Thanks for furnishing the lovely graph of global temperature anomalies in your WMO Statement on Status of the Global Climate in 2012. I’ve reproduced it here.
The caption for it reads:
Figure 4. January–December global land and ocean surface temperature anomalies (relative to 1961–1990) for the period 1950–2012; years that started with a moderate or strong La Niña already in place are shown in blue, years that started with a moderate or strong El Niño already in place are shown in red; other years are shown in grey.
If you’re not aware, persons see the following three periods in that graph.
Just thought you’d be interested. That’s what I see, and I suspect many other persons see the same three periods in the graph. And that means no matter what you’ve written in the rest of that report, what people will see and take away from your report is that global surface temperatures warmed for a couple of decades, starting around the mid-1970s. Then surface temperatures stopped warming a decade and a half ago.
The graph that you’ve provided as part of your press release is worse. The funky blue shading at the bottom of the 2012 bar will make persons wonder what you’re trying to show with it. One thing is for sure: it draws the eye down. Odd that you should do that when you’re struggling to show global warming.
A question: The WMO recommends that the base years used for anomalies be updated every 10 years. Many organizations, such as NOAA, comply with that recommendation. They now use 1981 to 2010 as the base years for anomalies for many of their datasets. Is there any reason you continue to use 1961-1990, other than to make the temperature anomaly map look warmer? Also, the non-linear color-coded scaling of the contour intervals is very awkward.
Last, earlier this year I prepared an illustrated essay that discusses global warming. It’s titled “The Manmade Global Warming Challenge”. The preview is here [4MB] and the full essay is here [42MB]. It’s easy to read and understand. I thought you might be interested in a copy.
Your overlay assessment of “No Warming, Warming, and No Warming” is absolutely correct, yet the Media delights in calling the recent “No Warming” period the “Warmest Years Ever.”
Of course, going back to the 1930s is politically incorrect, and mentioning the 16 year atmospheric temperature “flatline” or “standstill” will likely doom the career of any reporter trying to do so!
Keep on holding their feet to the fire! The flames are needed, as the air temperature won’t be warm enough to help!
Off topic, but didn’t know where to put this.
R. de Haan says:
4 May 2013 at 11:28 am
It’s interesting to refer to the work of Prof. Theodor Landscheidt who studied the solar cycles and planetary effects and he successfully predicted the end of the great Sahelian drought; as well as a period of drought in the U.S.A. around 1999. He also predicted the last five global temperature anomalies; the last three El Niños; and the course of the last La Niña prior to his death and of course the upcoming Landscheidt Minimum: http://www.landscheidt.info/ and many other links on the web including the Landscheidt Papers.
This is a good link for Landscheidt’s stuff on ENSO.
I was wondering if you have looked at this, given that Landscheidt would seem to be the only person to have fairly reliably and consistently managed to predict such events years in advance.
It’s a terrible shame that no one seems to have continued the promising line of enquiry Landscheidt started.
I have just published a book (the french version is posted) the link for the english version is :
I hope I shed new light on climate change.