Last month was the fourth warmest January on record for the contiguous United States and the 19th warmest January on record globally.
This 19th warmest ranking also means that January was the "coolest" month in the past four years.
The overall cooling tendency of La Nina, record cold in Alaska (not counted in the stats for the contiguous U.S.), and widespread cold in Eastern Europe, the Middle East, and Asia tempered the unusual warmth across the United States.
The combined global land and ocean average surface temperature in January was 54.3 degrees Fahrenheit, which is 0.7 degrees Fahrenheit above the 20th century average. Separately, the land surface temperature was 1.1 degrees Fahrenheit higher than the 20th century average (26th warmest on record), and the global ocean surface temperature was 0.54 degrees Fahrenheit warmer than the 20th century average (17th warmest on record).
There are a number global temperature measurements and a number of rankings, which can lead to confusion. The statistics referenced here are based on NOAA's preliminary global climate data, which is released each month. Each month is compared to itself (January versus all previous January months, July versus all previous July months, etc.), and the result is individual lists of the months ranked in order from warmest to coolest, with the data extending back to the 1890s.
In these terms, January 2012 ranks as the "coolest" individual month since January 2008, which was the 31st warmest January on record, and January 2012 is only one of five months out of the past 48 that has not been in the top 10 warmest on record. For comparison, eight of the 48 months have been the warmest or second warmest on record.
The cold from Eastern Europe into much of Asia represented the beginning of a prolonged intense cold wave that expanded westward and resulted in devastating cold and snow to large portions of Europe into this month.
It will be interesting to see how the battle between the U.S. warmth and European cold will play out in the global temperature statistics for February, and I'll include an update when those stats become available.
Are you suddenly going to recognize the century of original research which backs the scientific consensus on global warming?
It was very cold. Why do you ask?
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/hadobs/hadcet/mly_cet_mean_sort.txt
"While there are noticeable highs and lows in year to year data, over longer periods of time there is a discernible warming trend across the globe. Natural causes can explain only a small part of this warming. The overwhelming majority of scientists agree that this is due to rising concentrations of heat-trapping greenhouse gases in the atmosphere caused by human activities."
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/climate-change
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/hadobs/hadcet/mly_cet_mean_sort.txt
It's telling you that England in January 2012 was warmer than England was in January 1676.
http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/map/images/fnl/sfctmpmer_01a.fnl.anim.html
For the first 2 weeks in February, Europe, Australia, northern Asia and Antarctica were much colder than normal, with the contiguous US and Arctic being warmer than normal with part of the Arctic being much warmer than normal. On balance, the world looked like it would be below the baseline anomaly during this period. Currenlty, most of the places that were much colder have warmed up, the US has cooled slightly and the Arctic has remained warm, so on balance the world looks warmer than the baseline anomaly. It would have to be significantly warmer over the whole globe for the 11 days remaining for February 2012 not to be another cold month, however.
http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/analysis_monitoring/ensostuff/ensoyears.shtml
Secondly, if the cooling pacific ocean was the reason for the cool global temperature in January 2012, why was one of the areas closest to it's source - the contiguous US - warmer than the rest of the planet?
The truth is that climate "scientists" haven't got a clue where the "missing heat" which the computer models predicted should have occurred due to increasing CO2 emissions, has disappeared to. The solar cycle has been on a rise since 2009, so it's obviously not that. The explanation that it's being sucked in to the ocean depths is frankly ludicrous. Even if there was such a momentous force that could carry warm water downwards, it wouldn't stay there for long due to convection.