trend for global warming, I note that in the NOAA plot 2015 is above the trend line & it is likely that 2016 will be further above the trend line.  Finally, I note that in the linked Real Climate article Michael Mann speculates that climate change could be boosting the magnitude of current & future El Nino events.  If so, I note that El Nino cycles would then act as a positive feedback mechanism; which could be activated by global warming such like other positive feedbacks [see Royer (2016), for paleo-evidence that during interglacial periods (above Holocene temperature levels) that ECS would increase above 3C due to such temperature boosted positive feedbacks].

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2016/01/how-likely-is-the-observed-recent-warmth/
Extract from Michael Mann: "That analysis, however, neglects one intriguing possibility. Could it be that human-caused climate change is actually boosting the magnitude of El Niño events themselves, leading to more monster events like the ’98 and ’15 events? That proposition indeed finds some support in the recent peer-reviewed literature. If the hypothesis turns out to be true, then the record warmth of ’98 and ’15 might not have been flukes after all.

Dana L. Royer (2016), "Climate Sensitivity in the Geologic Past", Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Vol. 44

http://www.annualreviews.org/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev-earth-100815-024150?src=recsys

“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

James Lovejoy

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 158
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 5
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #756 on: January 30, 2016, 05:08:21 PM »
Nick Stokes has data in through Jan 28.  January is very likely to be as warm or warmer than December.  The anomaly for January so far is 0.05 degrees greater than the December 2015 anomaly, but after a blazing start about mid-month, it 'cooled' to merely very high.  I expect it to drop further, but that the anomaly for January will end up higher than that for December by 0.02 to 0.03C.


Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 15425
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 404
  • Likes Given: 209
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #757 on: January 31, 2016, 04:38:07 PM »
Summing up:  the five-year global forecast from the UK Met Office.

Here is the weather forecast for the next five years: even hotter
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/jan/31/weather-forecast-next-five-years-even-hotter
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 15425
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 404
  • Likes Given: 209
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #758 on: February 01, 2016, 04:19:09 AM »
Alaska.
Quote
@NWSFairbanks:  The Fairbanks airport has yet to hit -30° F this season. This is only the 3rd time Fairbanks has made it to 1/31 without hitting -30° F.

https://twitter.com/nwsfairbanks/status/693925895896104960
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

BenB

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 282
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 50
  • Likes Given: 13
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #759 on: February 01, 2016, 03:10:23 PM »
The average temperature at Svalbard airport was -3.8°C in January, 11.5°C higher than the long-term average of -15.3°C. Over the past 12 months, temperatures were almost 5 degrees C above normal. Clearly not global temperatures, but another symptom of the changes that are taking place everywhere, and particularly in the Arctic.

Edit: I've just seen that these figures had already been posted by someone else on the freezing season thread, but as I posted them here I may as well leave them...
« Last Edit: February 01, 2016, 03:36:46 PM by BenB »

James Lovejoy

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 158
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 5
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #760 on: February 02, 2016, 04:58:15 PM »
Nick Stokes has data in through January.  His estimate of the '93 to 2012 anomaly is 0.665 or just over 0.04C higher than December.  We have a new consecutive 12 month record! 

AbruptSLR

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 17394
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 584
  • Likes Given: 222
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #761 on: February 04, 2016, 04:35:48 PM »
The linked article & associated image shows that the UK Met Office GMST forecast from 2016 to 2020 is running well above Gavin Schmidt's historical trend line, probably indicating that climate change is already accelerating:

http://www.climatecentral.org/news/five-year-forecast-more-warming-in-store-19988

Extract: "This five-year forecast isn’t like the ones that appear on the evening news, rather, it is a research effort aimed at improving climate models. The goal is to get models to the point where they can have skill in predicting features like drought or seasonal hurricane activity a few years ahead, said climate scientist Doug Smith, who leads the Met Office effort. Such predictions would allow governments and societies time to prepare, he said."
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

Laurent

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2535
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 5
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #762 on: February 04, 2016, 06:49:32 PM »
If you want to hear this new tune that is global warming, it is here :


I don't like the melody... (to be continued)

Laurent

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2535
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 5
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #763 on: February 08, 2016, 06:07:48 PM »
No climate conspiracy: NOAA temperature adjustments bring data closer to pristine
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2016/feb/08/no-climate-conspiracy-noaa-temperature-adjustments-bring-data-closer-to-pristine
Quote
A new study finds that NOAA temperature adjustments are doing exactly what they’re supposed to
The U.S. Climate Reference Network consists of 114 stations, including this one in Capitol Reef National Park, Torrey, Utah.
The U.S. Climate Reference Network consists of 114 stations, including this one in Capitol Reef National Park, Torrey, Utah. Photograph: NOAA

Dana Nuccitelli

Monday 8 February 2016 11.00 GMT
Last modified on Monday 8 February 2016 15.32 GMT

    Share on Pinterest
    Share on LinkedIn
    Share on Google+

Shares
79
Comments
221
Save for later

Congressman Lamar Smith (R-TX) has embarked upon a witch-hunt against climate scientists at NOAA, accusing them of conspiring to fudge global temperature data. However, a new study has found that the adjustments NOAA makes to the raw temperature data bring them closer to measurements from a reference network of pristinely-located temperature stations.
The adjustments are scientifically necessary

Before delving into the new study, it’s worthwhile to revisit the temperature adjustments that Lamar Smith disputes. Volunteers have been logging measurements from weather stations around the world for over 150 years, and climate scientists use that data to estimate the Earth’s average surface temperature. But over a 150-year period, things change, as the authors of this study explain.

    Stations have moved to different locations over the past 150 years, most more than once. They have changed instruments from mercury thermometers to electronic sensors, and have changed the time they take temperature measurements from afternoon to morning. Cities have grown up around stations, and some weather stations are not ideally located. All of these issues introduce inconsistencies into the temperature record.

To find out how much actual temperatures have changed, scientists have to filter out these changes in the way the measurements were taken. Those are the adjustments under attack from Lamar Smith. They’re important, scientifically justified, and documented in the peer-reviewed literature.

James Lovejoy

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 158
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 5
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #764 on: February 11, 2016, 07:29:54 AM »
Nick Stokes reports that January was down 0.09C from December. http://moyhu.blogspot.com/2016/02/january-templs-surface-temperature-down.html

February seems to be warming up though.  Nick Stokes has 8 days of February data, but www.karstenhaustein.com/climate has forecasts to the beginning of February 18th.  They seem to point to an increase.

BornFromTheVoid

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 998
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 20
  • Likes Given: 21
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #765 on: February 13, 2016, 07:36:06 PM »
GISS have released their January data, and, with an anomaly of +1.13C above the 51-80 average, it's the warmest on record by +0.18C.



The 12 month average climbing quickly too, up to +0.89C


AbruptSLR

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 17394
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 584
  • Likes Given: 222
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #766 on: February 13, 2016, 08:20:54 PM »
GISS have released their January data, and,

...

The 12 month average climbing quickly too, up to +0.89C


I remind readers that in December 2015 the 12 month GISS average was +0.87C.  So we are already up +0.02C in one month from last year's record.
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

BornFromTheVoid

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 998
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 20
  • Likes Given: 21
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #767 on: February 13, 2016, 08:48:42 PM »

I remind readers that in December 2015 the 12 month GISS average was +0.87C.  So we are already up +0.02C in one month from last year's record.

I think maybe the data was adjusted again slightly. My current stats say it's up 0.3C (0.26C), from +0.86C last month.
We're up +0.52C on January 1998 too.

AbruptSLR

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 17394
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 584
  • Likes Given: 222
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #768 on: February 14, 2016, 10:14:17 AM »
The linked article quote both Gerald Meehl and Kevin Trenberth of NCAR, that if the global society stopped emitting GHG today we still committed to reach 1.5C GMST rise; and that following the Paris Pact we will reach the 1.5C level by 2030, for a rate of temperature rise of 0.5/1.5 = 0.333C/decade (which is about twice the rate Gavin Schmidt is citing based on linear regression, but which in my opinion still errs on the side of least drama, as I suspect that El Nino conditions may prevail throughout 2016).

http://www.dailycamera.com/science_environment/ci_29514273/boulder-scientists-warn-planet-nearing-critical-warming-threshold

Extract: "…. NCAR senior scientist Gerald Meehl believes the Earth is effectively already well beyond the 1 degree C that the planet is confirmed to have already warmed.
Given the physics of Earth's climate system, warming continues well after greenhouse gases are put into the atmosphere. That is because the oceans keep warming for decades in response to greenhouse gases that already have entered the atmosphere. That makes for a lag in the climate system.
Therefore, Meehl asserts that research shows the Earth is already assured about 0.5 degrees C of additional warming, even if levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere could be immediately stabilized.

Meehl gets support in his remarks from colleague Kevin Trenberth, distinguished senior scientist at NCAR — but Trenberth said "it's actually worse" than Meehl has said.
"The problem is that firstly there is a lot of inertia in the infrastructure and in the climate system, so that even if we, in the U.S., and globally, decided to act now to prevent 2 degree warming there is almost nothing we can do to stop it," said Trenberth, adding that its onset can, however, be slowed.
"Coal-fired power stations have a planning life time of over 40 years, so even with the EPA and administration's Clean Power Plan, it takes 20 years to make a noticeable difference. And it takes 40 years for the climate system to respond, as the oceans are still responding to what has happened thus far," Trenberth said.
The scientists' remarks come the same week that the U.S. Supreme Court at least temporarily blocked the Obama administration's implementation of new Environmental Protection Agency regulations calling for cutting emissions from electric power plants, with a stay ordered in response to a lawsuit from 29 states and a coalition of industry groups and corporations.
"Carbon dioxide levels will continue to climb for the foreseeable future," Trenberth said, "and we will blow right through a 1.5 C warming by about 2030, and 2 degrees C warming by 2060 or so. We might be able to delay that till 2080. with big efforts."
« Last Edit: February 14, 2016, 10:36:25 AM by AbruptSLR »
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

BornFromTheVoid

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 998
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 20
  • Likes Given: 21
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #769 on: February 15, 2016, 10:25:02 AM »
The JMA have released their January data, and as expected, January 2016 was the warmest on record. At +0.52C above the 81-10 average, it beats 2nd place by +0.23C



Five Warmest Years (Anomalies)

1st. 2016 (+0.52°C),
2nd. 2015, 2007, 2002 (+0.29°C),
5th. 2010 (+0.21°C)

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 15425
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 404
  • Likes Given: 209
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #770 on: February 16, 2016, 09:50:09 PM »
Alaska:
"Today is 50th consecutive day without measurable snow at Juneau [airport]. Longest winter streak on record. @NWSJuneau "
https://mobile.twitter.com/climatologist49/status/699641639065636864

Average temperature during the period: 36°F (2.2°C)
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

AbruptSLR

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 17394
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 584
  • Likes Given: 222
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #771 on: February 17, 2016, 07:50:56 PM »
SkS has put out their Tracker for the 2C Limit through January 2016 (see the following link and the two associated images).

https://www.skepticalscience.com/2c-2016-01.html

I note that in this version of Track SkS uses a different conversion for GISTEMP (LOTI = Land Ocean Temperature Index) preindustrial baseline adjustment than a few months ago they used -0.256 (this is the difference between the GISS baseline and the 1880-1909 preindustrial baseline).  I suspect that the adjustment factor changes because the hindcast changes with each new data input, and with adjusts for the ENSO (see second image).  This keeps the analysis current but also means that it is very difficult to make comparisons with old projections (like those made when developing the Paris Pact).
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

AbruptSLR

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 17394
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 584
  • Likes Given: 222
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #772 on: February 17, 2016, 08:23:48 PM »
GISS have released their January data, and, with an anomaly of +1.13C above the 51-80 average, it's the warmest on record by +0.18C.

For anyone who prefers this GISS data baselined to 1951-1980, I provide the attached plot from NASA through January 2016:
« Last Edit: February 17, 2016, 08:33:08 PM by AbruptSLR »
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 15425
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 404
  • Likes Given: 209
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #773 on: February 18, 2016, 01:57:41 PM »
January 2016: Shattering the Global Warming Monthly Record
By Phil Plait
Quote
The global temperature anomaly for January 2016 was 1.13° Celsius. That makes it the hottest January on record (the previous record was 0.95° C in 2007). But there’s more: 1.13° is the largest anomaly for any month since records began in 1880. There have only been monthly anomalies greater than 1°C three times before in recorded history, and those three were all from last year. The farther back in the past you go, the lower the anomalies are on average.

Yes, the world is getting hotter.
...

A lot of deniers will say this is a statistical fluctuation; sometimes things are just hotter. That is utter baloney. If that were true, you’d expect just as many record cold days/months/years as warm ones. Two Australian scientists looked into this and found record hot and cold days were about even … until the 1960s, then hot days started outpacing cold ones, and from 2000 to 2014 record heat outnumbered record cold by a factor of 12 to 1.

As it happens, we’re in the middle of an El Niño, an event in the Pacific Ocean that tends to warm surface temperatures. This is also one of if not the most intense on record. Some of that record-breaking heat in January is due to El Niño for sure, but not all or even a majority of it. As I pointed out recently, climate scientist Gavin Schmidt showed that El Niño only accounts for a fraction of a degree of this heating. Even accounting for El Niño years, things are getting hotter.
http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronomy/2016/02/17/january_2016_was_the_hottest_january_on_record.html
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

LRC1962

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 431
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 5
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #774 on: February 18, 2016, 06:47:12 PM »
For those looking forward to La Nina to 'cool' things down. I have a very sickening feeling that we are in for a bad surprise. Too many other feedbacks are starting to show their muscle and things are no longer the way they used to be.
In the new world global weather system environment I get the feeling 'we are no longer in Kansas Toto'.
"All truth passes through three stages: First, it is ridiculed; Second,  it is violently opposed; and Third, it is accepted as self-evident."
       - Arthur Schopenhauer

Lord M Vader

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1261
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 26
  • Likes Given: 19
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #775 on: February 18, 2016, 09:01:54 PM »
NOAA reported today that January was +1,04C warmer than the 20' century average. Only December 2015 was warmer with +1,11C. The margin to the old January record was big with 0,18C. Now we are looking forward to see how big the anomaly for February will be. If the rest of February will remain as warm as the first of it have been, then there is a possibility that we will have a nrw monthly record, again...

And,yes, I would not be surprised if we willsee some big and bad surprises as this El Nino fades. The most annoying thing is how much of the Pacific that is warmer than normal. Does anyone know whether there have been any El Nino that have covered such a huge area as this one? Another thing to look at is the lack of big cooling of the western Pacific.

Best, LMV

James Lovejoy

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 158
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 5
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #776 on: February 19, 2016, 02:00:00 AM »
With the data we have so far, between Nick Stokes report of  recent temperatures and http://www.karstenhaustein.com/climate forecasts, we have somewhat reliable data  through February 25th.  It is very likely that we will be at or near another record.  It is almost certain that February will be the warmest February on record.


Lord M Vader

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1261
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 26
  • Likes Given: 19
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #777 on: February 21, 2016, 07:16:41 PM »
With 10 days left of February, it is virtually certain that February 2016 will be the warmest February that have been observed. Of more importance is how warm the last days of the month wil be, does anyone have an idea about this?

If the big anomalies remains in charge and in terms of Nick Stokes normal period 1994-2013 exceed 0,7oC there are a small chance that the monthly anomaly will be close to +1,5oC above pre-industrial time.

Eyeballing the forecast there seems to be a decent chance for the warmth to continue through the rest of the month.

Best, LMV

AbruptSLR

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 17394
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 584
  • Likes Given: 222
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #778 on: February 21, 2016, 08:03:24 PM »
With 10 days left of February, it is virtually certain that February 2016 will be the warmest February that have been observed. Of more importance is how warm the last days of the month wil be, does anyone have an idea about this?

If the big anomalies remains in charge and in terms of Nick Stokes normal period 1994-2013 exceed 0,7oC there are a small chance that the monthly anomaly will be close to +1,5oC above pre-industrial time.

Eyeballing the forecast there seems to be a decent chance for the warmth to continue through the rest of the month.

Best, LMV

Per the attached GFS 2m temp anom forecast for Feb 28, 2016 the Global temp anom then will be 0.809C.  That said, I note the relatively low 2m temperatures over the Southern Ocean, which is likely a result of ice meltwater from the acceleration of AIS mass loss.  Thus looking at the measured GMST changes may be giving a false sense of security, and perhaps policy makers should have listened to Hansen in the early 1980's.
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

James Lovejoy

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 158
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 5
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #779 on: February 23, 2016, 12:27:36 AM »
With a combination of Nick Stokes reports through February 20, and http://www.karstenhaustein.com/climate for the rest of the month, the best estimate of the February anomaly is 0.789C.  This will very likely result in the highest GISS anomaly in the GISS records.  Best estimate is a GISS anomaly of +1.25+/- 0.10.

Note that so far 2015/2016 is retracing 1997/1998, except 0.4-0.5C warmer.   If this continues 2016 will end up about 0.15C warmer than 2015.  That would be just over 1C higher than GISS's 1951-1980 base period.


Lord M Vader

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1261
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 26
  • Likes Given: 19
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #780 on: February 23, 2016, 07:58:28 AM »
James Lovejoy, IF the GISS anomaly for February ends up being about +1,24C above normal, then February is roughly 1,5C warmer than the 1881-1900 average... The anomaly for the first 20 years is -0,26C relative the 1951-1980 normal period.Should give a huge echo around the world!!!

Best, LMV

oren

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 4419
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 848
  • Likes Given: 1270
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #781 on: February 23, 2016, 01:41:38 PM »
James Lovejoy, IF the GISS anomaly for February ends up being about +1,24C above normal, then February is roughly 1,5C warmer than the 1881-1900 average... The anomaly for the first 20 years is -0,26C relative the 1951-1980 normal period.Should give a huge echo around the world!!!

Best, LMV

It really should. That farce in Paris and all. But not sure it will though.

AbruptSLR

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 17394
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 584
  • Likes Given: 222
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #782 on: February 23, 2016, 10:00:29 PM »
With 10 days left of February, it is virtually certain that February 2016 will be the warmest February that have been observed. Of more importance is how warm the last days of the month wil be, does anyone have an idea about this?

If the big anomalies remains in charge and in terms of Nick Stokes normal period 1994-2013 exceed 0,7oC there are a small chance that the monthly anomaly will be close to +1,5oC above pre-industrial time.

Eyeballing the forecast there seems to be a decent chance for the warmth to continue through the rest of the month.

Best, LMV

Per the attached GFS 2m temp anom forecast for Feb 28, 2016 the Global temp anom then will be 0.809C.  That said, I note the relatively low 2m temperatures over the Southern Ocean, which is likely a result of ice meltwater from the acceleration of AIS mass loss.  Thus looking at the measured GMST changes may be giving a false sense of security, and perhaps policy makers should have listened to Hansen in the early 1980's.

Not to sound too much like a Jeremiah, but not only is ice meltwater in the Southern Ocean masking some of the GMST increase (while still promoting climate change), the following two articles show that: (a) Per Francey et al (2016) a relatively recent atmospheric circulation pattern is trapping more CO₂ in the NH than in the SH (see the first image) which will likely accelerate temperature increase in the NH (where most of the people are) faster than the AR5 projections; and (b) Per the Pedro et al (2016) reference in the second half of this century changes in ocean circulation patterns could result in a rapid/abrupt warming of Antarctica (see the second & third image); which would rapidly increase GMST at that time:

The first linked (open access) reference cites an example of inhomogeneity in atmospheric CO₂ distribution, in this case a 2009-2010 step in atmospheric CO₂ difference between the Northern & Southern Hemispheres.  This difference appears to be due to a sustained (at least until 2015) change in atmospheric circulation; which must also be modeled by future state of the art ESMs:

Francey, R. J. and Frederiksen, J. S.: The 2009–2010 step in atmospheric CO2 interhemispheric difference, Biogeosciences, 13, 873-885, doi:10.5194/bg-13-873-2016, 2016.

http://www.biogeosciences.net/13/873/2016/

Abstract. The annual average CO2 difference between baseline data from Mauna Loa and the Southern Hemisphere increased by  ∼  0.8 µmol mol−1 (0.8 ppm) between 2009 and 2010, a step unprecedented in over 50 years of reliable data. We find no evidence for coinciding, sufficiently large source and sink changes. A statistical anomaly is unlikely due to the highly systematic nature of the variation in observations. An explanation for the step, and the subsequent 5-year stability in this north–south difference, involves interhemispheric atmospheric exchange variation. The selected data describing this episode provide a critical test for studies that employ atmospheric transport models to interpret global carbon budgets and inform management of anthropogenic emissions.


Caption: "Figure 1. North–south differences and growth rates in CO2 since 1990. Panel (a) shows, on the left axis, annual average (January–December) 1C (ppm) from three programs – CSIRO, NOAA (mlo–cgo), and SIO (mlo–spo) – plotted mid-year. On the right axis are reported anthropogenic emissions (dashed line), with the correction suggested by Francey et al. (2013) (shaded), scaled so that the overall slope is similar to that from the long-term mlo–spo SIO record. Panel (b): CSIRO (mlo, cgo, spo) and NOAA (mlo) growth rates, dC / dt , plotted mid- month."



J.B. Pedro, T. Martin, E. J. Steig, M. Jochum, W. Park & S.O. Rasmussen (20 February 2016), "Southern Ocean deep convection as a driver of Antarctic warming events", Geophysical Research Letters, DOI: 10.1002/2016GL067861

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016GL067861/abstract
Abstract: "Simulations with a free-running coupled climate model show that heat release associated with Southern Ocean deep convection variability can drive centennial-scale Antarctic temperature variations of up to 2.0 °C. The mechanism involves three steps: Preconditioning: heat accumulates at depth in the Southern Ocean; Convection onset: wind and/or sea-ice changes tip the buoyantly unstable system into the convective state; Antarctic warming: fast sea-ice–albedo feedbacks (on annual–decadal timescales) and slow Southern Ocean frontal and sea-surface temperature adjustments to convective heat release (on multidecadal–century timescales) drive an increase in atmospheric heat and moisture transport toward Antarctica. We discuss the potential of this mechanism to help drive and amplify climate variability as observed in Antarctic ice-core records."

Caption for third image: "Figure S2. Map showing the surface-air-temperature (SAT) anomaly during stage 2 (cf. Figure 3d). Circles mark locations of ice-core records. Color-coding of the circles depicts the maximum lagged correlation coefficient of modeled local SAT with SAT over the convection area (black cross in Weddell Sea). Lower panels show time series of modeled SAT anomalies at selected ice-core sites (red) together with the SAT anomaly over the convection region (black). Note different y-axis scaling for red lines."
« Last Edit: February 24, 2016, 05:52:10 PM by AbruptSLR »
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

Wouter

  • New ice
  • Posts: 5
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #783 on: February 24, 2016, 04:56:23 PM »
It looks like 22 February being the warmest day on average on earth since at least 1994, with an anomaly of 0.997°C above 1994-2013, beating the previous record of 9 December 2015 (0.975°C).

Furthermore, it looks like that the 54 warmest days since 1994 were all found in the last 141 days, beating the value of +0.673°C that was the maximum value between the second of December 2013 and the 3rd of October 2015.

Source data: http://moyhu.blogspot.com

Lord M Vader

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1261
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 26
  • Likes Given: 19
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #784 on: February 24, 2016, 05:02:09 PM »
Damn, it was annoyingly close to exced 1,00C above the 1994-2013 normal!! I think we should see a drop in thr daily anomalies from now and on. Beside that, we'll soon enter spring time and somewhat less huge anomalies...

Buddy

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3325
  • Go DUCKS!!
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 40
  • Likes Given: 31
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #785 on: February 24, 2016, 05:17:14 PM »
Quote
Furthermore, it looks like that the 54 warmest days since 1994 were all found in the last 141 days

THAT....is rather "jaw dropping."  And not in a good way :-[
FOX (RT) News....."The Trump Channel.....where truth and journalism are dead."

Lord M Vader

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1261
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 26
  • Likes Given: 19
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #786 on: February 24, 2016, 05:32:50 PM »
How big anomalies for the next 5 days are the forecasts calling for? If no significant drop occurrs the odds are rather good that at least one of the NASA, NOAA or JMA will give an anomaly exceeding 1,50oC above pre-industrial for the month of February.

Will be scaring, exciting and sad to see if this prospect materializes. "Godzilla El Nino" doesn't care about politicians big words nor if you are right or left.

Csnavywx

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 520
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 29
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #787 on: February 24, 2016, 10:11:45 PM »
How big anomalies for the next 5 days are the forecasts calling for? If no significant drop occurrs the odds are rather good that at least one of the NASA, NOAA or JMA will give an anomaly exceeding 1,50oC above pre-industrial for the month of February.

Will be scaring, exciting and sad to see if this prospect materializes. "Godzilla El Nino" doesn't care about politicians big words nor if you are right or left.

The GFS has temps near where they are now (maybe very slightly cooler, but still at or around 0.9C above 1994-2013 til the end of the month.

AbruptSLR

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 17394
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 584
  • Likes Given: 222
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #788 on: February 25, 2016, 02:43:36 AM »
Per the linked article (& linked pdf) prominent climate scientists including: Gerald Meehl, Benjamin Santer, John Fyfe and Michael Mann, demonstrate that the faux hiatus was real w.r.t. global mean surface air temperature, but not w.r.t. global warming.  I concur with their position:

www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/02/24/top-scientists-insist-global-warming-really-did-slow-down-in-the-2000s/

Extract: "The authors also argue that a large body of research into the causes of the apparent slowdown — which tended to target natural fluctuations, and especially the behavior of the Pacific Ocean — represents valuable work that advances our understanding of “a basic science question that has been studied for at least twenty years: what are the signatures of (and the interactions between) internal decadal variability and the responses to external forcings, such as increasing GHGs or aerosols from volcanic eruptions?”"

See a pdf of the paper at:

http://www.nature.com/articles/nclimate2938.epdf?referrer_access_token=nya8U4bgjv_I-3aAfFgc6dRgN0jAjWel9jnR3ZoTv0OqExA1EwYluYLwiaayT9bldKYisAn--P5Djex2GxwUVaxHJvGZA6CV3RoVsacjc4Bn86sGs2o0Cf_t7bvmgVnexAsZGl_sj5cl968-0rn3-TKKTiKqC_s3Q09j3pThfDPycXe8LzueeRscl4CKDNi58tDKzjk6Fo1kd_kiv-sXePQULXJKqbaBW3mwQCOJRZ0zTsXiJoOiCZRHrvkxPZVJcuTcY6hxbXXpeVnHNR20oYrvi2d-OoFX7Jid961YhTM%3D&tracking_referrer=www.washingtonpost.com

Edit: See the associated Fig 1.

Edit2: Here is my standard citation:

John C. Fyfe, Gerald A. Meehl, Matthew H. England, Michael E. Mann, Benjamin D. Santer, Gregory M. Flato, Ed Hawkins, Nathan P. Gillett, Shang-Ping Xie, Yu Kosaka & Neil C. Swart (2016), "Making sense of the early-2000s warming slowdown", Nature Climate Change, Volume: 6, Pages: 224–228, doi:10.1038/nclimate2938

http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/v6/n3/full/nclimate2938.html

Summary: "It has been claimed that the early-2000s global warming slowdown or hiatus, characterized by a reduced rate of global surface warming, has been overstated, lacks sound scientific basis, or is unsupported by observations. The evidence presented here contradicts these claims."
« Last Edit: February 25, 2016, 06:18:38 PM by AbruptSLR »
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

Richard Rathbone

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 521
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 31
  • Likes Given: 7
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #789 on: February 25, 2016, 12:35:53 PM »
I prefer Tamino's change point analysis to theirs.

https://tamino.wordpress.com/2016/02/25/no-slowdown/

"A new paper by Fyfe et al. speaks with apparent certainty of a “slowdown” in the rise of global mean surface temperature (GMST). What it doesn’t give is any real evidence of it."

Lord M Vader

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1261
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 26
  • Likes Given: 19
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #790 on: February 25, 2016, 05:49:00 PM »
Csnavywx, thanks for the answer! Where can I find these forecasts from GFS?

Feb 23 was +0,967C above the normal and the anomaly according to NCEP is now roughly +1,37C. During the last four months the difference between NOAAand GISS number haven't been higher than 0,189C. That implies, to me, that February right now is at least 1,19C above GISS normal. Extrapolating for the years 1881-1900 which had sn February anomaly being about -0,25C the odds for break through Paris talks are rather high as that give us an anomaly of at least +1,44C above "pre-industrial"!!

AbruptSLR

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 17394
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 584
  • Likes Given: 222
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #791 on: February 26, 2016, 10:09:13 AM »
I prefer Tamino's change point analysis to theirs.

https://tamino.wordpress.com/2016/02/25/no-slowdown/

"A new paper by Fyfe et al. speaks with apparent certainty of a “slowdown” in the rise of global mean surface temperature (GMST). What it doesn’t give is any real evidence of it."

While I have nothing against Tamino's hindcasting efforts, if one ignores the "slowdown" (or faux hiatus) in GMST rise, then one may be unpleasantly surprised when a "speedup" occurs in the GMST rise for the next two to three decades.

The linked reference indicates that research that points-out that at the low end of AR5's ECS most probable range (1.5 to 4.5C); are likely in error because they do not adequately consider decadal feedback.  The reference indicates that the best way to address this matter is by diagnosing the role played by effective radiative forcing (ERF) within climate models:

Piers M. Forster (Volume publication date June 2016), "Inference of Climate Sensitivity from Analysis of Earth's Energy Budget", Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Vol. 44


http://www.annualreviews.org/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev-earth-060614-105156

Abstract: "Recent attempts to diagnose Equilibrium Climate Sensitivity (ECS) from changes in Earth’s energy budget point towards values at the low-end of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Fifth Assessment Report’s (AR5) likely range (1.5 to 4.5 K). These studies employ observations but still require an element of modeling to infer ECS. Their diagnosed effective ECS over the historic period of around 2 K holds up to scrutiny but there is tentative evidence that this underestimates the true ECS from a doubling of carbon dioxide. Different choices of energy imbalance data explain most of the difference between published best estimates while effective radiative forcing (ERF) dominates the overall uncertainty. For decadal analyses the largest source of uncertainty comes from a poor understanding of the relationship between ECS and decadal feedback. Considerable progress could be made by diagnosing ERF in models."

If it is not clear what decadal feedbacks are, they are associated with such phenomena as the PDO/IPO, AMO, etc.  As we have just left a period of negative PDO and are now in a period of positive PDO, we can expect El Ninos to keep driving up estimates of the ECS based on the future satellite record.
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

Richard Rathbone

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 521
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 31
  • Likes Given: 7
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #792 on: February 26, 2016, 11:50:18 AM »
I prefer Tamino's change point analysis to theirs.

https://tamino.wordpress.com/2016/02/25/no-slowdown/

"A new paper by Fyfe et al. speaks with apparent certainty of a “slowdown” in the rise of global mean surface temperature (GMST). What it doesn’t give is any real evidence of it."

While I have nothing against Tamino's hindcasting efforts, if one ignores the "slowdown" (or faux hiatus) in GMST rise, then one may be unpleasantly surprised when a "speedup" occurs in the GMST rise for the next two to three decades.


Why should a  statistician be unpleasantly surprised by a reversion to the mean? Its the people that think there has been a real change in trend that are going to be surprised, not those that can do the statistics and see the trend hasn't actually changed.

AbruptSLR

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 17394
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 584
  • Likes Given: 222
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #793 on: February 26, 2016, 07:02:36 PM »
Why should a  statistician be unpleasantly surprised by a reversion to the mean? Its the people that think there has been a real change in trend that are going to be surprised, not those that can do the statistics and see the trend hasn't actually changed.

While people may like to watch statistics being revised with each new data point; what climate change cares about is physics, including chaotic strange attractors that current paleo-data is beginning to document that the Earth Systems are more sensitive than AR5 projections indicate.  Thus it is possible that our current positive PDO phase could activate nonlinear components of positive feedbacks that are not well represented by statistical regression techniques.
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

AbruptSLR

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 17394
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 584
  • Likes Given: 222
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #794 on: February 26, 2016, 07:26:33 PM »
Further to my comments in Reply #797, in the linked article Robert Scribbler does a nice job of summarizing some of the key physics related issues of our current situation; including the possibility (probability) that the current positive PDO phase, and a CFSv2 ENSO forecast of a weak El Nino in the second half of 2016, may drive the GMST into record territory in 2016 (for the third year in a row [with a possibility of four records in a row if a moderate El Nino occurs in the second half of 2016, which could drive the 2017 GMST into record territory):

http://robertscribbler.com/2016/02/25/as-a-titanic-el-nino-begins-to-fade-what-fresh-trouble-will-a-record-warm-world-bring/

Extract: "But as El Nino weakens and the Equator cools, the Jet Stream would tend to slow even more. Such an atmospheric state would tend to further exaggerate already significant Jet Stream wave patterns — transferring still more low-Latitude heat poleward. In addition, the ocean gyres tend to speed up as El Nino fades or transitions to La Nina. The result is an amplified pulse of warmer waters emerging from southern Latitudes and entering the Arctic.
It’s for these combined reasons — tendency to amplify south to north atmospheric heat transfer into the Arctic post El Nino and tendency to flush warmer waters toward Arctic Ocean zones during the same period that it appears we are entering a high risk time for potential new sea ice melts and possible related Greenland land ice melts during 2016 and 2017.



Finally, extreme above average sea surface temperatures are predicted to intensify over the Barents and Greenland seas through to end of Summer 2016. This is an area to watch. The added ocean heat would tend to pull the Jet Stream northward over Eastern Europe and Western Russia — generating risk of heatwaves and drought for this region even as Central Asia fell under risk of floods. Long range CFS precipitation and temperature model runs for Europe have not yet picked up this risk. However, given the intensity of heat predicted for Barents sea surfaces and the related tendency of warmth over oceans and in the far north to influence the formation of blocking patterns, heat domes, and high amplitude troughs, it’s worth keeping a weather eye on the situation.



Though the primary driver of global warming is a massive human fossil fuel emission, the response of the world ocean system can significantly wag the rate of atmospheric temperature increases on a decadal time scale. If the ocean tendency is for La Nina, this would tend to somewhat suppress the overall decadal rate of temperature increase — and we saw this during the 2000s. But if the ocean tendency is to produce El Ninos (in a switch to a positive Pacific Decadal Oscillation, as appears to be happening now), then the overall pace of global atmospheric temperature increase would tend to be enhanced.



In contrast, the CFSv2 model forecast from NOAA (above image) shows El Nino only weakening through to July and then re-strengthening in the October-November time-frame. This CFS model scenario would result in higher atmospheric temperatures in 2016 — practically guaranteeing a lock on an unprecedented three back-to-back-to-back record warm years for 2014, 2015, and 2016. But such a scenario — implying that the Pacific Ocean had entered a new period of El Nino tendency — would also tend to keep atmospheric temperatures nearer to the newly established record highs.
Under the CFSv2 scenario, we may expect annual average global temperatures to rise as high as 1.08 to 1.2 C above 1880s values during 2016 (a very extreme departure and one uncomfortably close to the 1.5 C warming mark). These extreme values would, perhaps, recede to around between 0.9 and 1.1 C during 2017 so long as the second El Nino pulse did not remain in place for too long. However, if the bounce back toward El Nino conditions was strong enough in late 2016, there would be an outside chance that the globe may experience not 3, but an absolutely obnoxious 4 back-to-back record warm years.



However, it’s worth re-iterating that the CFSv2 model forecasts have been quite accurate in predicting the path of the current record El Nino to date."

Edit:  While Scribbler provides the PDF correct CFSv2 Nino 3.4 forecast issued Feb 25 2016; I attached both the uncorrected and the corrected CFSv2 Nino 3.4 forecasts issued Feb 26 2016 (respectively); which are even more bullish for weak El Nino conditions in the second half of 2016 than yesterday's forecast.
« Last Edit: February 26, 2016, 07:38:34 PM by AbruptSLR »
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

nowayout

  • New ice
  • Posts: 19
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #795 on: February 26, 2016, 09:52:35 PM »
Let me put it with a simpler wording: we're nuking the climate - so start to imagine what that may mean, to us , for us.

Every paleoclimate record must fail at this point to compare: speed. I'd like to conjecture, that we've just seen the start of an ugly transition. No longer it is about weather, freezing season or melting season, whatever. It is about changing weather patterns. Robert Scribbler does not state it, but he describes it, in his very skillful ways.

We are about 1° C above preindustrial levels. Nice. The point to consider: we lag the equlibrium of ~485 ppm co2e by more than 4° C. And we are still adding, hopefully at a reduced rate, given the state of the world economy. And exactly this temperature difference and lag in change is responsible for the speed of our current climate change.

(Second derivative; 'til the end of my days I'll be amused about the fact, that everyone can handle this one while driving a car - but most stop doing it when having arrived at home. Mankind won't survive, and this is the reason why.)

Prepare for a rough ride. A very rough ride. Regardless of precipitation, or lack thereof. That is, prepare for both. And equally: warm and cold. Don't take an April weather in February for granted, here in Europe.

You may want to (re-)read the Wikipedia entries on Lake Agassiz and the Younger Dryas. And then place a bet, how long it will take for the melted water beneath the Greenland interior to spill out big time. An event for your grandchildren? For your children? For you, happening in your lifetime?

(Tag: Doomerpr0n, fitting my nick; sry)

Wouter

  • New ice
  • Posts: 5
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #796 on: February 27, 2016, 08:10:54 AM »
It also seems certain now that February will be warmer on average, than the warmest day was before October 2015... Daily data since 1994, source: moyhu.blogspot.be

Laurent

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2535
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 5
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #797 on: February 27, 2016, 10:20:33 AM »
I don't think we should think with CO2e over 100 years, the most relevant now is the CO2e over 10 years ! That mean we are over 700 ppm of CO2e !!! The consequences are unraveling now.

AbruptSLR

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 17394
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 584
  • Likes Given: 222
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #798 on: February 27, 2016, 10:36:08 AM »
I don't think we should think with CO2e over 100 years, the most relevant now is the CO2e over 10 years ! That mean we are over 700 ppm of CO2e !!! The consequences are unraveling now.

However, do not forget the negative radiative forcing currently caused by aerosols [at least until we reduce anthropogenic aerosol emissions and allow deforestation and ocean acidification (think DMSP) to reduce natural secondary organic aerosol emissions].
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

Lord M Vader

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1261
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 26
  • Likes Given: 19
Re: Global Surface Air Temperatures
« Reply #799 on: February 27, 2016, 04:27:46 PM »
For the first time, the daily anomaly according to Nick Stokes, exceeded +1,0C. The anomaly for February 25 was an astonishing +1,027C above the 1994-2013 average!