So if 1998 and 2005 are neck and neck for the warmest temperature on record??

Question

Then you cannot say the temperature is warming or cooling right?? That the global temperature is at a stale mate. I've heard a few arguments that the global mean is cooling and that the global mean is still warming. I feel it is at a stale mate and that temperature is not cooling or warming just relaxing and waiting to see what move it wants to make next. Any suggestions as to why the global temps have stalled??

DJ: I agree with some of that, we know that in the past that the temps have been warmer than today including the MWP. I'm just wanting to know whether people think the trend as of now is cooling or warming and why the temps may have stalled which is what I feel the temps are doing now.

Francis K: The overall trend of 35 yrs maybe warming but from 1998-2007 it appears to be more of a stale mate considering that 1998 was the warmest then 2005 was slightly under but higher than the previous years til 1998 then now starting creep back down a bit. Since it's never gone above 1998 record but 2005 was almost as warm that the temps are just kind of lingering at one general temperature. So that gives us a ten year record to study which can be used as climatology. So what is causing this to stall and not rapidly run away since Co2 has been steadily increasing?? it's just odd to me.

Dana: 2005 and 1998 were both effected by El Nino, 1998's was just a bit stronger but if no global temperature has exceeded 1998's then how can the trend still be climbing. So if you remove the effect of El Nino in 1998, is 1998 still the warmest global temperature on record??

Trevor: What you are saying makes sense, kind of. So not following the actual global temperature of 1998 gives you the impression that temperatures are actually increasing. You don't follow the actual temperature of 1998 b/c it is an El Nino... So is it safe to say that when you statistically create this chart and do not follow the actual temperature of 1998, you are in a way eliminating El Nino's effect on that years global climate??

Darth Kreia: 2006 may have been the United States warmest year but not globally. I believe I am talking about Global Temperatures, so when you want to criticize someone's question why don't you at least read the DAMN QUESTION!!!!

Answer 1

Wrong.

If you do a simple and standard statistical analysis and apply a best fit line to the data from 1998-Present, this is what you get:

http://tamino.files.wordpress.com/2007/08/t1998.jpg

Even more recent, here is 2000-Present:

http://tamino.files.wordpress.com/2007/08/t2000.jpg

Clearly the warming continues.

Arguing that global temps have stalled based on one anomalously hot year (1998, which was warm due to an unusually strong El Nino event) is an argument about the noise which ignores the signal, as I discuss here:

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AiYUrYRGadqG8IBJkxgXFDDsy6IX;_ylv=3?qid=20071217121713AA4aAyU

In fact, that 2007 was almost as warm as 1998 even though 2007 was a cooler year in terms of both El Nino-Southern Oscillation cycles and TSI is further evidence that the warming continues, as discussed here by James Hansen:

"The natural variations of the Southern Oscillation and the solar cycle thus have minor but not entirely insignificant effects on year-to-year temperature change. Given that both of these natural effects were in their cool phases in 2007, it makes the unusual warmth this year all the more notable. It also suggests that, barring the unlikely event of a large volcanic eruption, a record global temperature exceeding that of 2005 can be expected within the next 2-3 years."

http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/mailings/20071210_GISTEMP.pdf

or discussed here by me:

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AiBHBPhyRNMzr41QhpHCsh7ty6IX;_ylv=3?qid=20071213161434AAb5f2P

No, if you remove the El Nino effect in 1998, it would not be nearly the hottest year on record. This is evident from looking at every other year in the 1990s besides 1998, or reading about the El Nino effect that year:

"The El Niño of 1997 - 1998 was particularly strong [16] and brought the phenomenon to worldwide attention. The event temporarilly warmed air temperature by 3°F, compared to the usual increase of 0.5°F associated with El Niño events[17]."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/El_Ni%C3%B1o#History_of_the_phenomenon

Answer 2

It all depends which temperature record you use. Many skeptics prefer to use the GISTemp record (NASA) as this is the one that shows 1934 as being the hottest year in the US. Sticking with the same temp record then the hottest year on record was 2005 with an average global temperature of 14.7592°C, 2007 is only just behind at 14.7590°C, 1998 is in third place at 14.7133°C.

If we take an average of several temperature records (a more accurate and realistic approach) then 1998 is the hottest year on record globally with an average temp of 14.6295°C, next comes 2005 at 14.6204°C then comes 2007 at 14.5973°C.

1998 was an exceptionally warm year due to the effects of ENSO (El Nino), had it not been for ENSO then it would have been a very ordinary year temperature wise.

In order to eliminate short term anomalies it's necessary to look at the temperature trend as opposed to the temperature from one year to the next. When we do that, and no matter what criteria are used to define 'trend', then the temperatures are progressively increasing. As can be seen from this graph - http://profend.com/gtr/graphs/meangraphave.html

Certain skeptics and some who may not understand how to accurately read the temperature record, may incorrectly claim that the world is cooling or that temperatures have stalled.

- - - - - - - - -

RE: YOUR ADDED DETAILS

Climate is about long term trends, it is, to apply a simplified definition, weather averaged out over a long time.

Climatologists don't look at single years as there could be any one of a number of factors that affect them. For example, 1998 was warmed more than normal because of the El Nino effect but just a few years earlier the temperatures fell following the massive eruption of Mount Pinatubo in 1991.

If we were to compare 1992 (cool) to 1998 (warm) then there's a rise in temperature of 0.543°C in just 6 years. Manipulating the figures this way could make it appear that temperatures had risen 30 times faster than they actually did.

Events such as El Nino and Pinatubo aren't eliminated, they're incoprorated into the temperature record. If you look at a graph plotting the temperatures from one year to the next http://profend.com/gtr/graphs/anomgraphave.html you can see that the graph is always going up and down but when you look at the longer term trend then it's one of constantly increasing temperatures.

This trend can be calculated in many different ways. However, that's purely academic as whichever method is chosen the result is the same. The first graph I linked to uses 5, 10 and 30 year moving averages, the second graph uses a 6 order polynomial.

1998 would be a significant year if a) it hadn't been an El Nino year or b) it were the point at which the overall trend took a downward turn.

The only reason it ever gets mentioned is because, according to some temperature records, it was the hottest year on record. As I've mentioned, in climate terms this is of little significance.

If we apply the logic that the global warming is over because 1998 was the hottest year on record, then we also have to deduce that people are dying younger because the oldest person who ever lived is dead and we're also getting shorter because the tallest person who ever lived is also dead.

Here's a website with a simplified version of the global temperature record, I haven't yet uploaded the data for November 2007. http://profend.com/gtr

Answer 3

I think you are right, temperatures have been flat for the last several years, the satellite measurements of the lower troposphere (surface) show a slight cooling, if you wanted split hairs. The middle troposphere where the AGW theory indicates that CO2 is capturing heat clearly shows a slight cooling trend over the last few years.

http://wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com/2007/11/26/the-scoop-on-satellite-temperature-data/

The tropics however tell a very different story according to the satellites. Sea surface temperatures and water vapor are falling rapidly and atmospheric temperatures in the tropics show a slight cooling trend.

http://www.ssmi.com/rss_research/climate_change_in_the_tropics.html


It would appear that with the exception of the Arctic circle, global warming has leveled off. Now this could be the 11 year solar cycle we are seeing, and when solar maximum returns around 2012 things will start warming again, but I wouldn't bet on it.

.
.

Answer 4

We can see by NASA's own data that 1934 was the warmest year and since 1998 the temperatures are on a slight decline.

I think most of the reason why you are sencing more panic from the believers, the reason for them saying that we have to 2012, just 4 short years left is that they are seeing that global warming is finished and the Earth is cooling down.

Answer 5

Stand by folks, the Global Warming zealots are already changing course. Most likely because the weather is not cooperating. They are already starting the next phase: CO2 levels are too high whether there is global warming or not.

So prepare for the next big push away from warming and towards a lot of useless projections about Carbon levels in the atmosphere.

Merry Christmas!

.

Answer 6

Dr Jello's table is just U.S. air temperature. If you take his link and back up one level (take the US_USHCN.2005vs1999.txt off the end of the URL), you can see the parent NASA site with that data graphed, along with a global average air and sea temperature record graphed. That global record shows a much more pronounced upward trend. The record goes back to 1880.

Answer 7

The key words you use are "...on record".

How long have we actually been accurately keeping records?

100 years, if that?

Even by the most conservative estimates, how old is the earth? Millions of years?

Our feeble attempts as humans to declare that we know and understand the earth's temperatures and how they change and what could cause this chage is pure arrogant rubbish.

Answer 8

Well first of all you need to get your facts straight. The warmest year on record is 2006.

Get your facts straight and then come with a proper argument.

Answer 9

I don't think that there is enough evidence yet to say that the upward tend has been broken.
http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/science/recenttc_triad.html