No Global Warming For The Majority Of The Satellite Temperature Record

Satellites which monitor the global temperature were launched almost 36 years ago, and there has been no warming for the majority of that period.

But it is worse than it seems. Most of the apparent warming prior to 1996 was due to settling of volcanic dust.

ScreenHunter_2639 Sep. 09 06.28

Wood for Trees: Interactive Graphs

About stevengoddard

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

18 Responses to No Global Warming For The Majority Of The Satellite Temperature Record

  1. Anto says:

    Best of all, this month’s temps were equalled or surpassed in 1981, 1983, 1987, 1988, 1990, 1991, 1993, 1994, and then – of course – from 1998 onwards.

    AGWing theory absolutely requires that temperatures increase, at an ever increasing rate, as CO2 concentrations rise. Temperature averages of one decade should never be matched by records from prior decades – they should always be increasing, at an ever increasing rate.

    They are not. The theory is falsified. Only the stupid, the ignorant and the corrupt would deny it.

  2. SMS says:

    I would suggest that the warming prior to 2005 is a result of a positive PDO. The current pause is just statistical. As part of the PDO cycle, the temperature started dropping in 2005. As I understand it the PDO switched in 2005 and the AMO is about to switch. When the AMO does switch, the Earths temperature drop will more noticeable. All a part of the PDO 60 – 70 year cycle. Bob Tisdale would be the expert to refer to when investigating this subject.

    • Donna K. Becker says:

      When is the AMO expected to switch?

      • Gail Combs says:

        Probably fairly soon. SEE: Climate4You

        One thing to keep in mind is the Antarctic Circumpolar Current (West Wind Drift) runs up the side of Africa and influences the Gulf Stream and the AMO.

        Solar influences===> formation and destruction of ozone =====> weather cells ====> wind ======> ENSO and the Antarctic Circumpolar Current (West Wind Drift)

        New paper finds solar activity related to the polar vortex & jet stream variability
        http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.co.uk/2014/04/new-paper-finds-solar-activity-related.html

        Quasi-Biennial Oscillation and Solar Cycle Influences on Winter Arctic Total Ozone
        King-Fai Li Ka-Kit Tung
        http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2013JD021065/abstract

        06 May 2012 Nature Geoscience | Letter Regional atmospheric circulation shifts induced by a grand solar minimum

        Abstract.
        We investigate an apparent inconsistency between two published results concerning the temperature of the winter polar stratosphere and its dependence on the state of the Sun and the phase of the Quasi-Biennial Oscillation (QBO). We find that the differences can be explained by the use of the authors of different pressure levels to define the phase of the QBO.

        We identify QBO and solar cycle signals in sea level pressure (SLP) data using a multiple linear regression approach. First we used a standard QBO time series dating back to 1953. In the SLP observations dating back to that time we find at high latitudes that individually the solar and QBO signals are weak but that a temporal index representing the combined effects of the Sun and the QBO shows a significant signal. This is such that combinations of low solar activity with westerly QBO and high solar activity with easterly QBO are both associated with a strengthening in the polar modes; while the opposite combinations coincide with a weakening. This result is true irrespective of the choice of QBO pressure level. By employing a QBO dataset reconstructed back to 1900, we extended the analysis and also find a robust signal in the surface SAM; though weaker for surface NAM.

        Our results suggest that solar variability, modulated by the phase of QBO, influences zonal mean temperatures at high latitudes in the lower stratosphere and subsequently affect sea level pressure near the poles. Thus a knowledge of the state of the Sun, and the phase of the QBO might be useful in surface climate prediction.
        (wwwDOT)atmos-chem-phys.net/11/11679/2011/acp-11-11679-2011.pdf

        If solar cycle 25 if quieter than solar cycle 24 things could get rather ‘interesting’

        • Dmh says:

          “One thing to keep in mind is the Antarctic Circumpolar Current (West Wind Drift) runs up the side of Africa and influences the Gulf Stream and the AMO.
          Solar influences===> formation and destruction of ozone =====> weather cells ====> wind ======> ENSO and the Antarctic Circumpolar Current (West Wind Drift)”

          Great summary Gail.
          It’s difficult to imagine why the AGW alarmists cannot see such an obvious connection and how the present low cycle is cooling the world from the polar regions.
          The increasing Antarctic ice anomalies are obviously changing ENSO and the AMO and, consequently, I think it’s also affecting the PDO because the positive anomalies of ENSO are being pushed to lower latitudes (near the NP) *and* eastward.
          This “forcing” is the cause of the persistent high pressure positive anomaly in the west coast of US and Canada and is favoring the drought conditions in CA.
          In two words: solar radiations.

        • tom0mason says:

          You may be interested to look at tallboke blog for Miles Mathis: The Cause of the Solar Cycle. Basically he uses simple(?) orbital modeling of Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and
          Neptune and their variations. But adds in electric charge fields, magnetic fields, and solar wind proton production and distribution to explain the solar cycle (not simple!).

          If I read it correctly he predicts a short and low solar maximum peak, followed by a comming long solar minimum.
          https://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2014/09/08/miles-mathis-the-cause-of-the-solar-cycle/

        • Dmh says:

          Thank you Tom for the link, I’m reading it right now and liking it very much! 🙂
          I’ve noticed that Miles Mathis seems to have an “Electric Universe”-type approach to describe the Sun:
          “… The Sun is recycling a greater charge field coming in from the galactic core and the surrounding galactic field …”
          This is fascinating because I’m convinced that there is an important EM-type component in the solar phenomena connected with the movement of the solar system through the Milk Way.
          Maybe Miles has already worked out all the details. 🙂

      • Dmh says:

        The expected length of each phase is ~30 years, it started the present positive phase in ~ 1995 (almost 20 years already) then it “should” switch to negative in ~ 2025, but due to solar forcing (low radiations in the present cycle) some analyses are predicting the reversal to happen much earlier, possibly in the next 2-3 years.
        If this happens it’d be the shortest oscillation ever recorded (see graph in my previous post).

    • Dmh says:

      The AMO switched to positive mode in 1995 and its large positive anomalies already reflex the accumulated heat in previous decades

      This heat accumulation is related with the step-change in world’s temperatures shown in Steve’s graph.
      The powerful El Nino oscillation of 1997-2001 is the signature of the step-change and also marks the change of the average temperatures trend from “warming” to slight “cooling”

  3. quaesoveritas says:

    The fact that CO2 levels are apparently rising at an increasingly rapid rate makes is even more puzzling for the warmists.
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-29115845
    They are “worried” by the fact that there was no apparent impact on the biosphere:
    “In 2013 there are no obvious impacts on the biosphere so it is more worrying,” said Oksana Tarasova.

    • Dmh says:

      They’re puzzled because they want to explain the El Nino of 1998 with CO2 forcing, which is incorrect because it was caused by accumulated heat in the oceans due to the repeated strong solar cycles of the XX century.
      If plant CO2 absorption is lower than expected (“.. reduced carbon uptake by the Earth’s biosphere… “) this should bring *more warming*, not the cooling that has been observed in the recent trend.
      Their problem is not “plant CO2 absorption”, but their inability to learn with their own mistakes.
      Thanks for the link, it’s always interesting to make a collection of their mistakes. 🙂

  4. Ed Martin says:

    “Most of the apparent warming prior to 1996 was due to settling of volcanic dust.”

    Tony, can you point me to more information on that? Been saying that for a long time that stratospheric dust load levels were considerably lower prior to Pinatubo, for a decade, mostly they poo-poo’d it. Pinatubo destroyed a lot of ozone which lead to a strong rebound effect and a super El Niño.

    Cosmic dust load is something else we do not have a handle on, estimated between 5-300 metric tons every 24 hours.

  5. Andy DC says:

    We have had one period of warming since the 1930’s, 1980-1997. The rest of the time has been either cooling or neutral. End of discussion.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s