Boy, this is a tough one. I think I'll weigh in after our resident experts, bt and bloom, tell us exactly what is happening here.

However, I'll put my money on an extended drought here in the Southeast.

Brett,

Nice to see some raw data, unfiltered by an author's interpretation. Three things stand out.

1. 1997 was the warmest year.

2. Temperatures have been cooling steadily since 2003.

3. Temperatures around Antarctica have been "below normal" since at least 1998.

I don't understand. Looks like overall cooling off since 1997 except a little warming in Arctic. Looks warmer in Arctic in 97. Brett, what you say?

Reply: Just looking at the maps I see a cooling trend from 1999-2001 then a warming trend from 2001-2003 followed by a slight cooling from 2004-2007. Brett

Pretty obvious recent cooling as you say Brett

Not sure exactly what the point is, but I guess if deniers and their misuse of "Henry's Law" were correct, CO2 increases should have been very erratic over the past ten years -- rather than linear -- because, after all, rising CO2 is due to warming oceans. (sarcasm)

Brett,

This a cool exercise. Can you do the same with land surface temps?

Reply: I will look into it. Brett

Like duh...

Nothing like cherry picking your data by starting with the biggest El Nino in history and comparing it to the current La Nina conditions. Reply: that's right, good observation Andrew. Part of the exercise was identifying the strong el nino from 97' with the obvious La Nina today. There were also some other weaker ENSO events that you can pick out as well. Also note the water temps over the tropical Atlantic and Caribbean over the period and see if there was a correlation to Atlantic hurricane activity. Brett

Brett,

A little lecture is in order...

Believe it or not, there is a differance between weather and climate!

Climate is the average of weather over a period of time. Typically, between 10 to 30 years. If you pick a particular day, week or month and compare them over the years, then it is easy to come up with all kinds of goofy trends that can easily mislead ignorant people. Reply: that is true Andrew, but there is no intent to mislead anyone in this case. I just grabbed each map from the third week of October and compared the changes from year to year. Usually, when I compare previous year anomalies I like to use data from the same month and week of each year. Brett

So, here is a little homework assignment.

Average 10 years of monthly sea surface temperature data and tell us when the warmest 10 years ended.

Here is an ftp site for the data.

ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/anomalies/monthly.ocean.90S.90N.df_1901-2000mean.dat

For extra points, tell us when the second warmest 10 years were that do not overlap with the warmest 10 years.

If you can answer correctly, then the warming trend in the climate will be obvious.

Things may be slow on the east coast with respect to Global Warming, but in California it is really heating up!

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/10/18/60minutes/main3380176_page2.shtml

"That's right. The fire season in the last 15 years or so has increased more than two months over the whole Western U.S. So actually 78 days of average longer fire season in the last 15 years compared to the previous 15 or 20 years," Swetnam says.

"Wait a minute. Did you just say that there's a reasonable chance we could lose half of the forests in the West?" Pelley asks.

"Yes, within some decades to a century, as warming continues, and we continue to get large scale fires," Swetnam replies.

"You know, there are a lot of people who don't believe in climate change," Pelley remarks.

"You won't find them on the fire line in the American West anymore," Tom Boatner says. "'Cause we've had climate change beat into us over the last ten or fifteen years. We know what we're seeing, and we're dealing with a period of climate, in terms of temperature and humidity and drought that's different than anything people have seen in our lifetimes."

Andrew-

When you chose to attack Brett you implicitly stated that by picking a warm period to start he is obviously trying to mislead us into noting that there has been a cooling trend. (oddly enough he picked a ten year period which would seem an odd coincedence if he was trying to mislead) Explain for me then, what it is that you and your fellow agw faithful are doing when you pick the last hundred and fifty years or so which began with the coldest period in a long time and demonstrate a warming trend. You are guilty of exactly what you accuse Brett of doing.

As a personal aside, I think that you are being unacceptebly rude to Brett and you have lost all respect from me. (not that it should matter to you in the slightest)

And further pertaining to the fires in the west, it has been seen over the last couple decades that between deforestation laws and various other political infringements that the undergrowth in the forests is not being cut out sufficiently enough to prevent fires. On another line, on of the fire chiefs currently fighting the fires has announced that at least three of the fires were deliberately set. Are you and your article honestly implying that a rise of a few degrees means the forest will all burn down? Because that is an absurd argument. Even if it is the case, we know forests have been in places that are now plains or deserts and also the reverse is true. One of the most prominent things in the agw argument is the assumption that the earth suddenly reached equilibrium a hundred and some odd years ago.

Elliot

"in California it is really heating up"

We are actually running about 5 to 10 degrees below normal for the last month.
http://hprcc.unl.edu/products/maps/acis/wrcc/30dTDeptWRCC.png

Over the last three years, California has generally had a lot of rain. This year it dried out and when the Santa Ana's arrived, people foolish enough to build near the hills are losing their properties.
http://hprcc.unl.edu/products/maps/acis/wrcc/36mPNormWRCC.png

About as surprising as hurricane damage to cities built along the gulf with elevations below sea level.

That is great data. Definite cooling trend. Makes one wonder if the oceans have been cooling over the last 10 years why all the hype about it being warmer everywhere? Brett is there a lag between the oceans cooling and land temps cooling? Makes one think it is inevitable that land temps will cool down over the coming years. Thanks again.

Elliot,

You are making things up about me. Stick with verified facts to avoid interpreting everything personally.

If you wish, pick the 1930's or 40's as a starting point for global warming discussions. At the time, they were regarded as a warmer period.

I recognize that there are both natural and man-made influences on the climate. Until around the 1950's, man's influence was minor. However, since then, man's influence is significant and has resulted in climatic changes.

The changes are also happening rapidly compared to the past and will continue until greenhouse gas levels are brought under control.

Question! How can the oceans seemingly cooling trend correspond to Mondays unbiased report of decreased CO2 absorption in the worlds oceans?????? Hmmmm Should the incongruity of the information be viewed as bad holistic science or just simple fraud??? AGW crowd do what you do best! Please feel free to speculate!
This is a 10 year trend. That's all it is.
Most AGW reports are using a 10-20 year trend, so please don't talk about cherry picking data.
We need real science in this debate followed with actual discussion on the merits of the science not social ideology.
As for the California fires???? Maybe living in a semi-desert has some drawbacks when you build your house on a ridge top with the canyon below filled with years accumulation of dry kindling. (Let's just pray these fires die quickly and hope nobody else gets hurt)
BTW- It would take way too long to explain the 20 other probable reasons for these fires without ever bringing up the words "Global Warming".

Andrew,

...but in California it is really heating up!

Study the graph at the bottom of this page and describe the trend(s) that you see. Granted, this graph does not include the United States, but then AGW is not exclusively confined to the US, correct?

"Question! How can the oceans seemingly cooling trend correspond to Mondays unbiased report of decreased CO2 absorption in the worlds oceans??????"

Good point Ted, that's the best question I've hear all morning.

Guys

Andrew is a little boisterous, but I feel he has a point. Not about the deception, because I know that Brett wasn't trying to deceive anyone. He does seem right in that the trends for one week of the year are not as important as the trends for the whole year. I, too, was happy when I saw these figures, because, while I am one of the AGW "faithful" as some would descrie me, I hate the thought of a warmer world, and I wish that the earth wasn't warming. But Andrew brought me back to reality and made me realize that on the whole, the oceans and the land have been getting warmer, assuimgn that the climate data has not been fouled up. What I mean to say is, when was the last time that the world as a whole had an average cool anomaly? The last one I remember hearing about was the year after Mt. Pinotubo. Heck, when was the last time that the world had an average cool anomaly for one single month?
One thing I would like to say is, I like being proved wrong on this topic, so if anyone out there has the actual data on when was the last global cool month and year, I'd like to hear it. By that I mean to ask if anyone knows when the global temperature anomaly was last negative for a whole month, and a whole year.

The AMO (Atlantic Multi Decadal Oscillation) has been in a positive phase for almost a decade. The PDO Pacific Decadal Oscillation) has been in a posiitve phase since 1976. Consequently, enhanced ENSO events are driving most of the NH climate. Having 2 strong positive teleconnections occuring at the same time indicate (at least to me)an excess amount thermal energy brought on by insolation. Remember, the main warming component of our oceans is the sun. As Joe Bastardi observed earlier this month, our current climate regime is ENSO driven.

As far as SoCal goes, Santa Ana winds occur when a Maritime Polar High settles over the Western Interior Rockies, and stays anchored for several days or weeks. The hot dry air are a result of subsidence and adiabatic warming, and not GHGs. Ironically, the stronger the Cold High, the stronger the pressure gradient, and the stronger the resultant winds become.

It seems to me these maps could be used by psychiatrists in the same manner they use ink-blots, as a window into people's subconcious.

For example, when I look at these maps I see a duck, a lamb, a sideways carrot, and a butterfly flapping its wings. (The psychiatrist goes, "Hmmm. Very interesting," and scratches doodles onto his notepad.)

Andrew sees someone picking cherries. (The psychiatrist goes, "Hmm. What color are the cherries?")

Another might wonder about the persistant hot spot north of Scandinavia. (The psychiatrist wakes up and says, "What's that you said about hot Scandinavians?")

Others don't even look at the maps, more interested in commenting on the comments.

Regarding California fires:

Besides the forestry practices already noted, it should be stated that (due to a lack of undeveloped real estate in the flatlands) developers have moved up into the hills, especially during the past decade. This increases the danger, and the likelihood of burned houses during a Santa Anna.

Fires are so natural to the western ecosystem that species of Pines have evolved which don't drop their seeds until prompted to do so by a fire.

As far as the fires go that headline will be soon forgot when winter rains bring massive mud slides.

Andrew,

Here is the reason for the California wildfires. This, and the fact, as Elliot pointed out, that the environmental laws preclude the clearing of dead vegetation as fire prevention measures.

http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/multimedia/audioclips/earth-20071023/

It is just the liberal media and the AGW crowd it caters to which are hyping this as a result of global warming.

The thought just recently occurred to me, having viewed the CNN PinP report (Planet in Peril), that all the melting ice in the Artic is cooling something. PinP said the original computer prediction of the loss of one million sq. miles of sea ice would occur by 2050. And it has, 43 years early, now. That is a lot of cooling. And where the water went would depend on the balance between it's salinity, and it's tempurature. The cold sinking, the fresh floating. And remember, water is a refrigerent fluid, much like freon, just at different pressures & temperatures. No wonder such complexity is hard to predict. Any thoughts or suggestions to this idea would be appreciated. Thanks, Dallas Dave