This chart doesn't seem correct to me. The left axis label says that the temperature anomaly is relative to 1980 - 2009. Since the chart itself is graphing the period 1980 - 2009, doesn't that mean the y-axis center has to be in the middle? How can the black line be 2/3 above the 0 point if the 0 point is the average of the chart data? Something doesn't add up.

It's an extremely short time period from which to try and draw any conclusions, but I don't mind seeing the data. Based on this chart it's been warming a bit, but there is not a good correlation between C02 and temp. Maybe it's just warming a bit....

jdeere5220 wrote:


The plots are 1979 thru August 2011. The black plot line is CO2 for which the right y-axis is applicable. Each monthly temperature is the difference between that months temperature and the 30 year average temperature for that month (1980-2009). Of course that average is already up about 0.5C since the late 1800s, but this graph only plots all the satellite data.

More interesting, I was able to predict this summers temperature average anomaly (0.3C) using IPCC models from 15 years ago. I expect that average value to continue as long as we continue to have volcanic, ENSO and TSI neutral conditions which will probably more or less hold through September at least.

www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/index.php

Deep Oceans Can Mask Global Warming for Decade-Long Periods


ScienceDaily (Sep. 18, 2011) — The planet's deep oceans at times may absorb enough heat to flatten the rate of global warming for periods of as long as a decade even in the midst of longer-term warming, according to a new analysis led by the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR).

....satellite measurements showed that the discrepancy between incoming sunshine and outgoing radiation from Earth actually increased. This implied that heat was building up somewhere on Earth, according to a 2010 study published in Science by NCAR researchers....

...indicated that temperatures would rise by several degrees during this century. But each simulation also showed periods in which temperatures would stabilize for about a decade before climbing again. For example, one simulation showed the global average rising by about 2.5 degrees Fahrenheit (1.4 degrees Celsius) between 2000 and 2100, but with two decade-long hiatus periods during the century.

During these hiatus periods, simulations showed that extra energy entered the oceans, with deeper layers absorbing a disproportionate amount of heat due to changes in oceanic circulation. The vast area of ocean below about 1,000 feet (300 meters) warmed by 18% to 19% more during hiatus periods than at other times. In contrast, the shallower global ocean above 1,000 feet warmed by 60% less than during non-hiatus periods in the simulation.


www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/09/110918144941.htm

Occam wrote:


Looks like there is growing evidence to support my hypothesis -from 3.5 years back - that answered the question "where is the heat".
forum.iburncorn.com/viewtopic.php?t=7452

Occam wrote:


They haven't found squat. It is more of the same excuses for why their last 20 years of predictions failed, and another "modeled" hypothesis that will end up on the ash heap of history along with the hockey stick and Santer's missing hot spot. They are trying to convince people this "missing heat" can somehow not show up in SST, upper 300m, upper 700m and even now upper 2000m. It is now "stealth heat".

So now what then, for the next 20 years we can wait in anxious anticipation for this "missing heat" to rear its ugly head while the surface continues to fail to warm along with the upper 700m which we were told was the "smoking gun" in 2005?

"your" hypothesis Trenberth was already proposing this nonsense in 2007.

EPIC FAIL



It's observations that matter Occam, not what modelers assume.
www.drroyspencer.com/2011/08/deep-ocean-...versus-observations/

I was ignoring all the Katy Perry tunes my kids listen to, until I saw how freakin' HOT she is. Whoa.

It's Over.

A double dip La Nina has ruined by chances for winning this wager 3 years straight so I will end it today by conceding 2011 and will accept payment of my $1000 winnings anytime now. Ha!




Proceeds will go to the Occupy Wall Street cause and the Salvation Army.

The experiment is over, ENSO neutral conditions no longer exist.

As you recall this summer presented a rare opportunity for seeing what the global tempersture was under neutral natural variability conditions: EL Nino, solar irradiance and volcanic activity were all neutral for about 4 months. So we could see how much the planet had warmed since the IPCC model baseline 1990 without the complicating factors of natural variation and see how that compared to the model projection of 0.18C per decade for scenario A1B1. forum.iburncorn.com/viewtopic.php?t=1100...01bb973533f8de29a0f3

The ONI [3 month running mean of Nino 3.4 region] this summer averaged 0.0C for J,J,August (neutral conditions) and -0.2C for J,A,September ( a hair cooler than neutral conditions).
www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/analysis_...status-fcsts-web.pdf

The sun also neutral....



The global average lower troposphere temperature averages
JJA = 0.293 C
JAS = 0.280 C

or 0.3C for the summer, just what I predicted by using the IPCC global model predictions from back around 2000, using their 0.18C per decade projection from circa 1990 which averaged -0.05C (sans Mt Pinituba months).
Occam wrote:
The math.... (0.0177C/year)(21yrs) + -0.05C = 0.32C, => 0.3C.