We Just Had The Warmest September on Record

Spread the love

We have been having a run of very warm months, and according to the GISS database, updated yesterday, September was the warmest on record, and the records go back to the late 19th century. This is global average temperature of the surface.

I’ll have more about this later, as other databases are updated. Sometimes one data set shows slightly different results than others, so it is good to look at them all as a group. Also, NOAA has not updated its climate watcher thingie yet.

If October, November and December turn out to be very warm as well, 2014 will end up being one of the top three or four warmest years on record, despite a somewhat cold start.

Have you read the breakthrough novel of the year? When you are done with that, try:

In Search of Sungudogo by Greg Laden, now in Kindle or Paperback
*Please note:
Links to books and other items on this page and elsewhere on Greg Ladens' blog may send you to Amazon, where I am a registered affiliate. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases, which helps to fund this site.

Spread the love

30 thoughts on “We Just Had The Warmest September on Record

  1. Top ten Septembers, global average temperature land and sea surfaces:

    2006 14.58 10
    2008 14.58 9
    2007 14.61 8
    2002 14.62 7
    2003 14.62 6
    2009 14.63 5
    2012 14.67 4
    2013 14.72 3
    2005 14.73 2
    2014 14.77 1

  2. Not the world, not the U.S.

    Danmark på vej mod rekordvarmt 2014
    (Denmark on the way to a record hot 2014)
    Hvis ikke vinteren kommer tidligt, så ender 2014 som Danmarks varmeste år, siden de landsdækkende målinger startede i 1874.
    (If winter doesn’t come early, 2014 will end as Denmark’s hottest year since nationwide measurements began in 1874)

  3. NOAA are releasing their September figures Tuesday 14th. The Japanese JMA has not release their figures yet.

    I was thinking how has it come to this, looking at monthly figures is silly given the uncertainty ranges. Yearly or 5-yearly makes more sense. I blame the AGW deniers and their misleading “zero trend” line thru TLT temperate data that is even more noisy than the surface data.

  4. Nope, no Goddard links on my blog. Try that again you are banned for life.

    Harry, we love data. Who is going to ignore monthly data for for five years? Also, this is not passive observation. The current state is vitally important. But yes, the deniers ….

  5. You really ought to make the distinction between S Goddard and NASA Goddard… I really don’t think you’re against links pointing to one of NASA’s FFRDCs that’s doing legitimate climate science…

  6. @2. Greg Laden : LOL.

    Scary stats – notice no year with a 19.. or anything other than 20 in front of that list. That kinda speaks for itself when we have well over a century and a half worth of recorded data doesn’t it? Thanks Desertphile.

    – Stevo R

  7. @9. I take it you aren’t talking about the pioneering rocket engineer here?

    Here in Adelaide its been unusually dry so far and therian has been patchy. I gather its not going to be an El Nino year after all but it still feels a bit like one at present anyhow – and dreading the summer and what it may bring us here.

  8. Astrostevo,

    I agree, it has felt like an El Nino in Australia for the last couple of months even if their strict definition has not been met. I recall we had a winter with frosty nights during the last one – a sign of dryness.

  9. Greg –
    Just to clarify:
    “Not the world, not the U.S.” doesn’t refer to what you did (global), but to my own limited focus (Denmark). My comment wasn’t a criticism, but a supplement.

  10. Japanese JMA data. September 2014 warmest September on record

    Five Warmest Years (Anomalies)

    1st. 2014(+0.34°C), 2nd. 2013(+0.26°C), 3rd. 2012(+0.25°C), 4th. 2009,2005(+0.22°C)

  11. Threatening to ban someone for life for posting a link to something you may disagree with?

    Reality denial, that’s what that is.


    1. No. I don’t want my site to be a link dump for really horrendous sites that provide huge amounts of misinformation. That is my choice, and in fact, it is my responsibility as a science communicator, educator, and scientist. Also Goddard isn’t just a denialist, he is a creepy person that I think many would find offensive and threatening, and I don’t want to point to sites like that either.

      This is not denying reality, it is observing a smarmy and obnoxious realty and refusing to take part in it.

  12. Per JMA, October through December only need anomalies of +0.16 per month for 2014 to be warmest year on record. Compare that with the average monthly anomaly thus far of +0.254. It seems pretty likely at this point.

  13. Goddard is a conspiracy theorist through and through. Nothing about him has any place in any discussion of science anywhere.

  14. NOAA temps data due out around the 22nd October. It always seems to get the most headlines.

    I am sure if 2014 is deemed the hottest year on record the deniers will just trot out that computer program they use to find zero trends in noisy monthly TLT temperature values, although it must be getting difficult to get even that trick to work.

    Does Goddard go around trying to average raw/unhomogenized temp values? I have seen this attempted on Australian BOM temp values.

  15. “Creepy…. offensive and threatening”?

    “A smarmy and obnoxious realty”? (Does he sell condos?)

    Jeez, #18 – you provoked a few ad hominems there, dude.

    Best just go back to analyzing the science of ‘warmness’, eh?

    1. D Swann: You keep using this word, “ad hominem” but I don’t think it means what you think it means.

      Goddard has nothing to contribute to the conversation. I am not suggesting he’s wrong because he is a creepy stalky jerk. His rhetoric on AGW is so abysmally bad and utterly made up that his arguments do not require further evaluation. He is, however, obnoxious and that is a simple statement of fact, not an argument about his arguments.

      You, D Swann, are a sock puppet (often known as “corrector” but a few other names as well). Which puts you in the ban bin as well. Bye.

  16. Greg

    As a non scientist, reading through these comments I am delighted that you are in fact ‘God’ in this – a God who does not mince his words and also able to properly judge inappropriate remarks and people. This has the effect of limiting the messages to the facts, taking away all of the nut elements. But more importantly it does not do away with the emotion, the constructive arguments and criticism. It is frightening to note the extent of madness in what is goes for rational humanity.

  17. James, it’s cheaper and often ‘greener’ to recycle materials (“our pollution”) than to produce replacements. If we instead bought brand new items from China, that would add more CO2 to the atmosphere. It’s a matter of efficiency. Better would be to cut back on consumerism, but we all know what a firestorm THAT suggestion would cause!

  18. Maybe the better way to put it would be, cut back on the short-lifespan disposable nature of consumerism. That’s an element of efficiency and one of the cheapest, most readily available means to curb greenhouse gas emissions.

  19. Sure. I usually think of the root of the word as regards ‘consumerism’: To consume, to use up — hence throwing away after such use, which leads to the short lifespan of things in “modern society”.

    Contrast the way we design, produce, and use things with an earlier age, perhaps termed the “craftsmanship” age. In that time, considerable care was put into making things so that they were durable, serviceable, and aesthetically pleasing (“useless ornamentation” is probably how it would be viewed by today’s manufacturing houses).

    “Consumers” used those items, but didn’t “consume” them. Today, it’s buy, consume, throw away: the packaging, the item, etc. — then go buy another, leading to more senseless manufacturing of landfill items and more CO2.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *