I thought it would be interesting to reprise some of the graphics I’ve posted since this blog began. Click on any of the graphs for a clearer view.
Note: See comment 13 (by Lazar) for references to the sources, and links to the original posts. Thanks Lazar!
Figure 1 To begin at the beginning, here’s the global average temperature anomaly according to NASA GISS:
Figure 2 Comparison of surface temperature to satellite-estimated lower-troposphere temperature:
Figure 3 Comparison of surface temperature to satellite-estimated lower-troposphere temperature, for the lower 48 states of the continental U.S. only:
Figure 4 Two paleoclimate reconstructions, representing the extremes of estimates of temperature for the last 2,000 years:
Figure 5 Historical northern-hemisphere sea ice anomaly:
Figure 6 Monthly averages of sea ice extent anomaly:
Figure 7 The number of tropical cyclones in the Atlantic ocean:
Figure 8 Change in glacier mass balance for glaciers worldwide:
Figure 9 The net loss of glacial mass:
Figure 10 Number of glacial earthquakes, and non-glacial earthquakes, over time:
Figure 11 Changes in CO2 concentration since measurements began at the Mauna Loa atmospheric observatory:
Figure 12 Changes in CO2 concentration for the last 1,000 years:
Figure 13 Changes in CO2 concentration over 20,000 years:
Figure 14 Changes in CO2 concentration over 400,000 years:
Figure 15 Long-term changes in greenhouse gas concentrations:
Figure 16 Changes in solar irradiance, compared to changes in global temperature (solar irradiance in black, temperature in red):
Figure 17 Changes in ocean heat content.
Figure 18 James Hansen’s prediction of global temperature change, made over 15 years ago:
Figure 19 To refute the claim (made by Christopher Monckton) that Iceland has cooled this century, temperature records from Iceland stations:
UPDATE UPDATE UPDATE
The 13th comment (by Lazar) contains links to all the sources for the graphs, as well as to the original posts in which they appear. Thanks to Lazar, that’s a nontrivial bit of work!
14 responses so far ↓
John Mashey // September 5, 2007 at 6:15 pm
Great set of charts in one place.
However, it would be nice if you made them easier to reference, i.e., add labels Figure 1, Figure 2 so we can point at them from elsewhere.
[Response: Done.]
Kim // September 5, 2007 at 7:45 pm
Thank you - these are great, and it’s nice to be able to find them all easily.
richard // September 5, 2007 at 8:25 pm
/start skep
Yes, but
1) McIntyre has clearly shown that the Iceland data are corrupted due to an influx of surplus polar bears from Greenland and northern Canada. Turns out these bears love warm water and have been splashing in the Iceland hot springs, thereby increasing air temps. The data are thus fatally flawed.
2) As everyone knows, the third law of thermodynamics causes ‘flaw’ to flow upwards. Consequently the ‘flaw’ in Fig 19 moves upwards on computer screens, covering Figs 1-18, rendering them flawed as well.
3) I demand therefore a complete re-analysis.
/end skep
Dano // September 6, 2007 at 4:08 am
Of course, Tamino, you know that your house of alarmistAGWChickenLittle cards will collapse as soon as the amateurs are done taking digital snaps of selected US surface stations.
Best,
D
Heretic // September 6, 2007 at 5:49 am
Great work, Tamino.
Georg Hoffmann // September 6, 2007 at 8:45 am
Dear Tamino
I asked you on the original posting already but probably it passed unnoticed. Do you have the “old uncorrected” GISS data (or a link to them) for the US48? You can use my lab mail for an answer.
Thanks for doing this great job here!
Georg
[Response: You must have missed the response. It's in UPDATE #6 tot he post.]
Ian Hopkinson // September 6, 2007 at 1:29 pm
Georg - rather interesting plot you have linked to your signature there. I was wondering how regional trends from the satellite data matched those from surface measurements…
John Willit // September 6, 2007 at 1:30 pm
I think you shouldn’t have different axis scales on the GISS versus LT sat temperatures.
If you want to show how they track together, you could show one with the same scale and then one with the adjusted scales.
[Response: The axes are different, but actually the *scale* is the same, only the *zero point* is different. And since they're both anomalies, and use different time frames to define anomaly, the zero point difference has no physical meaning.]
Peter Hug // September 6, 2007 at 3:03 pm
Do you have references for these data? If I show these to people, I can make better arguments if I know the sourcing.
Thanks for putting this together…
George // September 6, 2007 at 4:04 pm
Tamino, this is a great way to show all the stuff you have analyzed/synthesized.
I think you can make it even better by linking directly to your detailed post from each graph (rather than the standalone graph). That way someone can easily see where the data are coming from.
Perhaps you might also make an array of thumbnail images (perhaps to be displayed on the side bar) or on one page that includes all of these graphics (each graph being a thumbnail) with a link from each thumbnail to the enlarged image of the graph and then a link from the enlarged image to the post where it originally appeared.
Also, if you apply an “unsharp mask” filter (which most photo-processing software has) on someone of the graphics ( particularly “Changes in greenhouse gas from ice core and modern data”) it will sharpen them up.
Hank Roberts // September 6, 2007 at 5:08 pm
Agreeing, some kind of cite to a text resource with each would be most helpful — likely to your longer discussion where you probably already have the information identified by source as well as comments on it.
Tony // September 6, 2007 at 11:39 pm
Awesome work, but I have a question. Looking at fig.4, I got to wondering whether sceptics have made anything of this particular graph. Sure, they talk about natural variability, but can anyone tell me if they’ve tilted their spears at the huge increase in the rate of temp rise? (I remember hearing one climate scientist say it was 1,000 times larger than seen anywhere in the pre-industrial record.) Just wondering.
Lazar // September 7, 2007 at 12:07 am
Done.
Figure 1; global annual mean (land and sea) surface temperature anomaly (NASA GISS); The Latest From GISS (Tamino).
Figure 2; GISTEMP global annual mean (land and sea) surface temperature anomalies (NASA GISS); MSU TLT global monthly anomalies for the mean temperature at the lower troposphere (RSS); Before and After (Tamino).
Figure 3; GISTEMP U.S. lower 48 states, annual mean (land and sea) surface temperature anomalies (NASA GISS); MSU TLT U.S. lower 48 states, monthly (land and ocean) anomalies for the mean temperature at the lower troposphere (RSS); Before and After (Tamino).
Figure 4; Global Surface Temperatures over the Past Two Millennia (Mann, M.E., and Jones, P.D. 2003, Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 30, No. 15, pg. 1820); Highly variable Northern Hemisphere temperatures reconstructed from low- and high-resolution proxy data (Moberg, A., D.M. Sonechkin, K. Holmgren, N.M. Datsenko and W. Karlén, 2005, Nature, Vol. 433, No. 7026, pp. 613-617); Hockey Sticks (Tamino).
Figure 5; Northern Hemisphere Sea Ice Anomalies (NSIDC); Polar Ice (Tamino).
Figure 6; Monthly Average Northern Hemisphere Sea Ice Anomalies (NSDIC); Polar Ice (Tamino).
Figure 7; Heightened tropical cyclone activity in
the North Atlantic: natural variability or
climate trend? (Holland, Webster 2007, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society); North Atlantic Storms (Tamino).
Figure 8; Glacier Mass Balance Bulletin, No. 8, (WGMS); Glaciers (Al Gore got it right) (Tamino).
Figure 9; Global Glacier Mass Balance (Volume Change) (NSIDC); Glaciers (Al Gore got it right) (Tamino).
Figure 10; Seasonality and increasing frequency of Greenland glacial earthquakes (Ekström, G. et al. 2006. Science, 311); Greenland Tremors (Tamino).
Figure 11; monthly mean atmospheric CO2 concentration (NOAA ESRL); Fast CO2 (Tamino); Latest Trends in CO2 (Tamino).
Figure 12; Historical CO2 records from the Law Dome DE08, DE08-2, and DSS ice cores (Etheridge et. al 1998, CDIAC); monthly mean atmospheric CO2 concentration (NOAA ESRL); Fast CO2 (Tamino).
Figures 13 & 14; Atmospheric CO2 concentration from 60 to 20 kyr BP from the Taylor Dome ice core, Antarctica (Indermühle, A., E. Monnin, B. Stauffer, T.F. Stocker, and M. Wahlen 2000, Geophysical Research Letters 27:735-738); Historical CO2 records from the Law Dome DE08, DE08-2, and DSS ice cores (Etheridge et. al 1998, CDIAC); Vostok Ice Core CO2 Data (NOAA); monthly mean atmospheric CO2 concentration (NOAA ESRL); Fast CO2 (Tamino).
Figure 15; Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis, Summary for Policy Makers (IPCC AR4); It’s a Gas (Tamino).
Figure 16; Evolution of the Sun’s Spectral Irradiance Since the Maunder Minimum (Lean 2000, Geophysical Research Letters, 27, 2425); Here Comes the Sun (Tamino).
Figure 17; Earth’s Energy Imbalance:
Confirmation and Implications (Hansen et. al 2005, Science); Ocean Heat Content (Tamino).
Figure 18; Global temperature change (Hansen et. al 2006, Proceedings of the NAS); Once More, with Feeling (Tamino); Models on the Table (Tamino).
Figure 19; temperature anomalies (GHCN); Warming up to Iceland (Tamino).
[Response: Thank you!!! That's great.]
Lazar // September 7, 2007 at 1:41 am
Not at all. Thanks for putting all the brain work into those graphs and explaining the science. I normally make notes like the above, so I thought why not post them up.
Leave a Comment