M.O 2007 second warmest year

[Bobby]

I have checked the CET figures and will declare that the CET for 2007 was rather underwhelming joint 10th warmest. But that wouldn't make a very sensational headline, would it?

2006 10.82

1999 10.63

1990 10.63

1949 10.62

2002 10.60

1997 10.53

1995 10.52

2003 10.50

1989 10.50

2007 10.48

2004 10.48

1959 10.48

Also, as a bit of fun, I will declare that 2007 was actually the joint 2nd coldest CET for the last 6 years.

That's just cherry picking the data to see what you want to see. The warmest ever 2 year period was the last 2 years. The warmest 5 year period is the last 5 years. The warmest 10 year period is the last 10 years and so on.

How could we be cooling or plateauing when the last 2 years are the warmest ever? And the other periods above...

[noggin]

That's just cherry picking the data to see what you want to see.

It is indeed cherry-picking. I was just doing what the "other side" ( ) does.

Please don't anyone say anything about my use of the words "other side"....I'm tired!

[Essan]

Only one of the past 4 yrs features in the top four global temp record breakers, surely if CO2 is going up and up and that is directly related to temp then this does not fit??

Only if CO2 is the only factor determining annual temps

ie if CO2 levels remained constant would every year be the same temperature? Obviously not. Some years have always been warmer than others. Therefore what would expect to see is a continuation of this see-sawing of temps, but with a definable, underlying upward trend caused by increased CO2 levels. Which is exactly what the data current shows.

It's even possible for temps to drop over the next 20 years and yet for AGW to still be real, still be happening ......

[Anti-Mild]

With our 'arctic enhanced' monsoonal summer I'd not be surprised at a more 'normal' temp but no! it is still up there with the warmest!

Where would it have been without the input of the 'arctic drift'?

Had April not been so noteworthy and come in at average then the annual CET would have been 10.22c, which would have made it the 7th coldest in the last 20 years and a fair bit lower than the 10 year rolling average of 10.49c

Obviously it is entirely incidental but it is interesting nevertheless.

[Stratos Ferric]

Only one of the past 4 yrs features in the top four global temp record breakers, surely if CO2 is going up and up and that is directly related to temp then this does not fit??

Let me get this right HP, because it's a belief that seems to persist. Are you suggesting that for CO2 to be implicated in GW, and that because CO2 increases year on year, the global temperature should increase every year?

If so, can you explain two things to me.

1 - why do global anomalies not flux up and down during the year in synch with changing CO2 concentration (there is a seasonal pattern trelated to the growing season if I remember rightly);

2 - why would the normal variation in global temperature which has always gone on and which fluctuates by anything upto 0.2C fropm year to year suddenly have disappeared?

I have checked the CET figures and will declare that the CET for 2007 was rather underwhelming joint 10th warmest. But that wouldn't make a very sensational headline, would it?

2006 10.82

1999 10.63

1990 10.63

1949 10.62

2002 10.60

1997 10.53

1995 10.52

2003 10.50

1989 10.50

2007 10.48

2004 10.48

1959 10.48

Also, as a bit of fun, I will declare that 2007 was actually the joint 2nd coldest CET for the last 6 years.

That's it the Noggin, we're definitely cooling. I'm convinced.

Had April not been so noteworthy and come in at average then the annual CET would have been 10.22c, which would have made it the 7th coldest in the last 20 years and a fair bit lower than the 10 year rolling average of 10.49c

Obviously it is entirely incidental but it is interesting nevertheless.

I think we all have to accept that the outturn was the outturn: playing endless games of if this hadn't happened, or that, really is cherry picking of the very highest order. The fact is that what happened did happen. Four very warm months, a run of close to average or cool months, and we end up 10th on the all time list.

[jacksdad]

Many thanks to USA, China and India for your outstanding contribution.

[Hiya]

With our 'arctic enhanced' monsoonal summer I'd not be surprised at a more 'normal' temp but no! it is still up there with the warmest!

Where would it have been without the input of the 'arctic drift'?

What's that when it's at 'home'?

[noggin]

That's it the Noggin, we're definitely cooling. I'm convinced.

Do I detect a little irony there, Stratos?

[Stratos Ferric]

Do I detect a little irony there, Stratos?

No, seriously, I'm convinced. However, by extrapolation of the same logic, if in future we set a new record high then the case will fall flat again I guess - or am I wrong? Will there then be some other reason for a new record having been set; might it just be a fluke, will we attribute, say, El Nino?

What's that when it's at 'home'?

I suspect GW is attributing our cool summer to the excessive arctic melt. I have to say I've seen no evidence to suggest that this was the case, but that's not to say that he hasn't. If we get the same again this year in both cases then there might start to be a more robust case; at present I'd say it was just coincidence.

[HighPressure]

Let me get this right HP, because it's a belief that seems to persist. Are you suggesting that for CO2 to be implicated in GW, and that because CO2 increases year on year, the global temperature should increase every year?

If so, can you explain two things to me.

1 - why do global anomalies not flux up and down during the year in synch with changing CO2 concentration (there is a seasonal pattern trelated to the growing season if I remember rightly);

2 - why would the normal variation in global temperature which has always gone on and which fluctuates by anything upto 0.2C fropm year to year suddenly have disappeared?

Yes we are warming or at least have been, Yes CO2 plays a role within that process, what I am looking at is ways and hints to help find what that percentage might be. As stated by Magpie the increase in Co2 is small on an annual basis and can be overcome by natural factors in individual years and its these years which give me the biggest interest. Simply these factors have been enough to make sure that just 2006 sits in the top 4 and only 2 years in the post 2000 era sit in the top 7. This is during a period of Solar max / little volcanic activity so I would expect to see some high temp years in there, especially as our temps may of artificially been held down by Sulphur emissions of the first 3 quarters of the 20th century. I find it interesting how many of the 1990's still remain in the top 10 and can't help but tentatively suggest a link with Ozone, look for yourself at the charts:

http://ozonewatch.gsfc.nasa.gov/index.html

I know you can prove anything you like with stats but that cuts both ways, there is simple nothing to suggest that CO2 does not play a 20% role as opposed to a 80% in GW. Although media hype would have you believe we seeing a succession of warmer year upon warmer year I don't see that and neither do I see a conclusive link to CO2 emissions and heres the crunch playing as significant a role in GW as some would have us believe. Thats not to say it is not but merely the trend does not really back it up with so many other factors involved to consider. I don't subscribe to the rolling average idea really as you can get a line to go in any direction you like by choosing your start date.

I am definitely not trying to suggest CO2 plays no role but it looks like a classic case of 2+2 = 5 guess what you don't understand and bang in onto humans emissions. I think we will see that CO2 is only the icing on the cake and not the cake itself, we need to learn much more and not guess at what we don't know? I am not a doubter but a questioner and these warmest year trends do not show me that human CO2 significantly alters global temps?

[noggin]

No, seriously, I'm convinced. However, by extrapolation of the same logic, if in future we set a new record high then the case will fall flat again I guess - or am I wrong? Will there then be some other reason for a new record having been set; might it just be a fluke, will we attribute, say, El Nino?

If you really are convinced, Stratos, what do you make of this:

http://www.spaceandscience.net/id16.html

Massive thanks to laserguy for drawing our attention to it on the "solar activity" thread.

[laserguy]

If you really are convinced, Stratos, what do you make of this:

http://www.spaceandscience.net/id16.html

Massive thanks to laserguy for drawing our attention to it on the "solar activity" thread.

You're welcome! And here's another:

http://newstatesman.com/print/200712190004

[Nick H]

Had April not been so noteworthy and come in at average then the annual CET would have been 10.22c, which would have made it the 7th coldest in the last 20 years and a fair bit lower than the 10 year rolling average of 10.49c

Obviously it is entirely incidental but it is interesting nevertheless.

And had July come in at its previous year's level rather than 1deg C below average then the annual CET would have been 10.85C - the highest CET on record. Such is life...

Edited January 4, 2008 by Nick H

[Stratos Ferric]

If you really are convinced, Stratos, what do you make of this:

http://www.spaceandscience.net/id16.html

Massive thanks to laserguy for drawing our attention to it on the "solar activity" thread.

I think I've commented on that in the solar thread already.

Yes we are warming or at least have been, Yes CO2 plays a role within that process, what I am looking at is ways and hints to help find what that percentage might be. As stated by Magpie the increase in Co2 is small on an annual basis and can be overcome by natural factors in individual years and its these years which give me the biggest interest. Simply these factors have been enough to make sure that just 2006 sits in the top 4 and only 2 years in the post 2000 era sit in the top 7. This is during a period of Solar max / little volcanic activity so I would expect to see some high temp years in there, especially as our temps may of artificially been held down by Sulphur emissions of the first 3 quarters of the 20th century. I find it interesting how many of the 1990's still remain in the top 10 and can't help but tentatively suggest a link with Ozone, look for yourself at the charts:

http://ozonewatch.gsfc.nasa.gov/index.html

I know you can prove anything you like with stats but that cuts both ways, there is simple nothing to suggest that CO2 does not play a 20% role as opposed to a 80% in GW. Although media hype would have you believe we seeing a succession of warmer year upon warmer year I don't see that and neither do I see a conclusive link to CO2 emissions and heres the crunch playing as significant a role in GW as some would have us believe. Thats not to say it is not but merely the trend does not really back it up with so many other factors involved to consider. I don't subscribe to the rolling average idea really as you can get a line to go in any direction you like by choosing your start date.

I am definitely not trying to suggest CO2 plays no role but it looks like a classic case of 2+2 = 5 guess what you don't understand and bang in onto humans emissions. I think we will see that CO2 is only the icing on the cake and not the cake itself, we need to learn much more and not guess at what we don't know? I am not a doubter but a questioner and these warmest year trends do not show me that human CO2 significantly alters global temps?

Agree with all the above. Re my highlight, we might be confusing significant with apparent consistency. Who's to say, for example, that this winter shouldn't really be 3C cooler than it is?

The other factor is the secondary effects of the CO2, particularly for water vapour.

NOt sure where you're getting the data from (red highlight) - this NASA Data suggests that 6 of the top 7 are in the 2000s, as does Hadley. I'd be surprised if Hadley had the numbers wrong. You're not looking at the US only data are you?

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs/U...5vs1999.lrg.gif

http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/research/hadleycentre/obsdata/

[West is Best]

Apparently last year was the 2nd warmest on record, with 9 of the 10 wamest being since 1989.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7169690.stm

woody

This hasn't done the MetO favours. The twisting of facts to produce this news piece borders on scandalous, and is typical of the increasingly quasi-religious nature of the AGW argument that distorts facts to fit, ignores ones which don't (the obvious example here being the CET which when it suits is used!) and shuts down debate in a spiral of spin.

Small wonder many are starting to question.

[jethro]

And to add further to the confusion....

Here's the Troposphere measurements: http://davidsmith1.files.wordpress.com/2008/01/0103082.jpg

[Bobby]

This hasn't done the MetO favours. The twisting of facts to produce this news piece borders on scandalous, and is typical of the increasingly quasi-religious nature of the AGW argument that distorts facts to fit, ignores ones which don't (the obvious example here being the CET which when it suits is used!) and shuts down debate in a spiral of spin.

Small wonder many are starting to question.

You spouted all that personal stuff but didn't even say explain why and how they are "twisting facts".

Edited January 5, 2008 by Magpie

[noggin]

You're welcome! And here's another:

http://newstatesman.com/print/200712190004

Keep 'em coming, laserguy, keep 'em coming!

Going back to NASA and the SSRC's findings, it will be extremely interesting to see how much media coverage it gets! If there is none, then that will be the final nail in the IPCC's coffin for me. If it does get proper coverage then I shall be delighted, as I have always firmly believed that our warmings and coolings are due to the activity of the Sun.

Re the New Statesman article...well, I've been bleating along those lines for some time (and been ridiculed ).

This is a good news day as far as I am concerned, which, as ever, is not to say that we don't need to clean up our act and show due respect to our lovely planet.

[Bobby]

Global warming stopped? NASA say 2007 was the 2nd warmest ever and both NASA and NOAA say 2005 was the warmest. The last 3 years are the warmest 5 year period recorded, the last 5 years, the last 10 years etc. All this is around time of the solar minimum and a La Nina recently.

The warming has not stopped.

Edited January 5, 2008 by Magpie

[noggin]

It looks as if we have reached some sort of impasse in the enviromental department, Magpie. We could have a "oh, yes it has" "oh, no it hasn't" type of conversation but that would be frustrating for all!

So many times, I think "oh, I can't be doing with this anymore" and yet I still do!

[Bobby]

Some things are surely just right or wrong though? Some say that in the UK there are signs of cooling over the last few years, yet 2006-2007 is the warmest 2 year period ever recorded. Before that, 2005-2006 was the warmest 2 year period in the CET ever recorded. Some have said that last year showed signs of a cool down in the UK yet it was the 2nd warmest ever, in a year of La Nina and solar minimum.

I want to know how can anybody see cooling look at these statistics? Ok, the last 6 months or so have been around average, but are you saying we can make a long term prediction of our climate from just a few months worths of data, ignoring all the trends beforehand? We had a long cool period during winter of 2005-2006 - people said this was a sign of cooldown and winters would be colder. But in 2006 we had an astonishingly warm summer, autumn and winter, smashing records for fun and having the warmest 12 month period ever recorded.

The only basis someone can have for making a claim of a cool down is from the last 6 months or so which have been more around average. But then you would be saying that 6 months is enough time to make a long term prediction of our climate which is usually taken over 30 years.

Imagine if everything was reversed please, and that world and UK temperatures had been cooling since the industrial revolution. We were coming off the back today of a period of exceptional record breaking cold. Then we have 6 months of average temps. Would you be saying then that we were starting to warm? I think not.

We really need to be objective here and common sense is very easily lost.

[noggin]

Magpie......it's the old "lies, damned lies and statistics" thing and it applies equally to both the "cooling" brigade and the "warming" brigade. Both sides will cherry-pick data so that they can produce something which will appear to confirm what they say. If the media gets hold of it as well...well, their capacity for cherry-picking and sensationalism knows no bounds!

I mentioned in an earlier post that 2007 had the joint 2nd coldest CET for 6 years. I did it to show how things can be put forward with a different complexion, whilst using exactly the same information.

Hope I haven't waffled too much.

[Gray-Wolf]

I do not think it 'un-natural' for folk to be wishing AGW away (and see natural cycles/cooling at every turn) just unrealistic.

As we have found many times before the 'timid folk' who have no stomach for reality cannot allow themselves to see the truth that so frightens them and so can never be educated as to todays reality.

Let them carry on with their mantra of "it's not happening, it's not happening, it's not happening...." and reassure one another of the same for it obviously eases their burden.

For the rest of us we'd find our time better spent by projecting the scale/extent of the changes underway and how best to survive them with as much of humanity intact as possible.

As oft mooted 'if you're not a part of the solution then you are part of the problem' and the waste of time and energy spent in attempting to enlighten folk who have no wish to be enlightened must stop.

Let's all move on eh?

[Gray-Wolf]

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/...80104091616.htm

So even with a strong La-Nina we are still to expect another 'top ten' warmest years this year. Brrrrr, this cooldown is too much.......

[noggin]

As we have found many times before the 'timid folk' who have no stomach for reality cannot allow themselves to see the truth that so frightens them and so can never be educated as to todays reality.

Let them carry on with their mantra of "it's not happening, it's not happening, it's not happening...." and reassure one another of the same for it obviously eases their burden.

Just after a bit of clarification here, Gray-Wolf........are you including me here? :o

If not, then fine.