Tuesday, May 3, 2016

April global NCEP/NCAR down by 0.15°C; still fourth warmest month

The NCEP/NCAR index that I calculate from their reanalysis was down by 0.147°C in April, from 0.783°C to 0.636 (anomaly base 1994-2013). That is then down 0.2°C from February, and coolest for 2016, but it still warmer than any month before 2016.

Temperatures have been stable near that average level since about March 10, after some very high earlier peaks. There was this time less warmth in the Arctic (except Greenland), but a broad band of warmth through Siberia, Eastern Europe, into Africa. Cold in NE Canada; patchy in Antarctica.

Among other reports, Karsten has GFS surface down from 0.794°C to 0.706°C. Roy Spencer has UAH 6 lower troposphere down slightly, from 0.73 to 0.71°C. ENSO numbers are down, and if you watch the ENSO movie of recent weeks, you can see the equatorial jet turning to cool.



    In an email Hans wrote ...

    "The essence of science is to be able to have a discourse and discuss pro and cons about hypotheses and theories especially if you claim that the organization you represent has the intention to reach a standard that is at a scientific level. I have found that leading members of PSI show little will to discuss scientific matters and to leave out personal emotions making it close to impossible to have a meaningful dialog.

    "Doug Cotton might behave in a miserable way showing his anger towards certain scientists and PSI. Still, the book he has published contains many arguments which deserve a serious and thorough investigation. This is why I have recommended a number of Australian politicians to read what he writes. Much of it is essential in the debate of the IPCC false claims and even the future economies of western countries and even more. "


    You can't assume (like Postma and Bright-Paul) that the mean of 168W/m^2 could produce a mean temperature above 233K (-40°C) just because the radiation is variable and can reach over 1,000W/m^2 for a very small portion of Earth's surface. The variability actually leads to a LOWER mean temperature than that for steady flux. How would you explain Venus surface temperatures with your conjecture anyway?

    That's why the correct paradigm had to be discovered, as I did - https://itsnotco2.wordpress.com

    IT’S ABOUT TIME all you CLAUSIUS FANS got it into your heads that (for NON-RADIATIVE HEAT) the Clausius corollary of the Second Law* only applies in a horizontal plane wherein gravitational potential energy does not change and thus does not affect entropy. THIS IS OVERWHELMINGLY IMPORTANT IN REGARD TO PLANETARY TEMPERATURES.

    It is NOT radiation that supplies all the necessary thermal energy to maintain a planet's surface temperature - it is free (or "natural") convective heat transfer happening at the molecular level and carrying out the SECOND LAW* process of MAXIMUM ENTROPY PRODUCTION. But you will need to study my paper that arrogant people at PSI rejected in 2013.

    * Second law of thermodynamics: “In a natural thermodynamic process, the sum of the entropies of the interacting thermodynamic systems increases.” There's nothing in there about heat from hot to cold.

    1. Oh dear ... you have been Douged!!!!

  2. Every blog owner's nightmare perhaps?

    Ref. Doug Cotton’s comment – you may find of interest the review and comments relating to his booklet "Why it's not carbon dioxide after all" and the blog articles on which it is based ( see https://www.amazon.com/gp/customer-reviews/R3L4RWMLCPUD1O/ref=cm_cr_arp_d_rvw_ttl?ie=UTF8&ASIN=1478729228

  3. GISS is in. .99 ℃ for 2016. Fell a little short perhaps, but a lower hurdle for 2017!

  4. Amazing what you can achieve with a slight adjustment of the raw temperature data, but the unresolved question is what has been the real cause of any increase in the average global temperature since the Earth began recovering from the little ice age. The scientists are struggling to get a proper handle on that one, but there are plenty others around who want to scapegoat our use of fossil fuels.

    1. I'm curious about why comments are appearing on this old thread. But as for adjustment, TempLS as I publish it uses unadjusted GHCN, and gets very similar results.