Global Temperatures – April 2021

My calculation of April’s temperature (anomaly) was 0.64C, which is down 0.04C from March. This is based on V4C and HADSST3 data using spherical triangulation. It is the coldest April since 2015.

It was particularly cool across Europe, Central/Western US and in Australia and the Southern Polar region.

2021 so far is significantly cooler, so  roughly the same as 2014.


About Clive Best

PhD High Energy Physics Worked at CERN, Rutherford Lab, JET, JRC, OSVision
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

14 Responses to Global Temperatures – April 2021

  1. RichardLH says:

    How do think this will evolve over the next few months?

  2. RichardLH says:

    It might be worth doing a Mollweide projection instead/as well

  3. David Bunney says:

    Do you trust the data sets compiled by those that adjust surface measurements?
    Satellites show a much more pronounced cooling phase development.

    • Clive Best says:

      Yes we should consider both. They measure different things though and rely on anomalies to be able to compare them. Both see cooling in 2021

      • climateandenergymaster says:

        Thanks Clive. I recognise that both UAH satellite and various surface measurement data sets show cooling and that is very significant. It seems that the polar and subtropical jets have been rather further equatorward on average and much more wobbly (technical term) than in previous years. We are definitely cooler so far this year – which you might link to various reasons… which we might hypothesise to be due to various reasons.

        Is it good to infer something about global, regional or local climate from derived global temperature anomaly graphs? The idea of a global temperature and an temporal anomaly, assuming that bad data is eliminated whilst any corrections and adjustments make sense in terms of physics and mathematical/statistical principles. I am not sure it does. We see most raw data for good stations (not impacted seriously by changes in urbanisation) across N. America or Europe showing little trend or where there is variability and zooming out we see no real change from longer term climate records or even longer reconstructions. [little to support the AGW climate emergency].

        Satellite Data: Conversion of various microwave measurements (on a wavelength emitted strongly by oxygen isotopes), correcting for various factors which introduce errors… [hopefully in a rigorous and honest way] to give an average temperature for a slab of the atmosphere with high concentrations of that isotope.

        Ground Data: There are those (and I would count myself in this group) that believe that those who look after this data set are not applying honest scientific principles but being selective about the data used and how it is adjusted and reported… there are many stations which have undergone changes in surroundings from urbanisation; some stations stopped being manual recordings and became automatic and no one is checking that the site complies with quality standards (ie perhaps it’s now in an asphalt carpark with an air-conditioning exhaust).

        Anthony Watts and his followers have looking into how bad many of the current measurement stations are

        There seem to be a lot of statistical homogenisation where instead of reviewing artificially warmed stations due to urbanisation they overwrite good rural station data; similarly there is a lot of spurious cooling of historical data under the excuse of changes in instrumentation and time-of-day of readings;

        A number of people have analysed this:

        Tony Heller has looked at the NASA data records

        Anyway I am not in anyway criticising your data analysis… it is good that there is now a visible cooling phase and I would like to see more discussion and evaluation of the linkage with solar activity. For example : or the book “COLD SUN”

        • Clive Best says:

          The only reason to use global temperature measurements is that there is no other way to determine whether “global warming/climate change/climate emergency” is real and if it is serious. Anything else is more like crystal ball gazing ( hurricanes/drought/extreme temperatures increasing etc). So we have to do the best we can with incomplete and time varying temperature data. For sure there are problems with the historic data and attempts to homogenise differences may lead to biases, but on the whole it is clear that there has been a small amount of warming since pre-industrial times. Humans have had a massive impact on the environment and nature so they may surely have affected the climate.

          The problem I have is to imagine that climate change is the only problem we have and that somehow if we all drive EVs and cover vast amounts of the our countryside with Wind Turbines we can solve it. Nuclear Power is the only long term solution.

          • climateandenergymaster says:

            Clive, I see we are quite aligned on many things. I hold a degree in Meteorology (atmospheric physics and it’s application in studying the atmosphere and oceans for the main part with training in modelling and data analysis etc thrown in). And after over twenty years working in the UK National Grid in Energy Policy, regulation at UK and EU level, on market design, operational control processes and IT systems I have a good inside line on the climate debate as well as the huge impracticalities of moving away from fossil fuels (and lack of need to do so).

            I am quite happy looking across the proxy data going back millions of years; the archives of civilisation growth and decay and the role of climate in those events and the more recent instrument climate records (when you can sift through those that have been corrupted by the changing environment around them or deliberate alteration of record by politicised agencies) that we can say that climate has been warmer in the past with less glacial ice etc and generally civilisations do better and can colonise the vast northern lands of Russia and Canada during warmer periods. (Even in Britain much of upland areas such as Dartmoor were feld of trees during warmer periods when the area could sustain agriculture and humans in fire heated huts could keep warm.

            We know that the climate has been warmer and cooler under radically different levels of atmospheric CO2 concentration and from basic review of radiative transfer theory and the unknowns about feedback mechanisms we can say that it is improbable that putting lots of CO2 in the air will make a runaway climate hot house that is worse for humans. If anything it will be better for plants and for humans.

            When it comes to the mad policies that are being promoted by the UN political wing of the IPCC and the COP agendas as well as side groups such as the WEF. We see that this whole thing is hijacked for social, economic and political reengineering of the world. Which is bad for anyone doing reasonably well and loving democracy and freedom under the current regime.

            Fossil fuels are pretty much needed to enable intensive farming; industrial activity that gives us all our material goods and advanced tech; it is needed to pump water; to distribute food and goods and to keep us warm in winter… wind ,solar and storage are not up to the job. These attempts at a solution will destroy much more of the earth because of the land they require once installed, the amount of energy required to refine materials and manufacture them and the vast excavation and mining works required to pull metals, minerals and rare-earth materials out of the ground. When in operation they require a distributed model of operation and control, for which there is not enough affordable or installable capacity to make a storage solution viable at levels the facilitate today’s civilisation and instead we will start to ration energy, products, goods as well as heat, housing, clothing and food to the poorest… working our way up through civilisation until it is just the elites that still live comfortably as lords in their castles and estates. The future is bleak unless we stop all this madness.

            Anyway I am interested to see your work to show cooling; I just expect that if the trend continues that those that control datasets such as Hadcrut; Berkley Earth or NOAA/NASA will find additional adjustments to cancel out that cooling and make it appear as though the graph is still sloping upwards… they always do!

            Be interested to see if those that promote the COLD SUN driven cycles get to say I told you so… or whether as you say we will have plenty of more daily survival issues to deal with by then caused by politicians and other powerful people.

            Troubling times…

  4. Hugo says:

    Coroa effect. ?
    Aviation down 50% and temperatures drop.
    Maybe high altitude pollution has a pretty big effect.

  5. Western Hiker says:

    Lytton, BC, broke Canada’s all time high on three consecutive days, peaking at 121.4 F on June 29. That beat the original mark by 8 degrees F. (The place is tiny, so not much of an UHI.)

    Next day the whole town was on fire:

  6. Jacob N Middlebrook says:

    Hang on for more sea level rise talk. The Moon, Sun and Earth create an 18 year tidal cycle. The last peak was in September 2015. For the past decade we have been on the downward trend of maximum and minimum tides. Over the next decade we will be on the rising cycle. The result will be more high tide flooding in already low lying areas. Get ready for the we’re all gonna die button to be pressed.

Leave a Reply