|
Post by steve on Dec 10, 2009 18:37:11 GMT
In March 2008 after the two coldest months in recent years, and record snowfall, I expected a reversion to warming as usual, and made a guess for the HadCRUT3 temperatures for 2008 and 2009. solarcycle24com.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=globalwarming&action=display&thread=95&page=1#1150I don't think I did too badly, as HadCRUT came out at 0.312 and 0.439. Socold did very well, getting within 0.02 both times, though he and I differ on next year. So here's your chance to wipe the smug grins of the "warmers" faces. Fill in the poll, and give a figure if you like. I'm feeling less confident about my 0.6C prediction now, but I'll stick with it just to give you all a sporting chance.
|
|
|
Post by neilhamp on Dec 10, 2009 19:07:42 GMT
I have gone for another top ten year but COOLER than 2009 I think the lingering El Nino will keep temperatures up for the first half of 2010 If socold was so accurate in the past I would be interested to know his forcast for 2010
Here is the Met.Office opinion for 2010, but we all remeber last year's forcast:-
A combination of man-made global warming and a moderate warming of the tropical Pacific Ocean, a phenomenon known as El Niño, means it is very likely that 2010 will be a warmer year globally than 2009.
Recently released figures confirm that 2009 is expected to be the fifth-warmest year in the instrumental record that dates back to 1850.
The latest forecast from our climate scientists, shows the global temperature is forecast to be almost 0.6 °C above the 1961–90 long-term average. This means that it is more likely than not that 2010 will be the warmest year in the instrumental record, beating the previous record year which was 1998.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Dec 10, 2009 19:29:58 GMT
This is a hard call because of the metrics involved. An example of this is looking at surface data within the continental US. When you throw out the cities and use only rural stations, the US temp has not risen to any appreciable degree in the past 100 years.
With that in mind, I am going to forcast a cooling trend. The climate year starts in February is memory serves and I am going to make the forcast somewhat local, as I don't trust at all the global temps that have been pronounced as of late.
The upper midwest of the US will have another growing season similiar to 2009. The negative PDO affects us in a hugely negative way. Being there is no La Nina on the horizon to warm us, it will continue to be cold.
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Dec 10, 2009 20:40:01 GMT
In view of wattsupwiththat.com/2009/12/08/the-smoking-gun-at-darwin-zero/ its not really a worthwhile exercise especially with HadCRUT the temperatures will be whatever they want them to be. As sigurdur has said " looking at surface data within the continental US. When you throw out the cities and use only rural stations, the US temp has not risen to any appreciable degree in the past 100 years."Plus the number of times people on here have said how cool their weather is only to have a GISS or HadCRUT graphic posted telling them they must be wrong. As even UAH is calibrated based on some of these temperatures the entire thing ceases to be scientific. I would like to see a total separation between those who measure the weather and the oceans and those who carry out research on the reported metrics. Plus a solid QMS on the weather reporting stations. This is not going to happen so I will abstain.
|
|
|
Post by youngmg on Dec 10, 2009 20:51:46 GMT
Good point made by nautonnier. I'm an hour north of Boston, MA, USA and we just experienced our 3rd coldest June/July period in 100 years as recorded by numerious local weather stations and the HadCRUT anomoly maps showed our temps to be flat vs the 30 year mean! Not sure if they're the best metrics to use in this case.
|
|
|
Post by Graeme on Dec 10, 2009 21:06:47 GMT
I agree with the point about the metric being used having potential flaws, but I decided to vote anyway I used the word 'potential' because it hasn't been proven that the distortions that are well documented have any real effect in the calculation though I think it's likely. I voted for warmer than 2009 but cooler than 1998. My logic is similar to the UK Met office: ...but with one small change. I think it will be El Niño plus increasing solar activity that will make 2010 warmer than this year. I'm not going to try to put a figure on it, though, because that would be a pure guess as I don't know enough to be able to judge the effects of these two items.
|
|
|
Post by jimcripwell on Dec 10, 2009 21:41:27 GMT
It looks like 2010 maybe the year, for the UK Met. Office, that push comes to shove. The Met. Office seems to have nailed their colors to the mast and are going with the Smith et al model in Science August 2007. Here the forecast was that after 2009, half the years would register a temperature that was warmer than 1998. This rejects the model used by Keenleyside in Nature 2008, which predicts that temperatures will not start rising until 2015. Further Latif mused that the pause in warming could last until, maybe, 2025.
So I predict 2010 will be a major "tipping point". If the temperature does, indeed, exceed 1998, then Smith et al will get a big boost. But if, as I hope and have "predicted", 2010 is colder, maybe much colder, than 2009, then the Smith model will not have had much support.
|
|
shm6666
Level 2 Rank
The Sun :-)
Posts: 98
|
Post by shm6666 on Dec 10, 2009 21:59:00 GMT
Well Met Office goes "All In"! :-).
Well since we have an El Nino that I think will turn into a La Nina by June 2010 I think that we will be lover than 1998, 2005 and 2006. There is a big risk that we will be higher than 2009 I think.
The question is when will this El Nino spike and fall apart. I think it will happen about now and by June we will be in La Nina territory. Then depending on how deep that La Nina will be it will determine 2010 fate. However if this El Nino continues like the one 1987, then 2010 will be the warmest year on record I believe.
/Sven
|
|
|
Post by woodstove on Dec 10, 2009 22:28:19 GMT
I predict that the global mean "temperature," in Kelvins, will continue to look like this:
_____________________________________________________________________
;D
|
|
|
Post by boxman on Dec 10, 2009 22:53:13 GMT
I think it will be more or less the same as this year. I voted colder than 2009 but still among the top 10.
|
|
|
Post by northsphinx on Dec 10, 2009 23:36:31 GMT
2010 will be cold but CRU will (have to) show it even colder. That is when the rigging, sorry gridding, of raw data will be fundamentally reworked during the year will the CRU/GISS first show a very cold year compare to previous years. And when previous year is recalculated will 2010 still be just slightly colder than the last 30 years. By the way the winter will be record cold and snowy on the entire NH. The NH polar vortex will persist for record long time and cool down the NH.
|
|
|
Post by richdo on Dec 10, 2009 23:43:40 GMT
I think it will be cold,
In my house, because the present political trends are that I will be forced to lower the thermostat to make ends meet.
In my region, because Lake Superior water temp has returned to “normal” (~early 1980’s) levels. With Oct ’09 avg ~ 1deg C lower that 2008.
Around the world, because of a very weak SC24 and lower is consistent with the short term trend.
Frankly I think making predictions to a 1000th of a degree of a global “average” temperature from a massaged, homginized, tweeked, tricked, and otherwise prostituted raw data set is silly, even if one could trust the objectivity and adherence to the principles of science by those doing the “analysis”.
|
|
|
Post by raveninghorde on Dec 10, 2009 23:50:23 GMT
Met Office is predicting 0.58C rise and hottest year since records began. So after the "bbq summer" that didn't happen I've voted for cold. I'll go for 0.0C
|
|
|
Post by magellan on Dec 10, 2009 23:53:11 GMT
In view of wattsupwiththat.com/2009/12/08/the-smoking-gun-at-darwin-zero/ its not really a worthwhile exercise especially with HadCRUT the temperatures will be whatever they want them to be. As sigurdur has said " looking at surface data within the continental US. When you throw out the cities and use only rural stations, the US temp has not risen to any appreciable degree in the past 100 years."Plus the number of times people on here have said how cool their weather is only to have a GISS or HadCRUT graphic posted telling them they must be wrong. As even UAH is calibrated based on some of these temperatures the entire thing ceases to be scientific. I would like to see a total separation between those who measure the weather and the oceans and those who carry out research on the reported metrics. Plus a solid QMS on the weather reporting stations. This is not going to happen so I will abstain. As even UAH is calibrated based on some of these temperatures the entire thing ceases to be scientific. Do you have a reference for that? Monckton made similar statements in his essay on Climategate dated Nov 30, but has since removed it in a revised version dated Dec 7. I've yet to find one reference suggesting satellite data is calibrated to the surface. Anyway, not one for making predictions, based on the cyclical ENSO patterns in satellite data, I say 2010 will exceed 2009. The tropics have warmed in Nov indicating Jan or Feb global temps should exceed Nov placing 2010 global temps near or peaking 2007 in amplitude. However, it should be remembered the bigger they are the harder they fall, and 2010 will evolve into a La Nina as strong or stronger than 2007/2008. SOI is stalling and even though NINO 3.4 is in the strong category at the moment, it is likely to weaken soon. IMO the energy just isn't there to push 2010 over 1998. Above is based on past behavior of clear patterns (to me anyway) in the satellite ocean data. Both sides make the same mistake for different reasons. Warmologists think CO2 levels will inevitably always cause warming, and Coolers wish it would cool year after year to shut up the warmers who insist global cooling must drop like a rock to invalidate AGW. Tit for tat. In the end, 2010 will not lend any credence to the CoGW nor will it to global cooling. While they'll jump for joy thinking their beloved Big Warm is back on track after 12+ years, the next plunge coming after 2010 will let them down. ENSO (oceans in general) is where to look for the answers, and if we could predict cloud behavior, well wouldn't that be something. For the record, I no longer recognize any surface station data for my WAG as I think they are both unreliable and fudged beyond recognition. I prefer UAH because they use empirical calibration methods and appear to be the more accurate, but don't throw RSS under the bus. BTW, has anyone seen Roy Spencer's guest blog on GCR? He has been reluctant in the past to give Svensmark's hypothesis much attention, but appears to be giving it a second look. wattsupwiththat.com/2009/12/10/spencer-on-solar-geomagnetic-to-earth-climate-connections/
|
|
|
Post by glc on Dec 10, 2009 23:57:04 GMT
To those who have problems with Hadcrut why don't we use UAH .
I reckon 2010 will be second warmest year on record. The 'cooling trend' is over.
I've yet to find one reference suggesting satellite data is calibrated to the surface.
There isn't one - not a reliable one anyway.
|
|