Sentences with phrase «temperature anomalies»

In other words, the ocean is not a simple 1 - D slab that diffuses temperature anomalies down from the surface.

Figure 1: Dates of large historical eruptions (Siebert et al., 2011) within the last 600 years that likely caused significant Northern Hemisphere negative temperature anomalies as noted and ranked by Briffa et al. (1998).

I am really impressed by the spatial correlation between the model run and the actual temperature anomalies.

Using the known amplification of the solar cycle (and presumably the long term trend) in the UV band, allowing stratospheric temperatures and circulation patterns to adjust and including the direct radiative forcings from the sun and volcanoes, we found that it gave temperature anomalies and spatial patterns that were in fair agreement with the observations (Shindell et al, 2003).

Most of the images showing the transient changes in global mean temperatures (GMT) over the 20th Century and projections out to the 21st C, show temperature anomalies.

If this is correct, than sea ice will be much greater this summer than in recent years because northern hemisphere temperature anomalies have been low this winter.

In saying Monckton was more right than wrong, I was referring to the comparison of the IPCC scenarios for temperature anomalies compared to actual results over recent years.

I have a general question on the temperature anomalies.

In addition, if you regress NASA GISS temperature anomalies on year for 1999 - 2008 («the past 10 years») you get a statistically significant rising trend.

They adjust the temperature anomalies of urban stations by comparison with close by rural ones.

Why don't you get a list of CO2 levels and global temperature anomalies for each year since 1910 and see what correlation they have?

To continue with my previous comment, I've created an image which compares a graph of Atlantic tropical storm systems to a graph of global surface air temperature anomalies from 1851 to 2004:

Getting past the number crunching, it summarizes the impact of temperature anomalies as: +1.5 — «Systems are cracking» (e.g. Greenland, WAIS, permafrost.

Here's the background: «As far as the NOAA issue goes, the use of a baseline to calculate temperature anomalies relates to the issue of what is meant by «anomaly».

So, how should somewhat complex matters relating to average global surface temperature anomalies be reported in the media?

The details are described in the previous link, but the basic issue is that temperature anomalies have a much greater correlation scale (100's of miles) than absolute temperatures — i.e. if the monthly anomaly in upstate New York is a 2ºC, that is a good estimate for the anomaly from Ohio to Maine, and from Quebec to Maryland, while the absolute temperature would vary far more.

Because of the importance of interpolation, I do not think that would be the solution for temperature anomalies from station data.

Once it is published, the historical HadCRUT global temperature anomalies will also be updated.

Of course I've seen the often used IPCC TAR result here showing that modelling results combining natural and anthropogenic forcings reproduce 20th century global mean surface temperature anomalies relative to the 1880 to 1920 mean.

«On May 22nd, 2014, global sea surface temperature anomalies spiked to an amazing +1.25 degrees Celsius above the, already warmer than normal, 1979 to 2000 average.

You must, therefore, be able to determine what the temperature anomalies (w.r.t 1951 - 80 mean as per GISS) for those 3 years — if Pinatubo had not taken place.

Among these deniers» points are items such as local temperature anomalies, erratic cause and effect timelines, claims that the climate is projected to actually cool -LRB-!)

It turns out that while the actual temperature at a point is not very representative of the actual temperature at nearby points, the temperature anomalies are.

Here are the mean global annual temperature anomalies for 2001 to 2006 (NASA GISS):

Isn't this a deliberate manipulation of data, which results in far lower temperature anomalies being reported by NOAA as «data»?

When I look up the temperature anomalies relative to the base period 1951 - 1980 for Nov 2014 at http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp I find a change of 0.65 °C for GLB.Ts + dSST.txt and 0.78 °C for NH.Ts + dSST.txt.

Figure 3: Comparison of temperature anomalies from RSS satellite data (red) over the Moscow region (35ºE — 40ºE, 54ºN — 58ºN) versus Moscow station data (blue).

For global temperature anomalies, we are doing pretty well.

I have come to see modeling global temperature anomalies as a similar pastime.

Ok, the models have done a pretty good job of estimating global temperature anomalies.

OK, Are there some simple projections of the MSU lower troposphere temperature anomalies that we could watch come (mostly) true over the next year or two?

(The specific dataset used as the foundation of the composition was the Combined Land - Surface Air and Sea - Surface Water Temperature Anomalies Zonal annual means.)

one they can understand... and that really needs to be in terms of physical temperature anomalies.

I regressed NASA GISS temperature anomalies 2001 - 2008 on year and got a positive slope that was statistically insignificant.

On particular case in point was this past winters extremely warm periods, in fact as I can recall Michael Mann write, about North Americas sea of red temperature anomalies of January as something which is supposed to happen «20 years» from now.

As confirmation, the correlation between CO2 levels and CRU temperature anomalies (see above) is r = 0.912, p < 1.43 x 10 ^ -64.

It's long been known that El Niño variability affects the global mean temperature anomalies.

I'm also interested in knowing how to reason about the effect of snow cover on temperature anomalies, just for its own sake.

And a study by Evan et al (2009) The Role of Aerosols in the Evolution of Tropical North Atlantic Ocean Temperature Anomalies

It is also used by both GISS and Hadley Met Centre for calculating temperature anomalies against 30 year base periods.

However, it is unknown if the temporal variability of these aerosols is a key factor in the evolution of ocean temperature anomalies.

Those who are crowing about the recent «cooling» need only do one thing: pick a set of temperature anomalies, Hadley or GISS, for example, and plot 10 year and 30 year trends.

All siding with its infinite growth paradigm, so I'm not surprised to see you writing counter-pieces to the harsh truth, which, as it stands, is that we have a pretty much dead and severely warming ocean, daily record - breaking jet - stream related weather incidents, which in turn are caused by polar temperature anomalies of +20 C as of late.

(G) Northern Hemisphere average proxy temperature anomalies (10 - year means) reconstructed by Mann et al. (26) on the basis of two approaches (CPS, composite plus scale; EIV, error in variables) and by Moberg et al..

Sorry I should have been more precise in my previous post and given UAH SH land temperature anomalies: Jul: +0.26 C Aug: -0.56 C Sep: +0.24 C http://vortex.nsstc.uah.edu/data/msu/t2lt/uahncdc.lt I don't have the RSS figures to hand but they won't be very different in any event.

Note that the UV variations are strongly disproportionate to the integrated TSI change, and can reach up to 100 % variation (depending on the wavelength interval), ~ 6 % at UV wavelengths in the stratosphere, and temperature anomalies of ~ 1000 K in the very uppermost regions of the atmosphere; section 4 of the Gray et al. paper discussed UV changes and stratospheric feedbacks.

Micro-site effects and their timing are not coherent over thousands of kilometers — large scale temperature anomalies are.

With 150k sq km gap between today's SIE & the maximum - so - far suggests the region that will decide when this year's maximum appears will be the Bering Sea rather than the high Arctic that saw record temperature anomalies.

I've seen the blue blobs of temperature anomalies and read — as far as I am able to comprehend — the materials on the breakdown of the AMOC, along with following cryosphere melting.

It's worth noting that these kinds of comparisons work because of large distance over which the monthly temperature anomalies correlate.