Latest Global Temperatures

 

If you’re looking for a non-politicized (just the facts) site for global temperatures here’s a good one:

http://www.drroyspencer.com/latest-global-temperatures/

All it does is use the NOAA satellite data to measure the atmospheric temperatures. No more. No less.  As a result, it doesn’t rely on readings ground stations which have tended to be somewhat inaccurate or affected by ambient temperature changes due to man-made construction (i.e. as an area gets urbanized, it gets warmer).

Regardless of where you stand on climate change, the numbers probably won’t make an advocate of either side very happy.

284,016 views 71 replies
Reply #1 Top

To find later

Reply #2 Top

lulz.

 

burn all of the fossil fuels!

 

ALL OF IT.

Reply #3 Top

I'd like to see that graph extended. There appears at first sight to be a 25 year (approx) cycle in there. Interesting.

Reply #4 Top

For what it's worth, several studies (including this one by skeptic Richard Muller) have found that "heat island" effects are minimal and have little bearing on the conclusions of such analyses.

Reply #5 Top

Closer to 36, if it's even valid to extrapolate on that amount of data. Agree a lot more data is needed, if those are the only measurements to be used.

Reply #6 Top

Doesn't correlate very well with CO2 output, but does with solar activity. What were the odds?

Reply #7 Top

James Lovelock just backed off of his apocalyptic predictions.  He is the father of the scare.

Reply #8 Top

All I know is that Washington state is the most temperate place on the god damn earth. I would welcome some warm rain for a change.  :D

Reply #9 Top

Don't know why everybody all concerned about this weather nonsense when they all know Jesus is coming back soon to save the day, amen! O:)

Reply #10 Top

The ever-after is one huge toy store for me to play in.

Reply #11 Top

Climate change happening is pretty obvious for everyone but the most extreme critics.  What isn't so obvious is what are the synergies causing it.  How much is man-made, how much natural, how much from past industrialization and how much from the present?

Proponents want to control global industry and economy and introduce all sorts of austerity measures to force people to change--even to the point of further damaging the world economy and making it less stable.  They cheer every "proof" that it's "man's fault" (entirely) and ignore are become agitated at anything that shows other factors.

Here's a good one: One large and prolonged volcanic eruption can dump as much CO2 into the atmosphere as the last century of industrial pollution.  

Another recent and sound study showed that if you stopped every bit of global industry right now it would not reverse the presently known changes.

The last thing is that even though we know a lot about causes, we really don't understand and have data for the "whole system"--we just know bits and pieces.

It's no problem doing something long term about it but its the, "Give us control now and don't question us you idiots!" attitudes of the green movement extremists that make the rest of us mistrusting of their motives and agendas.

+1 Loading…
Reply #12 Top

Dick Clark won't be around to ring in the New Year this year.

Well played, Mayans.  Well played.

+1 Loading…
Reply #13 Top

Regardless of where you stand on climate change, the numbers probably won’t make an advocate of either side very happy.

Isn't this a bit of a flawed premise?     Is there any believer in global warming who would not just LOVE to be wrong?    Personally I am extremely concerned for what would happen to this planet if the polar caps melt.  We are talking to the tune of being uninhabitable.    Some people will probably think I'm crazy, but I would love nothing more than for them to be right.  I just don't think they are.

The same goes for the "okay, maybe there's global warming, but it's not man-made" camp.   Isn't it a bit irrational NOT to wish you were wrong?   If it isn't man-made, then there is nothing we can do about it.  But if it is, there is.  

Reply #14 Top

The bottom line is, we need to know--not just presume.

Reply #15 Top

Quoting seanw3, reply 8
All I know is that Washington state is the most temperate place on the god damn earth. I would welcome some warm rain for a change. 

I have been to the Northwest about half a dozen times (all on business).  I have yet to see the sun when I am there (although the natives do assure me it does shine). ;)

Reply #16 Top

We have one word for snow... 'again?'

+1 Loading…
Reply #17 Top

I'm waiting for the movies and documentaries to come out about this. Then we'll get to the truth! ;) XD

Reply #18 Top

Well, currently humans through our various methods of burning crap release about 7-8 billion tons of CO2 every year.  Which sounds bad until you find out that the rest of the world (e.g. volcanoes and fauna and other natural processes) release about 200 billion tons in the same time.

Reply #19 Top

That's my point--so we cut back 8 billion tons by reversing technology and crippling economies and then realize, "Oh--it WAS the volcanoes!".

Reply #20 Top

Well, well.

Hottest summer on record in US preceded by... lowest 4-month CO2 emissions since 1992.

Reply #21 Top

Quoting Daiwa, reply 20
Well, well.

Hottest summer on record in US preceded by... lowest 4-month CO2 emissions since 1992.

Lots of paradoxes to the Global Warming Fairy Tale, isn't there?

 

Nobody was screaming Global Warming in 1936, a year which set and still holds many records for the hottest year in Illinois. (however, quite a few of those were broken this year)  Before the latest warming trend started, where I live was under a mile of ice. I'll take warming over that kind of cooling. Yes,I know, global cooling is also caused by global warming according to the "experts" so I guess the weather could go the other way any year now. ;P

Satellite temp records are fine, just give me some sat data from 100 years ago....500...1000.....10,000. to compare to current data.  ;)

"On record" from a human standpoint is a very small speck of time. 

Greenhouse gasses?

It really is the cows.

Reply #22 Top

Wow.

I guess the glaciers are only appearing to recede because it's getting cooler.

Reply #23 Top

The glaciers have been receding for centuries, Doc. It's just a question of how fast and where.

If they were advancing, the alleged cause is the same. I find humor in that.  

Reply #24 Top

The rate is accelerating, Wiz.

How truly intelligent people maintain they have no effect on the environment amazes me, when it's abundantly clear they do.

Reply #25 Top

It's not clear (yet) what the significance of that effect may be.  Observations, associations and correlations do not cause and effect make, but I don't need to tell you that.