RSS Data Rubbishes Hottest Year Claims
By Paul Homewood
RSS satellite data is now published for December, and confirms that global atmospheric temperatures for 2014 are nowhere near the record being touted by NOAA and NASA.
The anomaly for the year has finished at 0.256C, which ties with 2007 as only the sixth warmest year since 1979. Not only that, but last year was well below the record set in 1998, and also 2010.
It has been claimed that there is a lag before tropospheric temperatures reflect higher sea temperatures. However, monthly temperatures according to RSS peaked in June and July, a couple of months after El Nino conditions peaked, as would be expected. Since then temperatures have dropped back and stabilised.
Unless El Nino conditions strengthen during the winter, it seems unlikely that we will see any significant increase in RSS temperatures in the next few months.
We await the UAH numbers with interest, but it looks as if the much more accurate and comprehensive satellite data will confirm that the temperature standstill has just extended for another year.
Trackbacks
- Final update to a couple of graphs showing a lack of local warming | wyoskeptic
- The record closes on 2014. Was it the warmest year on record? | Fabius Maximus
- I DATI RSS E UAH NON CONFERMANO L'ANNO 2014 COME IL PIU' CALDO DI SEMPRE!
- 2014 was the third or sixth or 34th or 8000th warmest year | wryheat
Comments are closed.
NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT 
Reblogged this on the WeatherAction News Blog.
The global standstill does not seem at all odd to me. I’m now looking at individual site data for mainly but not exclusively an assortment of European sites, and am finding, somewhat to my surprise, strong evidence for a complete standstill starting in the autumn of 1987. Every data set that I have looked at so far shows no measurable increase in temperatures (in the form of monthly “anomalies” relative to the average monthly values over the period of interest) from September 1987 to the present. If you don’t go along with this I suggest that you download some data, form the anomalies as described, and fit a trend line to them for the period since autumn 1987. There’s nothing like personal involvement with the data to focus the mind on what has really been happening! The choice of starting date is not cherry picking, but is due to there being a clear discontinuity in measurements occurring at that time, evidenced by plotting cusums of the original data and the anomalies.
Acc. to RSS it seems we are now down by almost 0.1K since 2002
http://www.woodfortrees.org/graph/hadcrut4gl/from:1987/to:2016/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:2002/to:2016/trend/plot/hadcrut3gl/from:1987/to:2016/plot/hadcrut3gl/from:2002/to:2016/trend/plot/rss/from:1987/to:2016/plot/rss/from:2002/to:2016/trend/plot/hadsst2gl/from:1987/to:2016/plot/hadsst2gl/from:2002/to:2016/trend/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:1987/to:2002/trend/plot/hadcrut3gl/from:1987/to:2002/trend/plot/hadsst2gl/from:1987/to:2002/trend/plot/rss/from:1987/to:2002/trend
Still, my own data
Click to access henryspooltableNEWc.pdf
says it is -0.015 x 14 = -0.2K since 2000.
I am saying my data are probably better because I have balanced it.
It is getting cooler.
Interesting. I plan on downloading data and trying your idea. This was something I always thought made the most sense—using data from one place and looking at it long term. Hopefully using data that has not been overly adjusted.
This is the method I used:
http://blogs.24.com/henryp/2014/11/09/henryps-pool-tables-on-global-cooling/
you should study the sampling procedure, before doing anything else.
Please let me know how you get on with my Sept 1987 surmise.
Robin, as far as the UK goes at least, when looking at the sharp rise in temps between 1986 and 1990, you also need to take into account the sharp drop in the two previous years.
I don’t know whether you get the same pattern for other regions. But the drop could be a result of the El Chichon eruption in 1982.
It may be then that the real changepoint is around 1980.
Paul mate, anyone with spare time can see how certain BBC Ecowarriors try to rebut such pieces.. Eg in 2011 Note how Black misleads in the text, then the clumsy correction at the end dated 1036 http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-15538845
Interesting that he makes a big issue of error bars. They have forgotten them now they want to claim hottest years!
Yep, Blacks piece is terrible, just the school of angry anti-denialist’s stuff probably written by his amateur assistant.
– Hower we should neither be claim ing that RSS proves 2014 was NOT the warmest year, cos as you say the error bars mean any year could be anything… And do such measurement sets really tell us anything about the state of the planet ?
– Stepping back properly – who cares whether 1 year is even 2C from another ? Only thing that matters is a change that we/ecological system cant cope with, like runaway feedback etc.
Fortunately, stewgreen, runaway feedback is still as much an unknown as whether or not there is life on other planets. It’s idea in someone’s head, turned into an hypothesis and then promoted theory without actual evidence. It seems likely that it would be unstoppable, irregardless of the cause. I worry about it about as much as I do asteroids hitting the earth—as in there’s nothing I can do about.
Yep @Reality check I agree with your comment on runaway feedback
– The fallacy of over-extrapolation or slippery slope is very commonly used by warmists.
Thanks, Paul,
Your excellent graphs tell the story very well.
More difficult to read, due to the superimposed trend line, is http://images.remss.com/msu/msu_time_series.html
It would have been worthwhile if you had explained why you think we should prefer RSS rather than other sources of temperature data like HADCRUT, GISS or UAH. Or is it just that RSS happened to be first?
UAH data will be out in a couple of days, and I will report on that in due course, just as I always do with HADCRUT etc.
None of the surface datasets come out till late in January
Be interesting to see what effect this solar event has on the weather for 2015. According to the Mirror, the hole is ‘hundreds of miles across’. Gosh!
(Click on ‘this’.)
Hallo Bloke down the pub, thx for this
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/technology-science/science/nasa-pictures-reveal-huge-mysterious-4913409
This could be it, what I told you about.
There must be a dead end stop coming to the continuing decrease of the solar magnetic field strengths (FSs) as shown here:
I am not a solar specialist, but in order for the FSs to go the way up again, I think something extra-ordinary must happen on the sun.
2015 is my calculated date for this to happen….
“… RSS peaked in June and July, a couple of months after El Nino conditions peaked, …”
Sea surface temperature for the appropriate regions peaked back then. There was considerable expectation, even excitement, that there was a really strong event on the way. I don’t recall, nor find data, that the gods of climate data ever declared an “official” El Niño.
I think you have used the Multivariate ENSO index (MEI) [your post of Oct. 15] that did peak in April/May.
Nothing wrong with doing so. Just thought it is worth mentioning.
Not sure if you would class them as one of the “gods of climate data”
“Japan weather bureau declares first El Nino in five years”
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/12/10/us-elnino-japan-idUSKBN0JO0I620141210
Yes that’s right. I always stick to the MEI
Paul, have you noticed a change in RSS data? I had not updated since Oct 14 so I downloaded the whole series and there appears to be minor changes starting in Jan 1999?
All small but the reason I noticed is that in my original data 2014 is 7th warmest. The change moves 2007 from +0.256c to +0.253.
Not really anything significant, it is just I did not expect retrospective changes. Latest update on the site:-
“RSS Version 3.3 Channel TLT, TMT, TTS, and TLS – January, 2011”
http://www.remss.com/measurements/upper-air-temperature#Version%20Notes
If you haven’t noticed any changes, it is not beyond me to have screwed up my data.
Thanks, I’ll doublecheck tomorrow.
Reblogged this on The Seahawk Boys Fearless and Stupid NFL Blog and commented:
Satellite data proves that NASA/NOAA claims of 2014 being the “hottest year on record” is a lie.
This is the true picture which is this is not even close to the warmest year.
Starting with this year(2015) the global average temperatures will be in a down trend tied into prolonged minimum solar activity and the current weak maximum of solar cycle 24 ending.
The question is how weak will solar activity become going forward and how this impacts the climate to what degree?
Looking at the graph
it seems to me we will have another year of low FSs
then the north and south will cross over again
providing/proving the actual dead end stop
or else temperatures
Click to access henryspooltableNEWc.pdf
will continue to drop….
Some more thoughts.
As I have maintained and will continue to maintain unless PROVEN wrong the climate system has a tremendous amount of noise in it, it is non linear and subject to thresholds. These factors make it next to impossible to get a strong correlation with factors that influence the climate despite the fact that they do influence the climate.
This is why thus far not one climate forecast for future conditions has been correct on a consistent basis. I take that back not even one seasonal forecast in advance for climate conditions has been correct on a consistent basis much less the climate.
What I have come across in this field are people that try to justify what they say and using any means to show they are right while everyone else is wrong. The truth is they are also wrong and have yet to show otherwise. It is getting old and most of the material is the same arguments with just a different spin.
My argument is if solar parameters reach extreme enough values and stay at those values for a sufficient amount of time they will over come the noise in the climate system and exert an influence on the climate in general terms.
I am also of the opinion that given solar changes will never result in the same climatic out come due to the beginning initial state of the earth in regards to present climate, land /ocean arrangements ,random terrestrial or extra terrestrial events and so on. The best that can be done is to forecast a general climatic trend.
This is why when I hear the climate will do this or that because of this or that to a point of exactness I just shake my head. Another annoying point is so many try to relate the climate to one particular item which will rule the vast climatic system which is ridiculous with the exception of the sun. Which we know that if it is variable enough it will exert an influence on the climate, The argument here however is, is it variable enough. I SAY YES.
In conclusion I think this field is in a state of complete disarray and needs to be approached in an entirely different manner. A more humble approach for lack of a better word.
http://www.solen.info/solar/polarfields/polar.html
As one can see there is no end in site to the weakening magnetic filed of the sun. It has a long way to and the AP index will show this to be the case as we move forward into this decade and this value
drops to 5 or lower on average.
Salvatore says
The development of the solar polar field strength throughout a solar sunspot cycle can be used to predict the magnitude of the next cycle and the peak of the current cycle. Polar field reversals typically occur within a year of sunspot maximum. It is not uncommon for the northern and southern polar fields to have significant differences in field strength and develop asynchronously over time. The Wilcox Solar Observatory has been collecting solar polar field data since 1975. Non-filtered data can be viewed in this plot. Below you will find a plot where only the filtered (by a 20 nHz lowpass filter) field strength data is displayed. Vertical lines representing field reversals and sunspot cycle min/max have been added to increase the potential usefulness of the plot.
The northern polar field changed polarity first in June 2012, then weakened and was near neutral in March 2014. The southern polar field reversed in July 2013. During the previous similar polarity reversal in 1989-1991 the northern polar field reversed 14 months prior to the southern polar field reversal.
Henry says
I am expecting to see another change in polarity within 1-2 years, this is what all my collected data is telling me.
However, I am not an expert on the sun. I don’t know why the experts cannot tell us?
Solar activity will start it’s downward march this year and will not bottom until 2022 or so followed by solar cycle 25 which should be weaker then weak solar cycle 24.
The AMO is also due to head south around then.
If you are right, we’d better start wrapping up!
Looks like those of us in the USA need to start wrapping up now. Another “blast of arctic air” is on its way and new low records are being set everywhere. If it’s going to get colder, we’ll need to add more layers!
Solar cycle 24 is still in it’s maximum state 7 years after it started which means the cycle according to this data has not even started it’s decline which is indicating this solar cycle will be some 14 years in length.
. I don’t know why the experts cannot tell us?
Because the have been faked out by the sun ever since it entered this prolonged minimum phase of activity which started in late 2005. They have been way off and are way off currently as the sun has yet to decline from this weak maximum which the so called experts said it would by now.
They also failed to predict the extreme solar lull of 2008-2010, and how weak but prolonged this cycle would be.
@Salvatore
Looking at the data (from temperature and precipitation) do you agree with me that the future of the next 40 yrs of the suns’s FSs must be the exact mirror of this
??
40 years , counting from 2016
i.e. 2016-2056
For those interested:
low solar FSs means that more energetic particles are able to escape from the sun. The sun is now brighter than ever.
The reaction of earth to this reaction [to protect us] is completely different: the atmosphere starts to produce more ozone, peroxides and nitrogenous oxides. This deflects more sunlight….
hence it is cooling.