Global Temperature Trend Update - March 2015

Earth's warmest and coldest temperature anomalies in March were both in North America.

Dreamstime: Meryll

Every month University of Alabama in Huntsville climatologists John Christy and Roy Spencer publish the latest global temperature trend data obtained from NOAA satellites. For the month of March 2015 they report:

Global Temperature Report: March 2015

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

March temperatures (preliminary)

Global composite temp.: +0.26 C (about 0.47 degrees Fahrenheit) above 30-year average for March.

Northern Hemisphere: +0.41 C (about 0.74 degrees Fahrenheit) above 30-year average for March.

Southern Hemisphere: +0.10 C (about 0.18 degrees Fahrenheit) above 30-year average for March.

Tropics: +0.08 C (about 0.06 degrees Fahrenheit) above 30-year average for March.

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

Roy Spencer

Notes on data released April 7, 2015:

March's global temperatures were highlighted by the contrast in the continental U.S., with cold in the east and warmth in the west, a pattern that persisted from January, according to Dr. John Christy, director of the Earth System Science Center at The University of Alabama in Huntsville. For the third month in a row, Earth's warmest and coldest temperature anomalies in March were both in North America.

Compared to seasonal norms, the warmest average temperature anomaly on Earth in March was in northern California, south of Modoc National Forest, where the March temperature was 3.80 C (about 6.84 degrees F) warmer than seasonal norms. Compared to seasonal norms, the coolest average temperature on Earth in March was in northeastern Quebec south of the Torngat Mountains, where the average March 2015 temperature was 3.97 C (about 7.15 degrees F) cooler than normal.

Go here for monthly global lower tropospheric satellite temperature trend data since 1979.

Comments

[Fist of Etiquette]

For the third month in a row, Earth's warmest and coldest temperature anomalies in March were both in North America.

Like a potato in a microwave.

[R C Dean]

That's it. We're done. Close the thread.

[tarran]

Dana Nuticelli, a shill for the green movement, decided to have a go at Dr Spencer, prompting Spencer to curb stomp him. It's a hoot and well worth reading in full.

To prove that Dana should probably avoid trying to interpret simple graphs, let's examine this chart he so likes, which allegedly shows that our (UAH) global temperature dataset has been continually adjusted for errors over the years, resulting in an increasing warming trend:

Danas-excellent-chart (Link removed because fuck you Reason Squirrels)

Now, setting aside the fact that (1) we actually do adjust for obvious, demonstrable errors as soon as they have been found (unlike the IPCC climate modelers who continue to promote demonstrably wrong models), and (2) RSS gets about the same (relatively benign) warming trend as we do, let's examine some other popular temperature datasets in the same manner as the above graph:

Accum_Trend

Looks a lot like Dana's plot, doesn't it?

Do you want to know why? Is it really because all those other temperature dataset providers were also busily correcting mistakes in their data, too?

No, it's largely because as the years go by, the global temperature trend changes, silly.

[R C Dean]

One thing that I find encouraging is that the Accum_Trend chart showing all the datasets over time has decreasing variances among them. They start spread over, what, .08 degrees, and end spread over probably .03.

[entropy_factor]

All this bullshit assumes an "average" or "correct" temp, and shows everything else as a deviation. As if the author, of you or I, could possibly pinpoint the "correct" temperature of the entire earth, now or ever.

[entropy_factor]

March- a .02 degree Celsius departure from the 1981-2010 average.. gee golly that sounds serious!

except not. And considering our sample is not representative of the ~4B years earth has existed, I reject this outright.

[Ron Bailey]

e-f: .02 degree?

Global composite temp.: +0.26 C

[entropy_factor]

ok, 2.6. From a 30-yr avg. It's a meaningless number.

[entropy_factor]

0.26 my decimals are acting up, I blame CO2.

[Bill]

Ron, I had a 6500 word response to your previous post and was
going to post it in 4 pieces but once there were 500 comments and
you were out of town anyway I decided not to. I pasted it into word
so I still have it. I may post it later after I walk the dogs unless
there are another 500 comments by then on this post.

It looks as though the global average is up mainly due to increases
in the Northern hemisphere. So, one could say that this is not global
warming, it is merely NH warming just like the MWP and RWP. After all,
that is the argument they use to say this time is different. We don't have
satellite or any other temp. measurements from back then, nor statistical
adjustments that show it is actually twice as bad as we thought just a few
years ago, just proxies.
Many of those do show that the earlier warm periods were not just restricted
to the NH but that does not seem to matter to the consensus position.

The world is warmer, CO2 is elevated, man does affect climate, but what
matters is to what extent.

[Entropy Void]

Well done, Namesake.

[mad.casual]

As if the author, of you or I, could possibly pinpoint the "correct" temperature of the entire earth, now or ever.

70 degrees Fahrenheit, not centigrade. Lord Kelvin can go fuck himself.

[entropy_factor]

lol, I agree with your opinion but that's my whole beef with AGW- it assumes a knowable 'correct' temp that an entire planet should be at.

To me, the hubris of that simply sets off alarms to any corrective measure proposed.

[TheZeitgeist]

All this bullshit assumes an "average" or "correct" temp, and shows everything else as a deviation. As if the author, of you or I, could possibly pinpoint the "correct" temperature of the entire earth, now or ever.

Nothing is assumed in this data or graph. The average is not static but derived from the total dataset.

In other words, the average changes with each new addition to the dataset, and is itself a dynamically computed value like the 'anomalies.'

I actually find this University of Alabama effort to be the cleanest, least massaged long-term temp-trend observation out there - with no video game 'models' anywhere in sight.

Good stuff.

[entropy_factor]

I understand what you're saying, I'm saying- this is 30 years of data for a ~4B year old planet. It's almost meaningless. Yet it will be pointed to as proof that the sky is falling.

[TheZeitgeist]

I'm saying- this is 30 years of data for a ~4B year old planet. It's almost meaningless. Yet it will be pointed to as proof that the sky is falling.

This is awesome and salient to your point:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G.....Change.png

This graph is where progtards start hating science.

[TheZeitgeist]

Shit. I read the graph wrong as well, its the 1981-2010 dataset average, that is a static value.

But it is a data-derived value for a benchmark, not some assumption of 'perfect' earth temps.

Plus there's a 13-month moving average value that is dynamic.

I'm still right generally, but derpa-derpa on me.

[Jerryskids]

Yes, all this bullsit does assume an average temperature - the average temperature being derived mathematically. If you have 500 temperatures, add them up and divide by 500, then that's your average temperature and each individual temperature deviates from the average by the amount that it, well, deviates. What don't you understand?
.
Maybe you should stop listening to John so much. The comments on that thread on "what would it take for you to believe that global warming is real?" was an embarrassment to me - embarrassing as someone who thinks of himself as a member of the commentariat here to begin with but, by the time John got done, embarrassing as a member of the hominid family.

[TheZeitgeist]

Got any links? Sounds like some good laughs await.

[R C Dean]

I dunno, I thought there were some nuggets in that thread: different and interesting ways and means of being convinced that CAGW is real.

[My Dog Bites Better Than Yours]

I was beat into my brain in Junior High School that absolute temperatures are referred as "degrees Celsius". Temperature differences are referred to as "Celsius degrees".

I don't know if this correct, or just a hold-over from a grammar nazi who hated teaching science.

/pedant

[Old Man With Candy]

I was beat into my brain in Junior High School that absolute temperatures are referred as "degrees Celsius".

That teacher should be beaten. Absolute temperature is in Kelvin.

[BigT]

Kelvins or degrees Rankine.

[Old Man With Candy]

Rankine in theory is absolute, but I have to say that in 40 years of doing science, I've never actually seen that scale used.

[wadair]

Rankine is used in mechanical engineering.

[robc]

Or Rankine.

[Hyperion]

Are we doomed yet, or do we have a couple more years? That's all I want to know. If we're doomed now, I'm quitting my job and partying like a mofo. Otherwise, I'm gonna chill. So what is it Bailey?

[Marshall Gill]

Are we doomed yet, or do we have a couple more years?.

Yes.

[Hyperion]

That's what I thought.

[PRX]

there's your problem right there there. that thermometer is a cheap POS.

[OldMexican]

the warmest average temperature anomaly on Earth in March was in northern California, south of Modoc National Forest, where the March temperature was 3.80 C (about 6.84 degrees F) warmer than seasonal norms.

That's where governor Moonbeam made his series of speeches about saving water and prosecuting showering babes.

[Sevo]

"That's where governor Moonbeam made his series of speeches about saving water and prosecuting showering babes."

Only about 40 years later than he should have been making speeches about how we need more reservoirs to keep up with the population growth.

[mad libertarian guy]

The amount of water is not the problem. It's the lack of pricing water at market rates.

[OldMexican]

I have the feeling that this post has nothing to do with Rand Paul's bid for the presidency...

[BigT]

Even socialist power sucking douche Lawrence Tribe has seen through this BS.

http://tinyurl.com/otf46gg

[Hyperion]

I just want to know if there is going to be and Rand stories today. I'm officially boycotting the site until there is one.

[Hyperion]

I mean, do people even know that he's running for president!?

[Almanian!]

Rand Paul is running for President?

Next you're going to tell me that Lou Reed is dead!! HAHAHAHA - Old Mexican - you so cray!

[Almanian!]

Huh - this response was supposed to be up a couple people (no offense, Hyperion)

I blame Anthropogenic Global Derp.

[Hyperion]

Well, I'm just pining for some Rand Paul news, and hoping that at least a few people know he's running for POTUS.

[Marshall Gill]

I blame Anthropogenic Global Derp.

I think you are on to something. The decrease in overall test scores among American school children could be the result of a miniscule increase in the amount of carbon in the air! Grant money, here I come!

[AlmightyJB]

Take that graph back to 10,000 BC and I might give a shit.

[Suthenboy]

It wouldn't tell you anything more than that one does.

I don't know what global temperatures are. Or global composite temperatures. I am pretty sure no one else does either. I challenge anyone to give me a definition that makes sense.

Perhaps is we were able to measure with precision the total number of joules globally from the top of the stratosphere to the bottom of the ocean it would be a meaningful measurement. Otherwise we are just reading tea leaves. I am simple like that.

[Francisco d'Anconia]

JESUS CHRIST! It's not going up fast enough. At this rate, Ima be dead LONG before I see any benefit.

[Steve G]

Look on the bright side, so will Al Gore..

[sloopyinTEXAS]

Since it's all adjusted anyway, shouldn't it be Global "Temperature" Trend Update"?