Earth had its coolest February since 2014

Posted: March 15, 2021 by oldbrew in climate, data, ENSO, Natural Variation, Temperature
Tags:

Credit: BBC


No correlation between these temperatures and the 0.04% (and rising) of the atmosphere that belongs to carbon dioxide. The low sunspot activity of the last 2-3 years may be starting to have an effect. Reports of ’19th warmest’ month somewhere look a tad desperate, amid all the feverish talk from alarmists of a supposed climate emergency. No doubt a warm spell will give them another doom-mongering opportunity at some point.
– – –
February 2021 was the planet’s coolest February in seven years due to La Niña in the tropical Pacific Ocean and unusually brisk temperatures that enveloped much of North America and northern Asia, reports Phys.org.

But vast temperature contrasts during February—and during the three-month season—were at play in other parts of the world.

In fact, the Northern Hemisphere as a whole experienced its 8th-warmest winter (December through February) in 142 years, according to scientists at NOAA’s National Center for Environmental Information.

Here’s more from NOAA’s latest monthly global climate report:

Climate by the numbers

February 2021

The average global land and ocean surface temperature last month was 1.17 degrees F (0.65 of a degree C) above the 20th-century average making it the 16th-warmest February on record for the globe—but still the coolest since 2014.

It was the 14th-warmest February on record for the Northern Hemisphere and the 19th warmest for the Southern Hemisphere. Eastern Canada, much of Europe, and southern and northeastern Asia experienced remarkable warmth in February.

On the flipside, much of North America, Scandinavia and northern Asia saw much cooler-than-normal temperatures—at least 5.4 degrees F (3.0 degrees C) below average.

Continued here.

Comments
  1. ivan says:

    NOAA’s National Center for Environmental Information

    The so called ‘scientists’ there are having as joke with us, after all it is getting close to the start of April. Or maybe they are believing their own ‘adjusted’ temperature figures. If they think it was the warmest February they need to come and live here – yes, it is getting warmer during the day but night time temperatures are still down in single figures C.

    Another question for the idiots, how do they measure wide area temperature to one hundredth of a degree be it F or C? Maybe this is just their unvalidated climate models talking, remember GIGO although I have been told the GO for so called ‘climatologists’ means Gospel Out.

  2. Graeme No.3 says:

    The SW of West Australia was hot – as usual. The rest of south -South Australia, Victoria (and Tasmania) were noticeably cooler from Nov. to the present.
    Even the average person noticed, so not a good thing for the AGW mongers.

  3. oldbrew says:

    Even ever-increasing urban heat islands and supposedly significant ’emissions’ couldn’t prevent large parts of NH dropping 3C below normal. Computer modellers take note.

  4. *No correlation between these temperatures and the 0.04% (and rising) of the atmosphere that belongs to carbon dioxide. The low solar sunspot activity of the last 2-3 years may be starting to have an effect. Reports of ’19th warmest’ month somewhere look a tad desperate, amidst all the feverish talk from alarmists of a supposed climate emergency. No doubt a warm spell will give them another doom-mongering opportunity at some point.* – – – February 2021 was the planet’s coolest February in seven years due to La Niña in the tropical Pacific Ocean and unusually brisk temperatures that enveloped much of North America and northern Asia, *reports Phys.org .*

    Look at what actually happened. Warm, Open Arctic, promotes evaporation and snowfall and disturbes the polar vortexes, disturbs the jet stream. A colder northern hemisphere due to more cold storms is a result of more evaporation from an open Arctic Ocean.

    The solar into the NH has decreased over ten thousand years. low solar activity does not promote more evaporation and snowfall and more severe winter storms. More warm tropical water flowing into the Arctic promotes more evaporation and snowfall. Alex Pope

    On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 7:38 AM Tallbloke’s Talkshop wrote:

    > oldbrew posted: ” No correlation between these temperatures and the 0.04% > (and rising) of the atmosphere that belongs to carbon dioxide. The low > solar sunspot activity of the last 2-3 years may be starting to have an > effect. Reports of ’19th warmest’ month somewhere look” >

  5. craigm350 says:

    the planet’s coolest February in seven years due to La Niña

    🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

  6. Paul Vaughan says:

    tallbloke noted:
    “[…] temps sank to -14C”

    Well-said. I’ve been looking at the annual-resolution 14C series that came out recently. I’ve never given that stuff really serious attention (just quick glances). I took a casual look at 10Be in the past.

    The 980 year cycle (if stationary) will peak just after 2100, but the curious thing is how people suggest this relates directly to temperatures. That it does not, but my early instinct is that it may (in some differintegral form) relate to major wind modes.

    Another curious thing I keep noticing is people watching solar activity live (instead of once every few decades) and suggesting it might mean something inconsistent with solar-terrestrial-climate observations.

    Of course whenever I notice this curious type of commentary I become both amused and suspicious. These commentators appear to falsely assume uniformity (of every variable everywhere), ignore circulation, circulatory topology, and latent heat (especially ice), and/or assume observation network capabilities that do not exist. I always assume they’re undercover alarmists trying to make it look like realists do not exist anywhere.

    No one has ever publicly acknowledged the most important solar-terrestrial observations. We have word from “The Party” that the truth will not be acknowledged upfront (for political reasons). The agenda must (their idea, not mine) go through first (so the middle-class will not oppose it — again: their idea, not mine).

    If someone posts an article on any of these things I cannot participate, but you know I might share something where it won’t be noticed when no one is paying attention or even thinking about the topic (part of the new deal).

    May peace and unity be with you.

  7. tallbloke says:

    Paul indeed. I was interested in this article which started so promisingly, and then spectacularly missed the point.
    https://unherd.com/2021/03/how-to-survive-a-little-ice-age/

  8. tallbloke: the ‘little ice-age’ was an Eddy root. The Eddy/980 peak is next, as PV points out.

  9. Phoenix44 says:

    8th warmest and all the rest simply means “within natural variability”. Perhaps its sunspots, perhaps its la Nina, but my sense is that temperatures have not been doing much for the Alarmists the last 12 months or so. There’s been some localised hotspots but not much else. Who knows, maybe we are in for a step-down in temperatures to counter the El Nino step-up?

  10. oldmanK says:

    This recent paper seems to change the 980 to a lower figure (but how that is exactly discerned from the curve I can’t figure out. pg 10 for Saturn and jupiter)

    https://www.researchgate.net/publication/339507562_Multiscale_Analysis_of_the_Instantaneous_Eccentricity_Oscillations_of_the_Planets_of_the_Solar_System_from_13_000_BC_to_17_000_AD

  11. oldmanK says:

    Looking at the matter from a historical time-line, Doggerland Eddy root at 6150bce. MM centred on 1679ce. Total 7829 for eight Eddy cycle >> 978 yrs per cycle. (but there might be some freq modulation).

  12. oldbrew says:

    popesclimatetheory says: March 16, 2021
    Warm, Open Arctic, promotes evaporation and snowfall and disturbs the polar vortexes, disturbs the jet stream.
    – – –
    How is snowfall supposed to disturb the jet stream? Snow happens all the time in the Arctic.

  13. tallbloke says:

    I think the timings of the ‘Eddy root’ and ‘Eddy peak’ can be pushed around quite a bit by higher frequency (and sometimes higher amplitude) cycles such as de Vries. At the moment, several of those cycles are conspiring to push downwards and this may well mean we’re at the ‘Eddy peak’ now.

    Given the weather volatility and greater swings that come along with periods of low solar activity, I expect the argument over what the longer term trend is won’t be settled anytime soon. Expect the unexpected and prepare for the worst, while enjoying life and remembering our ancestors had it harder than we.

  14. oldbrew says:

    Cool March as well?

    MARCH 15, 2021
    Denver’s airport reopens after powerful winter storm (Update)

    Denver’s airport reopened Monday after a powerful late winter snowstorm dumped over 3 feet of heavy, wet snow on parts of Colorado and Wyoming, shutting down roads, closing state legislatures in both states and interfering with COVID-19 vaccinations.

    The 27 inches (68 centimeters) that had fallen by the end of Sunday at Denver International Airport on the plains east of downtown made it the fourth biggest snowfall in the city’s history, according to the National Weather Service in Boulder. [bold added]

    https://phys.org/news/2021-03-denver-airport-day-winter-storm.html

  15. Paul Vaughan says:

    Lol at methods in paper to linked by oldmanK.

    Studying model output is not how to achieve fundamental understanding. (sarc) “Let’s see if we can figure out what our model assumptions were by studying our model output.” (/sarc)

    Even if that was a sensible approach to fundamental understanding: they have wavelet grain and extent locked to one another (applying canned methods not deeply fathomed complicates sensible interpretation).

    980 / 4 simply does not equal 209. The communication demanded by what I imagine as “undercover alarmists” is clearly designed to be impossible.

    Events can be exactly defined (strict mathematical equality) as anomalies from modular central limit. This is how good cross-disciplinary mediators can simply bridge cross-disciplinary divides like when “event freaks” don’t fathom the assumptions hidden in ivory tower tables of methodological contents.

    The authors appear (like almost all other other authors) totally in the dark about modular forms.

    oldmanK, again: Slip cycle lengths can move a long way with minor parameter tweaks. Again: Comparatively study the modular forms resulting from Scafetta’s model parameters with those resulting from Seidelmann’s. (We’ve already been over this before.)

    The model used by Scafetta has imbalanced aggregates for what should be obvious reasons. Those who can’t see this in a snap are probably missing aggregation criteria fundamentals and it might take extensive and formidable effort to diagnose exactly what they are missing …and there will never be a suitable way to explore that at the level of probing needed (a major hazard of cross-disciplinary communication in general).

    Perhaps to avoid internally destructive homeland entrapment in inverted totalitarianism we need to learn to talk past each other. It might work efficiently enough (or at least be tolerable enough) for the long run.

  16. Paul Vaughan says:

    TB: 980 is not earlier than 2100 (assuming stationarity) and is much bigger on the recent annual-resolution 14C record than 209, 356, & 504. (See note below on “ice-time”.)

    FYI the “11 year cycles” in the new series do not match the Schwabe solar cycle so they cannot be used for diagnostics on 66, 96, & 132 (whoosh!… overhead phase for almost everyone, I realize — tragic: mainstream is absolutely unwilling to communicate sensibly about pace and shape).

    Bear in mind that all calibrations are extremely nonlinear (due to ice).
    The calibration for one “ice-time” won’t work for another.

    Some naively dig in with “assume if you will” and I just tell them I can’t go with assumptions strictly contradicted by observations — doesn’t matter to me if they are physicists or statisticians, I know they are failing at the intersection of circulatory topology and material phase and this has been a source of unacceptable consternation for too long.

    The best analogy is a tachometer. There’s a clear relationship (both statistical and physical) between engine revs and vehicle movement, but imagine the conventional analyst (ignoring semi-annual & annual heat engine backeddy gyre tracks offside from a variable moonrock in the equatorial stream) simply hasn’t yet discovered different gears.

    …for example, the calibration for 1st gear (obviously) doesn’t work for 5th gear.

    The sun is the only thing pacing the equatorial mainstream “climate river” and pulsing its offside poleward eddy-course.

    I may soon leave the climate discussion permanently.

  17. Paul Vaughan says:

    The wavelet methods I left shelved for several years are a generalization of both methods like Tim Channon’s (all I have to do is lock a parameter to replicate that approach) and the methods used in the Scafetta paper (all I have to do is lock 2 parameters together to replicate that approach).

    Generalized wavelets can also be adapted to match singular spectrum analysis.

    Years ago when I used to do statistical analyses I left timescales above centennial to others, but because of how everything played out during the past year I’m suspicious (understatement) about centennial-millennial timescale insider trade secrets — some of which may have sold visions based on false assumptions.

    Changes in the shape of the atmosphere mean changes in the shape of circulation.

  18. Paul Vaughan says:

    ‘Bob Sea’

    G[yr]res$con fed-ants$
    1fearteam4Cease$sour$sov. CR US tee UN

    ‘fog years’ 4000 warmmmUN NAT[O]RAL[LY]
    ‘with B’ on D-eve n$t sim pull IT dude D-CReasing:

    6000 = 20^2 / 70^2 * 73500 know:mmm-UN=all-lie

  19. Paul Vaughan says:

    Hick Ease Speak Nacho Really

    6000’Sno.thingm[oo]nCO[2]D-erase.

    “because it is nacho real” — Queens of the Stone Age

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s