Not exact matches
Given that we're mainly looking at the
global mean surface temperature
anomaly, the most appropriate
comparison is for the net forcings for each scenario.
Given that we're mainly looking at the
global mean surface temperature
anomaly, the most appropriate
comparison is for the net forcings for each scenario.
I had attempted a similar project at the 3rd conference with my poster «
Comparison of Climate Forecasts: Expert Opinions vs. Prediction Markets» in which my abstract proposed the following: «As an experiment, we will ask participants to go on the record with estimates of probability that the
global temperature
anomaly for calendar year 2012 will be equal to or greater than x, where x ranges in increments of 0.05 °C from 0.30 to 1.10 °C (relative to the 1951 - 1980 base period, and published by NASA GISS).»
Comparison of
global lower troposphere temperature
anomaly over the oceans (blue line) to a model based on the first derivative of atmospheric CO2 concentration at Mauna Loa (red line).
Hocker's Figure 2 shows a
comparison of the observed and modeled
global ocean temperature
anomaly:
«Fig 1:
Comparison of different methods and re-constructions of
global and hemispheric temper - ature
anomalies.
Now for my favorite
comparison, the
global anomaly maps from the NOAA and the NCEP, via Weatherbell.
My point, is that the US is only about 2 % of the
global surface area, and the data you began the post with, was a
comparison of the
global temperature
anomalies.
The
comparison of the PDO with the
global surface
anomaly does in fact show that surface temperatures do follow the PDO.