Global heat records for August 2009 and June-August 2009

  • Thread starter Thread starter Xnn
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Climate State
Join the discussion
Registration is free. Start your own thread to ask a follow-up.
31 replies · 8K views
The following paper provides lots of details

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/sst/papers/SEA.temps08.pdf

Note that if the ship–buoy bias were also adjusted with
respect to the ships, then the most recent years would
be warmer, because the ship–buoy difference tends to
be positive and because of the increasing number of
buoy observations. However, as discussed above, these
differences are well within the 95% confidence limits.

The rankings of the
warmest 10 yr are similar for both, with 2005 the warmest
for both followed by 1998, a year with a strong warm
ENSO episode (Table 6).

Rank Merged.v2 Merged.v3
1 2005 0.41 2005 0.40
2 1998 0.38 1998 0.37
3 2002 0.36 2003 0.36
4 2003 0.36 2002 0.35
5 2006 0.35 2006 0.33
6 2004 0.34 2004 0.32
7 2001 0.30 2001 0.29
8 1997 0.27 1997 0.25
9 1999 0.20 1995 0.18
10 1995 0.19 1999 0.17

So, the 10 warmest years have "cooled off" under v3, with the exception of 2002, which remained the same. But, if they adjusted the ship-buoy data were adjusted for ships, then they would be warmer.

Evo; About satellite data:

That is because
both ERSST.v3 and OI.v2 incorporate bias-adjusted
satellite data.

The ERSST.v3 is improved by explicitly including
bias-adjusted satellite infrared SST estimates.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Earth sciences news on Phys.org
Evo said:
No, it's not. You apparently misread what I posted, which was that the NCDC stopped using satellite data in July 2009 in their "State of the climate". If you retracted this, I apologize, but you posted so prolifically trying to explain yourself that I honestly can't find it. :-p

Evo, I am sorry if this is too hard to follow, but it is all in the post to which you are replying, and I stand by that post, [post=2359652]msg #18[/post] in the thread, to explain precisely where the NCDC is continuing to use the satellite data, and where it has stopped using it.

Furthermore, you have edited my post, without any notice to me or indication of why you did so. In the process you have removed all the formatting which is intended to make it easy to navigate and locate information. The links are all gone, and quoting indications, and so on. It's a mess. I don't know what else you have changed and it is now almost impossible to follow.

But here is again for you, step by step, concerning the State of the Climate reports.
  • The NCDC no longer uses satellite data for ranking and long term trends, in the initial parts of the report. The impact of this on trends is negligible.
  • The NCDC continues to use satellite data in the report, in particular for the ENSO outlook.
  • Where they use ERSST they are using version 3b, with no satellite data. Where they use the OISST, satellite data is still included.
  • The difference between these datasets and the reasons for having two sets, are explained in the links provided and which you have removed in your edit.

I write prolifically to give this detail, and avoid the simple "yes it is"/"no it isn't" exchange.

You were also incorrect (at the end of [post=2356463]msg #13[/post]) as to WHY this change was made.

Felicitations -- sylas