Posted on 01/09/2009 10:24:27 AM PST by tom h
The 2008 annual temperature for the contiguous United States was near average, while the temperature for December was below the long-term average, based on records dating back to 1895, according to a preliminary analysis by scientists at NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center in Asheville, N.C...
Chart:
(Excerpt) Read more at noaanews.noaa.gov ...
It would not surprise me if their is a drop in c02...
After all when it is colder water can hold more dissolved c02 than what it is warmer. So there is a correlation but it is that temperature puts out c02, not the opposite..
It Anthromorphic Global Averaging that’s the new threat. My Gawd, won’t this vicious climate leave us alone, or is there no mercy??
Not too surprising, considering that we’re still in the midst of our longest solar minimum in quite a while.
Al Gore, calling Al Gore....Al Gore...please, come to the Emergency Room..now.
Hmm. So it takes a year or two for the lack of sunspots to show up in downward temperatures.
That is precisely what has been the case on every other downturn in temperature, and the reappearance of the sunspots brings the temperatures back up.
I can’t believe the temperatures show such a downward shift, as Hanson usually adds his “special sauce” to fake the numbers upward. I guess he wasn’t able to get NOAA to do his work this time.
Al Gore should stay away. Seems that everywhere he goes these days there is record cold or snow.
http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=4718
So in reality this year probably was even colder than they admit
fradulent data = fraudulent data
Climate Research NewsClick on POGW graphic for full GW rundown
Ping me if you find one I've missed.
There is apparently a lag of around 800 years after the temperature increase for the CO2 to rise, so don’t expect any drop in Co2 in the near future! Actually, colder temperatures can mean a shorter growing season, so less vegatational intake of CO2.
They already have. Have you noticed it is not “Global Warming” anymore? It is now Climate Change.
The twisting of the numbers upward could turn out to be dangerous if the sunspots/cooling is for real. Global warming would be generally beneficial to mankind, global cooling, which is where I think we're headed, will not be so kind.
We do need to prepare if we are, in fact, headed for a cool period. Releasing enormous amounts of greenhouse gases would be a small, good, start.
The graph also nicely shows why they use 1979 as a reference point for recent temperature changes.
Might as well use the “low spot” to make your point.../s
I particularly enjoy how they proclaim “global warming” using 100years of climate data.
They are only missing a few billion years.
I know exactly how they will explain it. They will use the recession and the reduction in the amount of gas used to solidify their point that it is CO2 causing the problem. Sadly the media will pick right up on it and say SEE, we need to stop driving cars right now. /argggg
The lack of sunspots is a minor factor, if a factor at all. The reason that 2008 was a cool year was the strong La Nina at the beginning of the year, and cooler-than-normal tropical Pacific temperatures have persisted (though they aren't as markedly cooler now as they were at the height of the La Nina last January-February).
Conveniently for the skeptics, sunspot numbers will probably start increasing just as the La Nina condition fades into Pacific "normal" and simultaneously the warming trend reasserts itself. That's why it'd be useful to have an El Nino rather soon, so that it would be clear that's the main interannual climate driver. If the next big El Nino coincides with solar max, the skeptics will probably blame the Sun again.
2005
The GISS data analysis was based on NOAA data. They had the error that was corrected (putting 1934 warmest in the U.S.). Based on the figure -- and this surprises me -- it does look like NOAA still has 1998 higher than 1934.
I went here:
Climate of 2008 - in Historical Perspective: Annual Report
Compare these two statements:
"The combined global land and ocean surface temperature from January - November was 0.86 degree F (0.48 degree C) above the 20th century mean of 57.2 degrees F (14.0 degrees C)."
"NCDC's ranking of 2008 as ninth warmest compares to a similar ranking of ninth warmest based on an analysis by NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies. The NASA analysis indicates that the January-November global temperature was 0.76 degree F (0.42 degree C) above the 20th century mean."
So NOAA and NASA are different. Alert the press ;-)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
