Determinations of the zonally averaged and diabatically derived residual mean circulation (RMC) are particularly sensitive to the assumed zonal mean temperature distribution used as input. Several different middle atmosphere satellite temperature distributions have been employed in models and are compared here: a 4-year (late 1978 to early 1982) National Meteorological Center (NMC) climatology, the Barnett and Corney (or BC) climatology, and the 7 months of Nimbus 7 limb infrared monitor of the stratosphere (LIMS) temperatures. All three climatologies are generally accurate below the 10 hPa level, but there are systematic differences between them of up to ¿5 K in the upper stratosphere and lower mesosphere. The NMC/LIMS differences are evaluated using time series of rocketsonde and reconstructed satellite temperatures at station locations. Much of those biases can be explained by the differing vertical resolutions for the satellite-derived temperatures; the time series of reconstructed LIMS profiles have higher resolution and are more accurate. Because the LIMS temperatures are limited to just two full seasons, one cannot obtain monthly RMCs from them for an annual model calculation. Two alternate monthly climatologies are examined briefly: the 4-year Nimbus 7 stratospheric and mesospheric sounder (SAMS) temperatures and for the mesosphere the distribution from the Solar Mesosphere Explorer (SME), both of which are limb viewers of medium vertical resolution. There are also differences of the order of ¿5 K for those data sets. It is concluded that a major source of error in the determination of diabatic RMCs is a persistent pattern of temperature bias whose characteristics vary according to the vertical resolution of each individual climatology. ¿ American Geophysical Union 1994