Aug 09 2007
Let’s Assume that the Surface Station Data is Wrong…
… how does one explain the observed temperature increase in the satellite data?
The huge increase in the Global, Land, and Ocean plots below in 1998 is due to the super-strong El Nino.
|
As predicted, the temperature increase over the land…
|
…is greater than the temperature increase over the ocean.
|
The Land-Ocean plot is semi-interesting because there is a multi-decadal signal in there. At least it appears that way in this limited time series.
|
(No Ratings Yet)
Loading ...Related Posts:
One Response to “Let’s Assume that the Surface Station Data is Wrong…”
To reduce spam, comments are automatically closed 30 days after the last comment. If you would like to comment on any closed thread, please use the contact form at the top of this page.
That multi-decadal signal is interesting. I’ve just been reading Camp and Tung’s new paper finding a .16C warming from solar min to solar max in surface temperatures. The first thought I got after reading it is we’re right in the middle of the solar minimum so that should mean a .16C solar warming from now until 2013 - on top of the ~.18 CO2 warming. I doubt we’ll be hearing the “hasn’t warmed since 1998″ argument in 2013.
I seem to recall reading somewhere that the solar signal should be even greater in the troposphere. The peaks and troughs seem to coincide with the solar maximum/minimums so it’d be interesting to see similar analysis done on the UAH and/or RSS data.
[Response: The above wasn't really a "analysis", it was just something I put up quick because I didn't know what to post for today.
But you've given me a good idea for tomorrow. Thanks.]