Archive for the ‘climate’ Category

UAH, ACORN and Rainfall: Something’s Wrong

April 4, 2018

Tom Quirk had an interesting article posted by Jo Nova this week, at

http://joannenova.com.au/2018/04/bom-homogenization-errors-are-so-big-they-can-be-seen-from-space/

questioning the large number of adjustments coincident with the changeover to automatic weather stations in the 1990s, which appear to have had a large impact on the correlation between BOM’s monthly ACORN mean temperatures and UAH’s Lower Troposphere data for the Australian region.

However, using a different comparison something very strange appears.

For me, his killer plot was this one, showing a huge drop in centred running 13 month correlations between UAH and BOM mean anomalies:

Figure 1: Tom’s plot of monthly correlations:

Tom Q correl plot

Using the same methodology, but with maxima instead of mean temperature anomalies (as tropospheric data better reflect daytime temperatures when there is deep convective overturning), I have replicated his findings.  Note that BOM maxima and rainfall are converted to anomalies from 1981 to 2010, the same as UAH.

Figure 2 is my plot of the running centred 13 month correlations between BOM maxima anomalies and UAH Australian region anomalies for all months of data from December 1978 to February 2018.

Figure 2:  Centred running 13 month correlation between BOM maxima and UAH:

BOM max v uah correl

There are some differences, but like Tom, I find a distinctly low, in fact, negative, correlation in the mid-nineties, centred on April 1996.

However, as I showed in my post “Why are surface and satellite temperatures different?”  in 2015, most of the difference between UAH and BOM maxima can be explained by rainfall variation alone.

Figure 3 is a plot of the monthly difference between UAH and BOM data plotted against rainfall anomalies (also calculated from 1981-2010 means).

Figure 3:

Diff v rain plot

R-squared of 0.54 means a correlation coefficient of 0.73.

This is how the correlation varies over time:

Figure 4:

Diff v rain correl

I have a problem.

There is a major drop in July 1995, but other big ones- October 1998, July 2003, December 2009, September 2015, and the most recent figure, August 2017.   Correlations are much more variable from 1995.  What can be the reason for these poor correlations?

There is also a general decrease in correlation over the years since 1978.

What’s wrong?  Surely rain gauges can’t be faulty?

Has there been a drift in accuracy of the UAH data?

Or has there been a drift in accuracy of BOM temperature measurement?

Any suggestions would be most welcome.

Post Script:

The major drops may occur at about the same time as major ENSO changes, though not always.  This graph plots the above correlations and 13 month centred averages of the SOI (scaled down) together.

Figure 5:

SOI and correlations

The SOI has not been lagged in this plot.  Perhaps the major changes in trade winds, monsoons, and the sub-tropical ridge affect tropospheric temperatures differently from surface temperatures at these times.  But that doesn’t explain the gradual decrease over time.

 

 

Advertisements

Fingerprints of Greenhouse Warming: Poles Apart

February 26, 2018

If global warming is driven by the influence of carbon dioxide and other man made greenhouse gases, it will have certain characteristics, as explained by Karl Braganza in his article for The Conversation (14 June 2011).

As water vapour is a very strong greenhouse gas, it will tend to mask the influence of man made greenhouse gases, and because solar radiation is such a powerful driver of temperature, this also must be taken into account.  Therefore, the characteristic greenhouse warming fingerprints are best seen where solar and water vapour influences can be minimised: that is, at night time, in winter, and near the poles.  So we would look for minimum temperatures rising faster than maxima; winter temperatures rising faster than summer, and polar temperatures rising faster than the tropics.  Indeed, polar temperature change in winter should be an ideal metric, as in Arctic and Antarctic regions the sun is almost completely absent in winter, and the intense cold means the atmosphere contains very little water vapour.  We can kill three birds with one stone, as winter months in polar regions are almost continuously night.

So let’s look at the evidence for greater winter and polar warming.

Figure 1: North Polar Summers:

NP summers

Figure 2:  North Polar Winters:

arctic all winters

Yep, North Polar winters are warming very strongly, at +2.58C/100 years, and much faster than summers (+1.83C/100 years)- strong evidence for anthropogenic global warming.  And warming is much faster than the Tropics (+1.023C/100 years):

Figure 3: Tropics

Tropics TLT

Unfortunately for the theory, the opposite happens in the South Polar region:

Figure 4: South Polar Summers

SP summers

Figure 5:  South Polar Winters:

antarctic all winters

While summers are warming (+0.58C/100 years), winters are cooling strongly at -1.66C/100 years.  Over land areas, with little influence from the ocean, very low moisture, and very little solar warming, winters are cooling even faster:

Figure 6:  Antarctic winters over land:

antarctic land winters

This is the exact opposite of what is supposed to happen in very dry, cold, and dark conditions- at night, in winter, at the poles.  Can this be because carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases are NOT well mixed, and are in fact decreasing in concentration near the South Pole?

Figure 7: Carbon Dioxide concentration at Cape Grim (Tasmania):

C Grim CO2

Figure 8:  South Polar region TLT (all months) as a function of CO2 concentration:SP vs co2

No, while Cape Grim data show CO2 concentration to be increasing in the Southern Hemisphere, but without the marked seasonal fluctuations of the Northern Hemisphere, there is NO relationship between CO2 and temperature in the South Polar region.

Is it because the oceans around Antarctica are cooling?

Figure 9: South Polar Ocean TLT:

SP ocean

Nope- -0.01C/100 years (+/- 0.1C).  Neither cooling nor warming.

The cold, dry, dark skies over Antarctica are getting colder in winter.  Summers show a small warming trend.

Conclusion:  The fingerprints of man made greenhouse warming are completely absent from the South Pole, and differences between North and South Polar regions must, until shown otherwise, be due to natural factors.

Data sources:

https://www.nsstc.uah.edu/data/msu/v6.0/tlt/uahncdc_lt_6.0.txt

http://www.csiro.au/en/Research/OandA/Areas/Assessing-our-climate/Latest-greenhouse-gas-data

Mandated disclaimer:-

“Any use of the Content must acknowledge the source of the Information as CSIRO Oceans & Atmosphere and the Australian Bureau of Meteorology (Cape Grim Baseline Air Pollution Station) and include a statement that CSIRO and the Australian Bureau of Meteorology give no warranty regarding the accuracy, completeness, currency or suitability for any particular purpose and accept no liability in respect of data.”

BEST Adjustments

February 11, 2018

Two years ago I wrote a post about changes in Diurnal Temperature Range (DTR) and whether these were a “Fingerprint of enhanced greenhouse warming”, as claimed by Dr Karl Braganza in an opinion piece at The Conversation in 2011, and in his 2004 paper.

It being time to check more recent data (in 2016 the BEST data finished at December 2015), I went to the BEST site and downloaded the most recent monthly data for maxima and minima, which now extends to July 2017.

I should not have been surprised to find that the two datasets, produced 18 months apart, are different.  The differences are not large enough to be immediately apparent (from 1850 to 2015 the increase in trend per 100 years is only 0.023 degrees Celsius for maxima and 0.007C for minima), but they are none-the-less influential.

Here’s why.

Fig. 1: BEST Tmax 2016 minus 2017 (above zero means the data has been cooled, below zero means it has been warmed.)

BEST max diff

Note the large corrections before 1910, but the overall effect is minor.

Fig. 2:  BEST Tmin 2016 minus 2017

BEST min diff

I have shown the zero value, meaning no adjustment.  Note the large adjustments pre-1910 (but at different times to maxima); apart from two short periods, the whole series is WARMED by about 0.1C; I have marked with arrows the period from the late 1950s to the early 1980s when adjustments were minimal; but note the sudden drop (from January 1983) with recent minima WARMED by about 0.1C.

They have warmed the present and pre-1950, but left the cool 1950 – 1980 period largely alone.   What effect would this have?

Not much if you are looking only at temperature- they certainly can’t be accused of the more usual cooling the past and warming the present.  But if you are looking to find fingerprints of greenhouse warming, this is gold.  One of the fingerprints of enhanced greenhouse warming is greater warming at night than during the day, such that the Diurnal Temperature Range decreases.

The effect is subtle.  There is virtually no change in the long term DTR trend from 1850.

Fig. 3:  Diurnal Temperature Range calculated from BEST 2016:

BEST dtr 1850 2015

Fig. 4:  DTR calculated from BEST 2017:

BEST dtr 1850 2015 2017 version

But there is much uncertainty in data before 1910 as we are told, which is why BOM climate datasets start from 1910.

Fig. 5:  DTR 1910 – 2015 from BEST 2016:

BEST dtr 1910 2015 2016 version

Fig. 6:  DTR 1910 – 2015 from BEST 2017:

BEST dtr 1910 2015 2017 version

Again, virtually no change.  Aha, I hear Global Warming Enthusiasts chortle, gotcha!

The real effect of the adjustments is on the period from 1950, when man-made atmospheric carbon dioxide began increasing rapidly.

Fig. 7:  DTR 1950 – 2015 from BEST 2016:

BEST dtr 1950 2015 2016 version

Note the linear trend value: that equates to less than -0.1C per 100 years- a clear fault with the 2016 BEST data.  But with the new, improved 2017 version, the downward trend in DTR becomes:

Fig. 8:  DTR 1950 – 2015 from BEST 2017:

BEST dtr 1950 2015 2017 version

A three-fold increase in the downward trend in DTR.  This is much better support for the narrative of strong greenhouse warming since 1950.  How convenient.  We just have to wait for the papers and publicity about new evidence for decreasing DTR.

But Global Warming Enthusiasts wouldn’t want us to look at shorter time frames, particularly starting from the dog-leg which still exists from 1983, despite BEST’s warming of the minima data since then by about 0.1C.  This graph includes data to July 2017.

Fig. 9:  DTR 1983 – 2017

BEST dtr 1983 2017 2017 version

That looks like a rather long period of increasing DTR- not good evidence for the meme.  Don’t worry, they’ll explain that by claiming it’s due to “increased cloud and rain” since 1983, and besides, you have to look at the long term trend.

So be prepared for papers and press releases spruiking new confirmation that greenhouse warming is real, as evidenced by strong DTR decrease since 1950.

And all because of almost undetectable changes to the BEST datasets.

Fake Survey: Is the “World Scientists’ Warning to Humanity” a Hoax?

November 19, 2017

The “Second Notice” released last week, with 15,364 scientist signatories from 184 countries, might be a hoax or a clever student prank.

What is notable and peculiar about the list of Signatories and the follow up list of Endorsers is the omissions.  No Michael Mann.  No Gavin Schmidt.  No Naomi Oreskes.  No Tim Flannery.  No Lewandowski.

James Hansen is the only eminent name I recognise.

Following on from Jo Nova’s excellent post on the recent publicity surrounding the release by the Alliance of World Scientists of their second warning to humanity, I decided to have a closer look at the AWS warning article and its 15,362 signatories, their backgrounds, and their motivation- and also, how the survey was conducted and how the Signatories and Endorsements were collected.

What I found strange is that along with the hundreds of scientists of all descriptions are theologians, philosophers, citizen scientists, renewable energy advocates, artists, musicians, photographers, a high school student- and a homeopath.

I then turned to the Endorsers, those who agree with the warning article but weren’t amongst the original Signatories.

Along with the bona fide scientists, and assorted activists, photographers, and philosophers, we find 1 wholesaler (educated in “the school of life”); 1 elementary (primary) school teacher; and 2 naturopaths.

As with the Signatories to the article, several of these later supporters entered themselves multiple times e.g. Harvey Quamme, research scientist, entered himself 3 times; David Wood, molecular genetics, entered himself twice- there were more like him.  How many more?

So I began to wonder- how well are the respondents checked, and how difficult is it to add your name- or someone elses’s?

The answer to both is: not at all.

All you have to do, dear friends, is go to their home page:

http://scientistswarning.forestry.oregonstate.edu/

Home page

Note the invitation to scientists “from any scientific discipline (e.g. ecology, medicine, economics, etc.)”

And the stipulation that “scientists only” are invited to Endorse the article.

Then click on “Endorse the Article”, and enter your details, not forgetting to confirm you are not a robot, then click save.  Your name will be added to the list of those who endorse the article.

Create Endorser

(Yes, I entered Saint Nicholas.)

Just really who are these Signatories and Endorsers? I’ve never heard of any of them (apart from James Hansen).  Are they real scientists (or homeopaths)?  Or are many of them completely fictitious, but with many real concerned individuals duped into adding their names?  And have real individuals been entered without their knowledge or consent?  How would anyone know?

It is possible to copy the lists of names into a Word document and do a word search to find how many times a particular profession is mentioned.  But look more closely at the names in various professions.  In the list of original Signatories, the names appear to be credible.  However in the list of Endorsers are some very interesting names.

The article has been endorsed by some pretty heavy hitters: amongst those who include “physics” in their entry are Albert Einstein and Ernest Rutherford.   Musicians include John Lennon and Elvis Presley.  Florence Nightingale is a nurse.  Luke Skywalker is an astronaut.  Indiana Jones is an archaeologist.

And note the name of the first respondent on the list of Endorsers.

Endorsement aaskan

Aaskan, Yushal Raseev.  Get it?

If this was a real survey, why would that entry have been left there for all to see for many days?

Check for yourself- there are sure to be many more to find.

Has this been a well-crafted, gigantic student prank?  Have we all been fooled by this farce?

The “Second Notice” of the World Scientists’ Warning to Humanity is worthless.  At the very least the survey software- at least for the Endorsing the article, and probably for the original Signatories as well-  has no security system for preventing or checking fake entries, so no one really knows if the names are real or bogus, or how many legitimate scientists really do support the article.

We know how climate change promoters ever since Hansen in 1987 have used cunning stratagems (remember “Mike’s Nature trick”?) to fool people and convince them that global warming is real.  Perhaps the whole climate change scare is a clever student prank from the 1980s that developed into a meme with a life of its own and grew and grew- the biggest practical joke ever perpetrated.

Perhaps, but it is clear that the Viewpoint article in the journal Bioscience entitled “World Scientists’ Warning to Humanity: a second notice” by Ripple et al. (2017) has no credibility and must be withdrawn.

It is a joke.

Replicating Lewis et. al. (2017): Another Junk Paper

October 9, 2017

The recently released scarey predictions about “50 degree temperatures for Sydney and Melbourne” touted by Sophie Lewis are hardly worth wasting time on.  The paper is

Australia’s unprecedented future temperature extremes under Paris limits to warming, Sophie C. Lewis , Andrew D. King  and Daniel M. Mitchel, (no publication details available).

The paper is junk.  It has some very sciencey sounding words but is at heart pure speculation.  Like most “projections” by Global Warming Enthusiasts, the predictions are untestable.  Scarey temperatures are possible IF (and only if) IPCC scenarios are valid and we get either 1.5C or 2C warming by the last decade of the century.  That’s what the paper rests on.

The paper looks at Australian summer means, Coral Sea autumn means, and New South Wales and Victorian daily January maxima.  AWAP data are used for Australia and NSW and Victoria, and HadCruT4 for the Coral Sea region (which includes most of Queensland).

I have just looked at Australian Summer Means, and that was enough for me.  Lewis et.al. say that the decadal mean from 2091-2100 may have Australia wide summer means of 2 to 2.4 degrees above the mean of 2012-13, or 30.1 to 30.5C, with resultant very high daily maxima in southern cities.

I could have saved them the trouble, and at considerably less cost.

All I needed was the AWAP data for summer means (I purchased monthly AWAP data up to 2013 a couple of years ago), and plotted it with a 2nd order polynomial (quadratic) trend line:

lewis predictions summers1

And also showing decadal means (although the first and last decades have several missing summers):

lewis predictions summers2

There: the trend line goes smack through the higher (+2 degrees) projection, so it must be right!

Only trouble is, extrapolating with a quadratic trend is not a good idea. Lots can go wrong in the meantime.

So my plot is about as useful as the Lewis et.al. paper, and that’s not much.

The Pause Update July 2017

August 11, 2017

The complete UAH v6.0 data for July have been released. I present all the graphs for various regions, and as well summaries for easier comparison. I also include graphs for the North and South Temperate regions (20-60 North and South), estimated from Polar and Extra-Tropical data.

The Pause has ended globally and for all regions including the USA, Australia, and the Southern Hemisphere, except for Southern Extra-Tropics, South Temperate, and South Polar. The 12 month mean to July 2017 for the Globe is +0.35 C.

These graphs show the furthest back one can go to show a zero or negative trend (less than 0.1 +/-0.1C per 100 years) in lower tropospheric temperatures. I calculate 12 month running means to remove the small possibility of seasonal autocorrelation in the monthly anomalies. Note: The satellite record commences in December 1978- now 38 years and eight months long- 464 months. 12 month running means commence in November 1979. The y-axes in the graphs below are at December 1978, so the vertical gridlines denote Decembers. The final plotted points are July 2017.
[CLICK ON IMAGES TO ENLARGE]

Globe:

Pause July 17 globe

The Pause has ended. A trend of +0.53C/100 years (+/- 0.1C) since February 1998 is creeping up, but the 12 month means have peaked and are heading down.

And, for the special benefit of those who think that I am deliberately fudging data by using 12 month running means, here is the plot of monthly anomalies:

Pause July 17 globe mthly

Northern Hemisphere:

Pause July 17 NH

The Northern Hemisphere Pause has well and truly ended.

Southern Hemisphere:

Pause July 17 SH

The Pause has ended but temperatures for the last 19 years are rising very slowly.

Tropics:

Pause July 17 Tropics

The Pause in the Tropics (20N to 20S) has ended and the minimal trend is now +0.52C/ 100 years.

Northern Extra Tropics:

Pause July 17 NExt

The Pause has ended and the trend is increasing, but the slowdown since 1998 is obvious.

Northern Temperate Region:

Pause July 17 Nth Temp

Using estimates calculated from North Polar and Northern Extra-Tropics data, the slowdown is obvious.

Southern Extra Tropics:

Pause July 17 SExt

The Pause has weakened but still just persists, and 12 month means have peaked.

Southern Temperate Region:

Pause July 17 Sth Temp

Using estimates calculated from South Polar and Southern Extra-Tropics data, the Pause likewise persists but has shortened.

Northern Polar:

Pause July 17 NP

The trend has increased and will continue to do so even though 12 month means are falling rapidly.  The strong trend in Arctic temperatures is due to a step change from 1995 – 2002, and the strong 2015 – 2016 El Nino.

Southern Polar:

Pause July 17 SP

The South Polar region has been cooling (-0.12C) for the entire record. Although the 12 month means may have peaked, this cooling trend will slow over the next few months, and Global Warming Enthusiasts may start to get excited.

USA 49 States:

Pause July 17 USA 49

The warming trend is increasing.

USA 48 States:

Pause July 17 USA 48

Excluding Alaska the USA has only +0.23C/ 100 years warming.  This trend will increase however.

Australia:

Pause July 17 Oz

The Pause has ended, but the trend since June 1998 has reduced from +0.42C/ 100 years to +0.3C, and since September 2002 is +0.13C.

The next graphs summarise the above plots. First, a graph of the relative length of The Pause in the various regions:

Pause length July 17

Note that the Pause has ended by my criteria in all regions of Northern Hemisphere, and consequently the Globe, and the Tropics, but all southern regions have a Pause for over half the record, including the South Polar region which has been cooling for the whole record. Note that the Tropic influence has been enough to end the Pause for the Southern Hemisphere, and the Pause is likely to disappear from all southern regions except South Polar in the next couple of months.

The variation in the linear trend for the whole record, 1978 to the present:

Trends 1978 july 17

Note the decrease in trends from North Polar to South Polar.

And the variation in the linear trend since June 1998, which is about halfway between the global low point of December 1997 and the peak in December 1998:

Trends 1998 july 17

For 19 years “global” warming has been dominated by the influence of the Tropics and North Polar regions.

The imbalance between the two hemispheres is obvious.

The Pause has disappeared from the USA, Australia, and the Southern Hemisphere, but not the Southern Extra-Tropics, South Temperate, and South Polar regions.  Interestingly, July anomalies have decreased in Northern regions but increased in Southern regions and the Tropics.  The next few months will be interesting.

Garbage In, Garbage Out

August 7, 2017

(By Ken Stewart, assisted by Bill Johnston and Phill Goode; and cross-posted with Jo Nova)

Early ABC Radio news bulletins last Wednesday morning were led by this item, which you can read in full at ABC Online.

More climate scientists needed to avoid expensive mistakes, review urges

Apparently we urgently need 77 climate scientists to predict the future of areas like the Murray-Darling Basin with climate modelling.

Interestingly, Professor McDougall of the Australian Academy of Science points out that one of those “expensive mistakes” was the $2 billion desalination plant built in Queensland as a response to the millennium drought, “which really wasn’t an indication of climate change at all”.   Why didn’t the good professor raise his voice before the money was wasted?

But I digress.

Reliable modelling and projections for the future are surely desirable.

But such modelling must be based on reliable data, and the reliability of temperature data in Australia is demonstrably poor.

Example 1:  As has been widely reported in The Australian, and by Jennifer Marohasy and Jo Nova, cold temperatures at two separate sites (and possibly many others) were altered to appear warmer, then changed back, then deleted.  The BOM gave two conflicting explanations, both of which cast grave doubt on the reliability of “raw” temperature data from an unknown number of stations.

Example 2:  After enquiring why there are frequently two different temperature readings for exactly the same minute at various weather stations, a Bureau spokesperson told me that:

Firstly, we receive AWS data every minute. There are 3 temperature values:
1. Most recent one second measurement
2. Highest one second measurement (for the previous 60 secs)
3. Lowest one second measurement (for the previous 60 secs)

(See here and here.)

In other words, Australian maximum and minimum temperatures are taken from ONE SECOND readings from Automatic Weather Stations.  Spikes due to localised gusts of hot air, or instrument error, become the maximum for the day.  (This rarely has a large effect on minima, as night time temperatures are fairly smooth, whereas during the day temperature bounces rapidly up and down.  This is shown in this plot of temperatures at Thangool Airport in Queensland on Australia Day this year.)

Thangool 26 Jan 17 1 min

And this is for the same day between 3.00pm and 4.00pm.

Thangool 26 Jan 17 3 to 4pm

As you can see the temperature spikes up and down in the heat of the day by up to one degree between one minute and the next.  But these are the temperatures at the final second of each minute: during the intervening 59 seconds the temperature is spiking up and down as well, which we know because occasionally the highest or lowest temperature for the day occurs in the same minute as a final second recording on the BOM database (usually on the hour or half hour).  This can be up or down by two or three degrees in less than 60 seconds.

This is in contrast to the rest of the world.  The WMO recommends 1 minute (60 second) averages of temperature to be recorded to combat this very problem of noisy data, and this is followed in the UK.  In the USA 5 minute (300 second) averages are calculated.

From THE WEATHER OBSERVER’S HANDBOOK by Stephen Burt (Cambridge University Press, 2012):

Observers handbook

Even without software or human interference as in Example 1, this means Australian temperature data, in particular maxima, are not reliable.

Example 3:  Historically, temperatures were observed from Liquid In Glass (LIG) thermometers.  From the 1990s, Automatic Weather Stations (AWS) were installed using Platinum Resistance Thermometers (PRT) and are now the source for daily data.  AWS thermometers are very precise, but as I showed in Example 2, their data is used idiosyncratically to record 1 second spikes, frequently resulting in higher maxima and less often slightly lower minima than a 1 or 5 minute average.

One would think that with such a major change in technology there would be comparative studies reported in the BOM’s meteorological journal or other “peer reviewed” literature.  Apparently not.

Dr Bill Johnston has investigated this and says:

Parallel data were collected all over Australia for over a decade, some until last year when thermometers were removed, at manned sites, mainly major airports (Ceduna, Sydney, Hobart, Perth, Darwin, Alice Springs, Albany, Norfolk Island, Wagga to name a few) and also met-offices such as Cobar and Giles. However, comparisons between screens were done at one site only (Broadmeadows, Melbourne, which is not even an official weather station) using PRT only and reported as a “preliminary report”, which is available (https://www.wmo.int/pages/prog/www/IMOP/WebPortal-AWS/Tests/ITR649.pdf) however, after AWS became primary instruments, as I’ve reported before, the Bureau had an internal policy that parallel liquid-in-glass thermometer data were not databased. Furthermore, they had another policy that paper-data was destroyed after 2-years. So there is nothing that is easily available…. there is also no multi-site replicated study involving screen types and thermometers vs. PRT probes ….

Deliberate destruction of data is scandalous; the only way now to compare Automatic Weather Stations (AWS) and Liquid in Glass, is to hunt for sites where there is overlap between two stations; where the AWS is given a new number. This is possible BUT the problem is that the change-over is invariably confounded with either a site move or the change to a small screen.

Therefore we suspect that the introduction and reliance on AWS has led to artificially higher maxima (and thus record temperatures) than in the past, but we have no way of knowing for sure or how much.

So we now have (1) temperatures that are altered before they even become ‘raw’ data; (2) use of one second spikes for recording daily maximum and minimum temperatures, very probably resulting in artificially high maxima and slightly lower minima; and (3) no way of telling how the resulting data compare with those from historical liquid-in-glass thermometers.

How can the CSIRO hope to produce reliable climate modelling with any number of climate scientists when the BOM cannot produce reliable temperature data?  Garbage in, garbage out.

The Pause Update: June 2017

July 19, 2017

Better late than never!  I’m sorry for the lateness of this post.  A couple of issues and events got in the way.

The complete UAH v6.0 data for June have been released. I present all the graphs for various regions, and as well summaries for easier comparison. I also include graphs for the North and South Temperate regions (20-60 North and South), estimated from Polar and Extra-Tropical data.

The Pause has ended globally and for all regions including the USA, Australia, and the Southern Hemisphere, except for Southern Extra-Tropics, South Temperate, and South Polar. The 12 month mean to June 2017 for the Globe is +0.36 C.

These graphs show the furthest back one can go to show a zero or negative trend (less than 0.1 +/-0.1C per 100 years) in lower tropospheric temperatures. I calculate 12 month running means to remove the small possibility of seasonal autocorrelation in the monthly anomalies. Note: The satellite record commences in December 1978- now 38 years and seven months long- 463 months. 12 month running means commence in November 1979. The y-axes in the graphs below are at December 1978, so the vertical gridlines denote Decembers. The final plotted points are June 2017.
[CLICK ON IMAGES TO ENLARGE]

Globe:

Pause June 17 globe

The Pause has ended. A trend of +0.49 C/100 years (+/- 0.1C) since February 1998 is creeping up, but the 12 month means have peaked and are heading down.

And, for the special benefit of those who think that I am deliberately fudging data by using 12 month running means, here is the plot of monthly anomalies:

Pause June 17 globe monthly

Northern Hemisphere:

Pause June 17 NH

The Northern Hemisphere Pause has well and truly ended.

Southern Hemisphere:

Pause June 17 SH

The Pause has ended but temperatures for the last 19 years are rising very slowly.

Tropics:

Pause June 17 Tropics

The Pause in the Tropics (20N to 20S) has ended and the minimal trend is now +0.49C/ 100 years. 12 month means are dropping fast.

Northern Extra Tropics:

Pause June 17 NExt

Northern Temperate Region:

Pause June 17 N Temp

Using estimates calculated from North Polar and Northern Extra-Tropics data, the slowdown is obvious.

Southern Extra Tropics:

Pause June 17 SExt

The Pause has weakened and shortened but still persists, and 12 month means have peaked.

Southern Temperate Region:

Pause June 17 S Temp

Using estimates calculated from South Polar and Southern Extra-Tropics data, the Pause likewise persists.

Northern Polar:

Pause June 17 NP

The trend has increased and will continue to do so even though 12 month means are falling rapidly.  The strong trend in Arctic temperatures is due to a step change from 1995 – 2002, and the strong 2015 – 2016 El Nino.

Southern Polar:

Pause June 17 SP

The South Polar region has been cooling (-0.14C) for the entire record. Although the 12 month means may have peaked, this cooling trend will slow over the next few months, and Global Warming Enthusiasts may start to get excited.

USA 49 States:

Pause June 17 US49

The Pause has ended. It will not re-appear for some time.

Australia:

Pause June 17 Oz

The Pause has ended suddenly, and will not re-appear for some time.

The next graphs summarise the above plots. First, a graph of the relative length of The Pause in the various regions:

Pause length June 17

The Pause has disappeared from Australia.

Note that the Pause has ended by my criteria in all regions of Northern Hemisphere, and consequently the Globe, and the Tropics, but all southern regions have a Pause for over half the record, including the South Polar region which has been cooling for the whole record. Note that the Tropic influence has been enough to end the Pause for the Southern Hemisphere.

The variation in the linear trend for the whole record, 1978 to the present:

Trends 1978 june17

Note the decrease in trends from North Polar to South Polar.

And the variation in the linear trend since June 1998, which is about halfway between the global low point of December 1997 and the peak in December 1998:

Trends 1998 june17

For 19 years “global” warming has been dominated by the influence of the Tropics and North Polar regions.

The imbalance between the two hemispheres is obvious.

The Pause has disappeared from the USA, Australia, and the Southern Hemisphere, but not the Southern Extra-Tropics, South Temperate, and South Polar regions. El Nino tropical heat is rapidly decreasing, with all means falling. The next few months will be interesting.

The Pause Update: April 2017

May 19, 2017

The complete UAH v6.0 data for April have finally been released. I present all the graphs for various regions, and as well summaries for easier comparison. I also include graphs for the North and South Temperate regions (20-60 North and South), estimated from Polar and Extra-Tropical data.

The Pause has ended globally and for all regions including the USA and the Southern Hemisphere, except for Southern Extra-Tropics, South Temperate, South Polar, and Australia. The 12 month mean to April 2017 for the Globe is +0.36 C and continuing steadily downwards.

These graphs show the furthest back one can go to show a zero or negative trend (less than 0.1 +/-0.1C per 100 years) in lower tropospheric temperatures. I calculate 12 month running means to remove the small possibility of seasonal autocorrelation in the monthly anomalies. Note: The satellite record commences in December 1978- now 38 years and five months long- 461 months. 12 month running means commence in November 1979. The y-axes in the graphs below are at December 1978, so the vertical gridlines denote Decembers. The final plotted points are March 2017.
[CLICK ON IMAGES TO ENLARGE]

Globe:

Pause Apr 17 globe

The Pause has ended. A trend of +0.44 C/100 years (+/- 0.1C) since March 1998 is creeping up, but the 12 month means have peaked and are heading down.

And, for the special benefit of those who think that I am deliberately fudging data by using 12 month running means, here is the plot of monthly anomalies:

Pause Apr 17 globe monthly

Northern Hemisphere:

Pause Apr 17 NH

The Northern Hemisphere Pause has well and truly ended.

Southern Hemisphere:

Pause Apr 17 SH

The Pause has ended but temperatures for the last 19 years are rising very slowly.

Tropics:

Pause Apr 17 Tropics

The Pause in the Tropics (20N to 20S) has ended and the minimal trend is now +0.45C/ 100 years. 12 month means are dropping fast.

Northern Extra Tropics:

Pause Apr 17 NExT

Northern Temperate Region:

Pause Apr 17 NTemp

Using estimates calculated from North Polar and Northern Extra-Tropics data, the slowdown is obvious.

Southern Extra Tropics:

Pause Apr 17 SExT

The Pause has weakened and shortened but still persists, and 12 month means have peaked.

Southern Temperate Region:

Pause Apr 17 STemp

Using estimates calculated from South Polar and Southern Extra-Tropics data, the Pause likewise persists.

Northern Polar:

Pause Apr 17 NP

The trend has increased rapidly and will continue to do so even though 12 month means have started to fall.  There is an argument for saying that no recent pause is visible, but there was one for the first 16 years.

Southern Polar:

Pause Apr 17 SP

The South Polar region has been cooling (-0.16C) for the entire record. Although the 12 month means may have peaked, this cooling trend will slow over the next few months.

USA 49 States:

Pause Apr 17 USA49

The Pause has ended. It will not re-appear for some time.

Australia:

Pause Apr 17 Oz

The Pause is still 21 years 2 months- well over half the record.

The next graphs summarise the above plots. First, a graph of the relative length of The Pause in the various regions:

Pause length Apr 17

Note that the Pause has ended by my criteria in all regions of Northern Hemisphere, and consequently the Globe, and the Tropics, but all southern regions have a Pause for over half the record, including the South Polar region which has been cooling for the whole record. Note that the Tropic influence has been enough to end the Pause for the Southern Hemisphere.

The variation in the linear trend for the whole record, 1978 to the present:

Trends 78 now Apr 17

Note the decrease in trends from North Polar to South Polar.

And the variation in the linear trend since June 1998, which is about halfway between the global low point of December 1997 and the peak in December 1998:

Trends June 98 now Apr 17

The imbalance between the two hemispheres is obvious. The lower troposphere over Australia has been strongly cooling for 18 years and 11 months- over half the record.  The Pause has disappeared from the USA and the Southern Hemisphere, but not the Southern Extra-Tropics, South Temperate, and South Polar regions, or Australia. El Nino tropical heat is rapidly decreasing, with all means falling. The next few months will be interesting.

The Pause Update: March 2017

April 15, 2017

The complete UAH v6.0 data for March have been released. I present all the graphs for various regions, and as well summaries for easier comparison. I also include graphs for the North and South Temperate regions (20-60 North and South), estimated from Polar and Extra-Tropical data.

The Pause has ended globally and for all regions including the USA and the Southern Hemisphere, except for Southern Extra-Tropics, South Temperate, South Polar, and Australia. The 12 month mean to March 2017 for the Globe is +0.40 C- down 0.12 C in four months.

These graphs show the furthest back one can go to show a zero or negative trend (less than 0.1 +/-0.1C per 100 years) in lower tropospheric temperatures. I calculate 12 month running means to remove the small possibility of seasonal autocorrelation in the monthly anomalies. Note: The satellite record commences in December 1978- now 38 years and four months long- 460 months. 12 month running means commence in November 1979. The y-axes in the graphs below are at December 1978, so the vertical gridlines denote Decembers. The final plotted points are March 2017.
[CLICK ON IMAGES TO ENLARGE]

Globe:

Pause Mar 17 globe

The Pause has ended. A trend of +0.41 C/100 years (+/- 0.1C) since February 1998 is creeping up, but the 12 month means have peaked and are heading down.

And, for the special benefit of those who think that I am deliberately fudging data by using 12 month running means, here is the plot of monthly anomalies:

Pause Mar 17 globe monthly

Northern Hemisphere:

Pause Mar 17 NH

The Northern Hemisphere Pause has well and truly ended.

Southern Hemisphere:

Pause Mar 17 SH

The Pause has ended but temperatures for the last 19 years are rising very slowly.

Tropics:

Pause Mar 17 Tropics

The Pause in the Tropics (20N to 20S) has ended and the minimal trend is now +0.43C/ 100 years. 12 month means are dropping fast.

Northern Extra Tropics:

Pause Mar 17 NExT

Northern Temperate Region:

Pause Mar 17 NTemp

Using estimates calculated from North Polar and Northern Extra-Tropics data, the slowdown is obvious.

Southern Extra Tropics:

Pause Mar 17 SExT

The Pause has weakened and shortened but still persists.

Southern Temperate Region:

Pause Mar 17 STemp

Using estimates calculated from South Polar and Southern Extra-Tropics data, the Pause likewise persists.

Northern Polar:

Pause Mar 17 N polar

The trend has increased rapidly and will continue to do so even though 12 month means have started to fall.

Southern Polar:

Pause Mar 17 S polar

The South Polar region has been cooling (-0.17C) for the entire record. With 12 month means still rising, this cooling trend will slow over the next few months.

USA 49 States:

Pause Mar 17 USA49

The Pause has ended. It will not re-appear for some time.

Australia:

Pause Mar 17 Oz

The Pause is still 21 years 5 months- well over half the record.

The next graphs summarise the above plots. First, a graph of the relative length of The Pause in the various regions:

Pause Mar 17 Length

Note that the Pause has ended by my criteria in all regions of Northern Hemisphere, and consequently the Globe, and the Tropics, but all southern regions have a Pause for over half the record, including the South Polar region which has been cooling for the whole record. Note that the Tropic influence has been enough to end the Pause for the Southern Hemisphere.

The variation in the linear trend for the whole record, 1978 to the present:

Pause Mar 17 Trends 78

Note the decrease in trends from North Polar to South Polar.

And the variation in the linear trend since June 1998, which is about halfway between the global low point of December 1997 and the peak in December 1998:

Pause Mar 17 Trends 98

The imbalance between the two hemispheres is obvious. The lower troposphere over Australia has been strongly cooling for 18 years and 10 months- over half the record.  The Pause has disappeared from the USA and the Southern Hemisphere, but not the Southern Extra-Tropics, South Temperate, and South Polar regions, or Australia. El Nino tropical heat is rapidly decreasing, with all means except the South Polar region falling. The next few months will be interesting.