2017 global monthly temps updated to July:



As hot as El Nino year 2016.

No sign at all of an ice age Booby!


Bringing this to the front again.

And yet the temperatures are increasing. In Australia, La Nina years now are warmer than El Nino years used to be even 30 years ago. The man on the land is feeling this increased heat and has increasingly to cope with it.

Uncertainty is always with us, that is why statistical methods were invented.

If temperatures are now ± .01°C instead of what we might like, as meteorologists, ± 0.001°C it can still measure changes of .02°C or greater.

The various temperature series do show the climb in temperatures since the Industrial Revolution. That some gases are greenhouse gases has also been known since the mid 1800s. The Harries and Feldman papers show that less IR escapes the earth and more is reflected back to the surface which warms because it cannot radiate away all the warmth it has gained from the sun.

We can also measure changes in precipitation as well. That changes as temperatures keep climbing, be impossible for it not to change with temperature: higher temperatures mean more evaporation.

And the series show that this year that is not an El Nino year is only marginally cooler than El Nino year 2016. Not by chance did we note the very hot summer in the northern hemisphere and the very mild southern hemisphere winter.

We see the increase in the number and size of wildfires. When things get hotter vegetation dries out more meaning it burns easier. The wildfires now reach such ferocities that they create their own weather, cause a cloud type associated only with huge wildfires.

Glaciers and icesheets are retreating, not advancing bar a very few glaciers that are positioned just right and benefit from increased precipitation. While there might be more precision that we would like the ±, the variance or uncertainty in temperature measurements does not mean they are wrong or that the AGW theory is in doubt.

The world is warming. No doubt about that whatsoever.

Quote:


Additional data sources—guess the uncertainty just got reduced.

Quote:




Quote:


Quote:

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 17^th, 2017 at 5:25am:



How do they compaer to 100 years ago. NOT based on a phony "temperature reconstruction"?Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 17^th, 2017 at 11:16am:



How much hotter or cooler than the measured grid box?

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 17^th, 2017 at 5:25am:



You are a meteorologist now? How many of these gauges are accurate to 0.01°C?Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 17^th, 2017 at 5:25am:



Yes and the IPCC says they couldn't measure it before the 50's because CO2 was too low., and only 50% of the warming since the 1950's. Phil Jones CRU has said that the differences in  late 19th, early 20th and late 20th century warming are statistically insignificant.

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 17^th, 2017 at 5:25am:



Yes. You expected the oceans to cool faster?

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 17^th, 2017 at 5:25am:



Citation required. Don't quote the CSIRO study that only looked at post -1970. They have good data back to 1925 or thereabouts.

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 17^th, 2017 at 5:25am:



You expect glaciers and icesheets to be static on a dynamic earth? They have advanced and retreated before.

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 17^th, 2017 at 5:25am:


They don't mean they are as certain as you like to pretend.

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 17^th, 2017 at 11:16am:


And what is the time period exactly? Oh, we don't have much historical data? If we don't have the data it didn't happen?

2017 global monthly temps updated to July:



As hot as El Nino year 2016.

No sign at all of an ice age Booby!


Bringing this to the front again.

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 17^th, 2017 at 5:18pm:



Yeah. Shows you shouldn't post sch!t.

"That calculation comes from NASA and NOAA. Other agencies may come up with a slightly different number because there are several techniques for calculating a global average, depending on how one accounts for temperatures above the data-sparse oceans and other poorly sampled regions.

Since there is no universally accepted definition for Earth’s average temperature, several different groups around the world use slightly different methods for tracking the global average over time"

https://www2.ucar.edu/climate/faq/what-average-global-temperature-now

Wow. No universally accepted definition? What a great way to do science. Compare apples to oranges or orang-utans, makes no difference.

BTW- How are those temperatures for 1997 going? Still over 3ºF above 2016?

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 17^th, 2017 at 9:01pm:



There goes that incomprehension of yours again.

They all use GHCN. They then incorporate their own algorithms.

Of course it you want to disagree with what ucar.edu says their address is below.

"Postal Address: P.O. Box 3000, Boulder, CO 80307-3000 • Shipping Address: 3090 Center Green Drive, Boulder, CO 80301

The National Center for Atmospheric Research is sponsored by the National Science Foundation. Any opinions, findings and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation."

Enjoy.