Still Going

Wondering what the May temperature anomaly maps will look like. Isn’t El Nino supposed to have wound down?

Anyway the UAH near-surface channel continues to be a rather disconcerting outlier. (Click the image for focus.)


  1. The negative nature of the y-axis is because it's not actually showing temperature – it's showing "brightness temperature" which takes a little explanation.And there really is a seasonal variation because (a) different amount of land in northern vs southern hemispheres and (b) eccentricity of Earth's orbit. Compare the seasonal variation of the sea surface chart with that of ch04/ch05. It'll make sense if you think about it.

  2. The y axis is negative, and the record started in 1998.As for ch 4 vs ch 5, I am not sure. I guess there is more scientific interest in a pure tropospheric signal than one where some land temps may mix in.

  3. I find the set up at that site odd. The y axis values appears to be upside down, there's no data for half of the 'controversial' 1998, and there is a temp rise hump in the middle of every year that seems at odds with their data, where the higher temps are Oct – Mar for some years. And, as Nick pointed out, there are more utilities for the channel 05 data than the surface channel (04), which is where the point of controversy is strongest (isn't it?).I'm no expert, so if someone could explain these things, or confirm that they're a bit odd, I'd be grateful.

  4. You are being a nonconformist in your choice of the more obvious "near surface layer(ch04)" UAH amsu graph.Other websites generally suggest the less obvious 14000ft channel 5, without ever giving an explanation. The message is the same on both.

Leave a Reply