2014 On Track for Warmest Ever?
October 21, 2014
A well informed correspondent writes:
So noaa reinforces nasa… Hottest September ever. For us NOT TO BREAK the record now, a significant cool down would have to occur. So far, October is just as hot as September so it is unlikely to cool this month. Means temps in November and December would have to be about 0.58C to avoid an alltime record. That won’t happen
The first nine months of 2014 have a global average temperature of 58.72 degrees (14.78 degrees Celsius), tying with 1998 for the warmest first nine months on record, according to NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center in Asheville, N.C.
‘It’s pretty likely’ that 2014 will break the record for hottest year, said NOAA climate scientist Jessica Blunden.
The reason involves El Nino, a warming of the tropical Pacific Ocean that affects weather worldwide. In 1998, the year started off super-hot because of an El Nino.
But then that El Nino disappeared and temperatures moderated slightly toward the end of the year.
This year has no El Nino yet, but forecasts for the rest of the year show a strong chance that one will show up, and that weather will be warmer than normal, Blunden said
All of the world’s top 10 warmest years have occurred since 2000. Climate studies have shown the world is poised for more warmth as the amounts of carbon dioxide rise. Last month, figures revealed carbon dioxide levels rose by the highest amount in 30 years in 2013.
Noaa has recorded above-average global temperatures for each September in the last 38 years. The last September with below 20th century average temperatures occurred in 1976, Noaa said.
The government agency said the temperatures were driven by warming oceans.
Australia also had hotter day time temperatures, with western Australia breaking its previous records. Britain also had its fourth warmest September since records began a century ago, with temperatures 1.2°C above the long-term average.
The record-breaking heat goes back to the end of last year — November 2013 broke a record. So the 12 months from October 2013 to September 2014 are the hottest 12-month period on record, Blunden said. Earth hasn’t set a monthly record for cold since December 1916, but all monthly heat record have been set after 1997.
September also marks the fifth month in a row that Earth’s oceans broke monthly heat records, Blunden said.
The U.S. as a whole was warmer than normal for September, but the month was only the 25th warmest on record.
While parts of the U.S. Midwest, Russia and central Africa were slightly cool in September, it was especially hotter than normal in the U.S. West, Australia, Europe, northwestern Africa, central South America and parts of Asia. California and Nevada set records for the hottest September.
If Earth sets a record for heat in 2014 it probably won’t last, said Jeff Masters, meteorology director for the private firm Weather Underground. If there is an El Nino, Masters said, “next year could well bring Earth’s hottest year on record, accompanied by unprecedented regional heat waves and droughts.”
Denialist boiler rooms spinning like crazy in the comments to all these posts.
Climate Denial Crock of the Week 
October 21, 2014 at 8:07 am
I don’t follow the Daily Mail as it’s not a source of reliable information. I follow the Guardian though and I strongly recommend people read this award-winning website.
Here’s a typical post from the Daily Mail:
RobertG, Rockville, United States, 4 hours ago
“Oh right. How much did they have to fudge the data to come up with this lie.”
And one from the Guardian:
palindrom 20 October 2014 6:05pm
“I’m wondering when the patently falsity of the ‘no warming in N years’ meme used by the denialists is going to finally become obvious to all.
Given that denialist talking points never die, no matter how many times they are decisively refuted, I’m not holding my breath.”
October 21, 2014 at 9:20 am
“Means temps in November and December would have to be about 0.58C to avoid an alltime record” – that should be “mean temp anomaly” or “mean temp variation from long term average”, no?
October 21, 2014 at 11:54 am
I’m sure that means anomaly.
October 21, 2014 at 1:36 pm
“The global time series is produced from the Smith and Reynolds blended land and ocean data set (Smith et al., 2008). This data set consists of monthly average temperature anomalies on a 5° x 5° grid across land and ocean surfaces. These grid boxes are then averaged to provide an average global temperature anomaly. An area-weighted scheme is used to reflect the reality that the boxes are smaller near the poles and larger near the equator. Global-average anomalies are calculated on a monthly and annual time scale. Average temperature anomalies are also available for land and ocean surfaces separately, and the Northern and Southern Hemispheres separately. The global and hemispheric anomalies are provided with respect to the period 1901-2000, the 20th century average.”
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/monitoring-references/faq/anomalies.php
October 21, 2014 at 2:31 pm
Incidentally look at that graph. Maybe I can pull it up here:
https://climatecrock.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/noaa_1014.jpg?w=480&h=516
The area between the 2010 line and the 2014 line for Jan to Sept would have to be of smaller magnitude compared to that of the Sept to Dec (i.e. the section where the lines cross) in order for it to qualify for the record, right? Same deal for 1998. That seems like a lot of area to be adding in just a few months.
Am I making sense?
The graph looks like it is made of discrete points quantized in monthly intervals linked together with lines. Right? And if we assign each month and arbitrary value of time equal to 1 unit, for the purpose of simplification, then each chunk of area between months is just the smaller of the y values between the two months being examined multiplied by the time unit of 1 added to the absolute value of the difference between y values divided by 2 and again multiplied by the arbitrary time unit. Now repeat that for every chunk on the graph and add all those areas together. The year with the biggest area wins, right?
Or don’t even worry about the time dimension, just add up the monthly values and divide by 12. The biggest number, wins?
Not knowing anything else but what’s on that graph, it seems like we’re going to have to have a very strong rest of the year to beat the record.
I think I see what’s going on, by looking at the other graph:
https://climatecrock.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/guardgraph14.jpg?w=480&h=415
The values for 2014 on the first graph are lower than those on the second. What’s the discrepancy? Is the black line just drawn wrong, or is it something I’m missing?
October 21, 2014 at 3:23 pm
The temperature graph is not a plot of monthly temperature but a running average for the year to date.
If the 2014 line is above the end point of 2010 then it is hottest year on record.
The 2010 and 1998 had record months only in the first half of their years , but their last half were cold months (- ENSO end of year).
October 21, 2014 at 4:53 pm
Got it: the black line just has to finish above the other lines to win. Thanks!
October 21, 2014 at 10:38 am
[…] deniers like to pretend that stuff like THIS just isn’t true, no matter the scientific credentials of the agencies reporting […]
October 21, 2014 at 7:10 pm
“Global warming has often been likened to the situation of a frog in slowly boiling water. We’ve been the frog for almost 30 years.”
“These kinds of records are becoming so regular that they’re starting to seem a lot less impressive. They’re shrug-inducing. But to think of them in that way is a mistake.” – Chris Mooney (Washington Post)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2014/10/21/temperatures-have-been-above-average-for-355-straight-months/
October 22, 2014 at 8:19 am
[…] in voter attitudes on climate change are unlikely to stop, especially given the possibility that 2014 could be the hottest year ever in the NASA surface temperature record, and if a developing El Nino warming even tin the Pacific […]
November 1, 2014 at 6:30 pm
Please keep this up. I haven’t laughed so long for a long time. October 2014 wasn’t the hottest month in history by a long shot. Ever notice why the cooler temperatures always seem to be in the U.S., UK, and Europe where accurate temperatures have been kept for centuries, and the really hot temperatures are in the middle nowhere?
There’s a reason for that – now see if you can figure out what it is. In the meantime, I wouldn’t throw away your long underwear just yet. Not when it snows in South Carolina on Halloween.
November 2, 2014 at 2:17 pm
Is this Troll Month on Crock? How come we weren’t notified. If I had known, I would have taken 45 or 50 points off my IQ and made a comment like this one.
January 16, 2015 at 8:44 pm
My problem with the climate change nuts is they don’t put their money where their mouth is. If you truly believe in this – do something. Live Amish. Stop driving. Stop using electricity. Stop having kids! Instead you tell everyone else what to do and you do it in a Prius with a child’s seat in the back on your way to walmart to buy more Chinese crap made in the land of pollution carried over here on the Kings of pollution themselves cargo ships. You are all hypocrites to the billionth degree.
If the government or anyone else truly thought the earth was warming and it were a problem you’d see real and simple steps being taken like timing stop lights to avoid stop and go traffic or not putting up new lights at all. Or eliminating toll roads where you stop and start. Calculate how much fuel a tractor trailer uses starting and stopping. Better yet you’d encourage manufacturing to stay in this country rather than China – the dirtiest place on earth. Coal fired plant anyone? Or you’d elimiante super cargo ships that pollute as much as all the cars on earth – 15 of them in a year. Or stop having kids! Everyone with any common sense knows people are the problem. One new kid destroys any benefit your stupid hybrid could of had. We can’t keep from having sex though can we? God forbid we actually change our habits for something we supposedly think is world altering.
Climate change is a marketing gimmick – they can sell you less for more. I once saw green ziplock bags. Box said made with 25% less plastic and with free wind energy. Did they cost less? No. So I buy less plastic made with energy you got a tax credit for using and I don’t save anything? I should just feel good I am helping the planet? You see this all over from trucks with sayings on the side about how green they are to airlines. They aren’t saving fuel because they care, they are saving dollars. They can’t justify higher prices in the name of saving something if the earth wasn’t in trouble. That is the friendly scenario.
The truth is climate change is about consolidating power for large globalist corporations and governments controlling people. It’s about agenda 21 from the UN. Look it up. It’s about a one world government. It’s about good vs evil. Freedom vs tyranny. This all has nothing to do with the earth and everything to do with evil greedy men.
Wake up you freakin morons.