There is no way that the scientists can accurately predict weather patterns from 1880 and compare them with today. Scientists would probably not be able to accurately monitor temperatures until the 1980s (especially ocean temperatures). We are not seeing record-breaking temperatures that have smashed decades-long temperature records.

UnSubRocky wrote on Jan 19^th, 2017 at 9:39pm:


Well now they have 3000 Argo buoys for the ocean. 355 million sq km. That should cut that uncertainty right down. 

Let's hear the date of your earliest record and we can all make up our minds how relevant the data is in the overall scheme of things.

Global record from 1850[edit]
The period for which reasonably reliable instrumental records of near-surface temperature exist with quasi-global coverage is generally considered to begin around 1850. Earlier records exist, but with sparser coverage and less standardized instrumentation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instrumental_temperature_record

Quote:
Global record from 1850[edit]
The period for which reasonably reliable instrumental records of near-surface temperature exist with quasi-global coverage is generally considered to begin around 1850. Earlier records exist, but with sparser coverage and less standardized instrumentation.

Interesting graphics

Because they don't have thermometers at the North Pole they infill from the nearest land based source.

With 1200 kilometre interpolation.

https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2017/01/2016-giss-1200km-interpolati...

Without 1200kilometre interpolation

https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2017/01/2016-giss-250km-interpolatio...

Grey areas are those with no data.

So still 0.73 degrees above anomaly even with no data areas shaded? Cheers.

The whole thing is multifactorial.

Not really, its just statistics.

NO just saying that if you understand stats you understand why that variance occurs. It doesn't bother me largely.

Umm you can't just say its 0.04 degrees warmer on its own and say its statistically significant or insignificant.

And it still doesnt improve the ability to state its statistically significant or insignifcant.

No. P value would be good.

"Now, in a Nature news article titled “Scientific method: Statistical errors,” Regina Nuzzo, a professor of statistics at Gallaudet University in Washington, DC, has ignited a statistical firestorm on the internet. The tweets are flying and the blogosphere exploding with commentary (including this one). Sadly, the specious use of statistics is nothing new. According to Nuzzo, the root of the problem is the surprisingly slippery nature of the P value, which is neither as reliable nor as objective as most scientists assume. An analysis of medical literature found that P values have emerged from many different kinds of experiments, and have been processed and filtered in so many ways, that there is no way that the underlying assumptions about their statistical properties could hold up."

http://theresilientearth.com/?q=content/perfidious-p-value-and-false-global-warm...

http://www.nature.com/news/scientific-method-statistical-errors-1.14700

The movie An Inconvenient Truth,2006, predicted the flooding of New York,2012, during superstorm Sandy 6 years before it happened.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=2unzHvFPtY0

The movies scored on many predictions

There goes lee spewing off his nonsense again.

Appears the latest temperature data confirms Mother Earth's long-term warming trend. Oh but wait a minnie here, lee will contest "weather phenomena" like El Nino and its bratty cousin  La Nina. No question, both can cause positive or negative spikes in the temperature yet they are relatively small compared to the overall increase in global surface temperature(s) which have risen by an average of 1.1 degrees Celsius since the late 19th century.

So keep on increasing amount of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases into the atmosphere (Trump will damn sure make that happen) and continue to blame everything else but human activity.

Denizen lee must be off it's head. "62.45ºC"

16 of the 17 hottest years have occurred since 2000
Once, the years with heat records were anomalies. Now it seems that we are getting used to experiencing hotter temperatures each year. According to scientists, though there are many factors, the main cause of this problem is the human burning of fossil fuels. They say that the earth is going through big changes and these changes are caused by Greenhouse gas emission.

2016 has become the hottest year on the earth since the temperatures started being tracked back in 1880, as it was announced Wednesday by the World Meteorological Organization, a specialized agency of the United Nations. As well, 2016 has set global warm record for the third consecutive year. This was also announced by NASA and NOAA, who held a joint press conference to discuss the matter.

I've already pointed out to you that you are deceitfully using superseded data

Quote:
Please note: the estimate for the baseline global temperature used in this study differed, and was warmer than, the baseline estimate (Jones et al., 1999) used currently. This report has been superseded by subsequent analyses. However, as with all climate monitoring reports, it is left online as it was written at the time.

Want to hear a scary statistic? You have just lived through the hottest year on record. If you’re under 40, you’ve never lived in a year with global temperatures at or below the 20th century average....

...In 2016, Australians witnessed the battering of our natural heritage by climate change.

The Great Barrier Reef suffered its worst coral bleaching event in history; ancient World Heritage forests in Tasmania which had never burned before were razed by bushfires; and extreme heat drove an unprecedented mangrove dieback in the Northern Territory.

Many other heat records were broken in 2016, with Australia experiencing its fourth-warmest year ever, including the hottest March and autumn on record.

Ocean temperatures around Australia were the hottest ever recorded.

The 2016-17 summer had only just begun before Sydneysiders spent their hottest December night in record-keeping history, tossing and turning in what was the first of many more extreme heat events for the season. There was no cold turkey on offer in Adelaide either as the city sweltered through its hottest Christmas in 70 years, while temperatures soared to almost 40°C in some parts of Victoria over the festive period. The high day and night-time temperatures resulted in heatwave conditions in much of NSW, southern Queensland, central and eastern Victoria and northern Tasmania.

As the bells brought in the new year, the world’s leading meteorological agencies were crunching the numbers to later hand 2016 the unenviable title of hottest year on record, the third consecutive year the record has been broken.

More importantly, the record hot years of 2014, 2015 and 2016 are part of a deeply troubling long-term warming trend that is marching on unabated. We cannot afford this dangerous trend to continue.

Unforgiven wrote on Jan 21^st, 2017 at 2:55pm:



Except for 1997.

Mmmm, 150+ years . . .a tiny pimple on one butt in a herd of elephants.

The_Barnacle wrote on Jan 21^st, 2017 at 9:29am:


You do realise they only compare it to 1979?

How is that for cherry picking records?