Global Temperature Trend Update: October 2011

|

Every month University of Alabama in Huntsville climatologists John Christy and Roy Spencer report the latest global temperature trends from satellite data. Below are the newest data updated through October, 2011.

Monthly Global Average Temperatures Satellite Data

Temperatures fall as La Niña sets up

Global Temperature Report: October 2011

Global climate trend since Nov. 16, 1978: +0.14 C per decade


October temperatures (preliminary)

Global composite temp.: +0.11 C (about 0.20 degrees Fahrenheit) above 30-year average for October.

Northern Hemisphere: +0.17 C (about 0.31 degrees Fahrenheit) above 30-year average for October.

Southern Hemisphere: +0.06 C (about 0.11 degrees Fahrenheit) above 30-year average for October.

Tropics: -0.06 C (about 0.11 degrees Fahrenheit) below 30-year average for October.

September temperatures (revised):

Global Composite: +0.29 C above 30-year average

Northern Hemisphere: +0.30 C above 30-year average

Southern Hemisphere: +0.27 C above 30-year average

Tropics: +0.18 C above 30-year average

(All temperature anomalies are based on a 30-year average (1981-2010) for the month reported.)

Notes on data released Nov. 4, 2011:

Temperatures in both hemispheres and the tropics dropped through October as a new La Niña Pacific Ocean cooling event strengthened in the ocean west of Ecuador, Peru and Colombia, according to Dr. John Christy, a professor of atmospheric science and director of the Earth System Science Center at The University of Alabama in Huntsville.

Go here for the monthly temperature datasets. 

NEXT: The "Ice Cream of the Future" Goes the Way of Solyndra

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Still wondering why last year’s El Nino isn’t labelled as such.

    1. Do you really wonder why?

      Repeat after me: warming = global warming; cooling = anomaly

      1. Do you really wonder why?

        Repeat after me: warming = global warming; cooling = anomaly

        Don’t be an ass MLG. Spencer is a skeptic.

    2. Because it wasn’t? We are nearing the end of a two-year La Nina.

      1. Bullshit. Even the warmists are saying it was a an El Nino.

    3. There have been other El Nino’s since 1998.

      They are not labeled either.

  2. Can we just copy/paste the comments from last month and skip this one?

    1. Why not, the article’s just copied and pasted from the University of Alabama in Huntsville.

      1. eh…i think Ron is going for “see the world is warming but not so much. So AGW is real but is exaggerated” Which is of course bullshit…if the signal is weak, which it is, then there is no way to determine if it is man made or not.

        Also all the other temperature records are mostly bullshit. So he uses the satellite one.

        Also it is good he uses this one because all the warmists hate it because it is more reliable, accurate and the methodology and data that produced it is transparent and replicable…and does not have a hockey stick shape.

    2. Here’s my copy and paste:

      “I’m yawning. I’m yawning some more. AND, zzzzzzz.”

    3. [insert my standard complaint here]

  3. That sure looks like a sine wave around the average. The period is roughly 30 years. If the 13 month average starts to decline, what will the explanation be?

    1. Yeah, last month we asked about that new black line, and it turns out the author stuck that in just to see how it might line up with the data.

      1. ARRRRRGGGGGGG!!!!!

        Here is Spencer’s blog.

        http://www.drroyspencer.com/

        Here is what he says about the new black line:

        The 3rd order polynomial fit to the data (courtesy of Excel) is for entertainment purposes only, and should not be construed as having any predictive value whatsoever.

        1. NOW!

    2. So the global climate might be cyclical and not necessarily driven by manmade whatever? I am shocked!

  4. Australian temperatures

    Jonathan Lowe, an Australian statistician, has performed extensive analysis of weather data recorded at fixed times by Australia’s Bureau of Meteorology (BoM). This analysis is available at his blog, A Gust of Hot Air. The data comes from 21 weather stations manned by professional meteorologists.

    This work needs to be brought to a wider audience because it paints a very different climate picture to the global land datasets based on minimum and maximum temperatures ? GISS, HadCRUT and the recent BEST analysis.

    I’ll present his discoveries in three parts, as there appear to be three significant elements in his work.

    Using a minimum and maximum temperature dataset exaggerates the increase in the global average land surface temperature over the last 60 years by approximately 45%

    Almost all the warming over the last 60 years occurred between 6am and 12 noon

    Warming is strongly correlated with decreasing cloud cover during the daytime and is therefore caused by increased solar insolation

    I’ll then add a part 4 covering some additional analysis of mine

    Reduced anthropogenic aerosols (and clouds seeded by anthropogenic aerosols) are the cause of most the observed warming over the last 60 years

  5. And the cultists continue to cling to their failed religion. How pathetic and sad.

    1. When people stop believing in God the danger is not that they will believe in nothing. It is that they will believe in anything.

      Regardless of your opinion of religion, people seem to really desire and need it. AGW is just another example of this.

      1. Some people may, John, including you. I certainly don’t, and there are many others on this board who don’t.

        1. Most people do. It is just that some call their “religions” other things like political ideology, mysticism, new ageism, or environmentalism or something. Dr. Spocks are pretty damned rare.

          1. So you believe it’s good to believe in something untrue if it has good effects for society? Utilitarian nonsense. The only good argument for a religion would be that it is true. Faith in faith is relativist bullshit.

    2. cling to their false religion of the agricultural city-STATE by artificially restricting the free movement of people across the land.
      Officer, am I free to gambol?

      1. HI MISS RECTAL ITS COOTER DID YOU ENJOY THAT SWEET TEA I MADE YOU? I MADE IT EXTRA SWEET JUST LIKE YOU!

        1. So white Indian is a sock puppet of Rather?

          Or does Rather actually believe this stuff now?

          I always thought she was simply a run of the mill democrat?

          1. Where WI posts, rather is bound to be there too. At least that’s what I’m noticing.

  6. Global climate trend since Nov. 16, 1978: +0.14 C per decade

    Where the hell are you getting this number?

    Cuz it sure as hell is not on Spencer’s website that i can find.

    1. Global climate trend since Nov. 16, 1978: +0.14 C per decade

      Where the hell are you getting this number?

      Its at the bottom of the data page.

      http://vortex.nsstc.uah.edu/da…..glhmam_5.3

    2. My program calculates the same number:

      http://www.heurtley.com/richar…..111104.png

      1. What number do you get from 2001 to 2011?

  7. Are these land temperatures? Shouldn’t ocean temperatures matter more?

    1. Are these land temperatures?

      No, they are lower troposphere.

      1. And the lower troposhere shows less warming than the surface, which is the exact opposite of what AGW theory says should happen.

        The state of climate science is such a joke that the scientists can’t even agree on what the best freaking method is for collecting the data.

        1. I think you are thinking of the upper troposphere.

          The surface pretty much is the lower troposphere.

          And yes the upper atmosphere should be raising faster then the surface if AGW is correct. CO2 is an atmospheric gas so one would expect that warming to actually be where that gas is….rather then where the dirt is.

          And it is not warming but in fact cooling:

          http://www.drroyspencer.com/wp…..2-2011.png

  8. Millions of people have died since I wrote my book. Millions!

  9. Here is an interesting article talking about satellite records (which the above graph is generated from) and how they compare with the new BEST temperature records.

    http://climateaudit.org/2011/1…..s-on-best/

    The BEST and CRU series run hotter than TLT satellite data

    1. Are they still pulling the tow-the-lionshare of temperature records from the land-based Stevenson Screens like they did back in the 90s and early aughts?

  10. The “trend” function looks like a negative sine graph.

    1. It’s a third order polynomial. Curve fitting like that is an art because you can choose the number of “bumps” in your fit. The third order polynomial looks like a sine wave and suggests that future temperatures are going down. All the other polynomial fits suggest that future temperatures are going up. None of it has any predictive ability.

      1. Once again I quote Spencer:

        The 3rd order polynomial fit to the data (courtesy of Excel) is for entertainment purposes only, and should not be construed as having any predictive value whatsoever.

      2. Not to pile on, but Richard is right. Any 3rd order polynomial that starts off at zero and begins with a negative slope is going to turn back towards zero (possibly going into positive territory) and then drop off again with a negative slope. I think Dr. Spencer does it just to piss off Jim Hanson and the RealClimate guys.

  11. Why do I release has been garbage information

  12. Why do I release has been garbage information
    http://www.foodchem.com/

  13. Don;t know why last year’s El Nino isn’t labelled as such.

  14. Exactly what you are indicating is completely true. I am aware that everyone have got to say the same thing, however I just think which you input it in a way that everyone can fully grasp. Also I enjoy the pictures you spend hey. They fit so effectively with what you are saying. I know youll attain so many individuals with what you’ve got to express.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.