NOAA Updates Their GMST Dataset to v. 5.1

Within the last week or so, NOAA issued an update to their Global Mean Surface Temperature dataset. The update to v. 5.1 now has full global coverage (mostly due to increased coverage of the Arctic) and extends back to 1850. The results are pretty close to to the v. 5 dataset, and I suspect differences in trends between the two will not be significant over time frames of 30 years or longer. Below I plotted v. 5 and v. 5.1 with the difference between the two (v.5.1 - v.5). The changes are minimal and there is virtually no trend to the difference. The additional warming in recent years is likely due to the increased Arctic coverage.

I also found the global raw data (with no adjustments or bias correction) and plotted v. 5 and v 5.1 so that you can see the effect of bias correction on global temperatures. The largest adjustments occur before 1944, and they are dominated by increasing sea surface temperatures to account for changes in the sampling methods from ships. Contrary to the claims of some popular bloggers and YouTubers, bias correction does not increase global temperature trends. In fact, by warming past temperatures, it actually decreases the overall warming trend. The raw data I found only covers 1880-2016, but I think you get how the overall affect of bias correction affects global temperature trends.
I downloaded the monthly data for v. 5.1 as well. Since the time series now goes back to 1850, I can set it to the 1850-1900 baseline, which is the baseline used by the IPCC. Two other Datasets, HadCRUT5 and BEST, also go back to 1850.  Below I plotted the monthly data through January 2023 with an 1850-1900 baseline and a twelve month running mean.
The IPCC defines its thresholds in terms of a 30-year mean anomaly with respect to the 1850-1900 baseline (which is taken to be warming above preindustrial levels). Now we can use three major global datasets to evaluate how much the globe as warmed above preindustrial levels. I thought it would be good to average NOAA, HadCRUT5, and BEST, then plot centered running 30-year means. I then projected the most recent 30-year trend from the end the last 30-year mean. The trend projection is shown below with dotted lines. From this, the average of three datasets shows that we have exceeded 1.2 C warming above preindustrial levels, and the most recent 30-year trend is 0.21 C/decade. If you compare this post to my 2022 summary from last month, NOAA's update doesn't really change what we understand about global warming much at all. But it does add some confirming evidence to results from HadCRUT5 and BEST.




Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Marketing of Alt-Data at Temperature.Global

Image
Temperature.Global (12-month running average, sort of) A few years ago, I started seeing people post links to a new dataset for global temperatures at a website called temperature.global. There are at least four unique features of this dataset. First, the website claims to update global temperature in near real time. Second, every year in the dataset averages below "normal." Third, there is absolutely no transparency regarding their methodology (those who administer it are anonymous, most of the data is hidden, and much of their methodology is unclear). And fourth, what is disclosed about their methodology reveals that what they are calculating is not the Earth's surface temperature. Description of Temperature.Global If you go to the temperature.global website, it becomes almost immediately apparent that this website has little concern for transparency. The website is hosted by Parler (the alternative social network), which if nothing else is pretty odd. There are no name
Read more

Are Scientists and Journalists Conspiring to Retract Papers?

Image
Dr. Roger Pielke, Jr has published two posts recently having to do with extreme weather and the IPCC. In the first post , he expresses frustration over an apparently inevitable retraction of a paper on extreme weather. The paper is Alimonti et al 2022 (A22) published in The European Physical Journal Plus (EPJP)[1]. I became aware of this paper about a year ago; it was not a good paper and was not particularly influential; it received almost no attention except for a brief period of time when the usual blogs promoted it, and then after SkyNews in Australia publicized this study as demonstrating there is no climate emergency. In the second post , Pielke summarized what he believes the IPCC's position is on extreme weather, and here he refers again to this previous paper. He declares that he believes that popular and scientific treatments of extreme weather have become far mor extreme than the position taken by the IPCC. According to him, "with the exception perhaps of only extr
Read more

Tropical Cyclone Trends

Image
In a previous post , I covered the distinction between detection and attribution. These are normally considered sequentially. First you detect a signal above natural variability, then you examine if some portion of that signal can be attributed to human activity. The previous post shows that the two are statistically independent from each other, so there is no need to limit attribution studies to signals that are detectable above natural variability. This distinction and clarification I think is important in discussions of tropical cyclone trends. While trends are clear since 1980, the longer term record (since ~1850-1900) is less clear due to selection biases arising from our increasing ability to detect tropical cyclones. This makes detection difficult long term, but that doesn't necessarily mean that scientists can't also examine ways in which human activity is affecting tropical cyclone trends. Detection in the Satellite Record (Since 1980) The satellite record provides us
Read more