Perspectives on Temperature

[Jack Hays]

By now most regular visitors to this subforum have seen most of the graphed temperature presentations favored by different posters. This is a review of presentations and the information they actually convey.

Global Warming in Perspective
“…it is the change in temperature compared to what we’ve been used to that matters.” – Part 2

In this post, we’re going to present graphs that show the annual lowest TMIN and highest TMAX Near-Land Surface Air Temperatures (not in anomaly form) for ten (10) Countries in an effort to add some perspective to global warming. The list of countries, which follows, includes the countries with the highest populations. And, as always…

[FONT=&quot]Normally, global land+ocean surface temperature anomaly data are presented in anomaly form, with the scaling of the y-axis as tight as possible to make the long-term and short-term variations appear large, when, in reality, they’re very small…so small you’d never notice them if it wasn’t for the constant browbeating with alarmist propaganda we’re receiving daily from politicians, from the mainstream media, from businesses whose profits depend on the climate change scare, and from members of the publically funded climate data and modeling businesses, which have to keep their funding alive. An example of a normal presentation of global mean surface temperature (GMST) data can be seen in Reference Figure 1. It is a graph created by NASA GISS (Goddard Institute of Space Studies) and is available at their website here in .png form.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Reference Figure 2 is an example of what’s being presented in this post, but instead of TMIN and TMAX data for individual countries, the data in Reference Figure 2 is derived from the global mean data for near-surface land air temperatures. The Berkeley Earth global TMAX data for land surfaces are here and the global TMIN data are here. The blue curve toward the bottom includes the data for the annual lowest TMIN temperatures and red curve toward the top includes the data for the annual highest TMAX Near-Land Surface Air Temperatures (not in anomaly form). As noted above, the black curve toward the middle is for the Berkeley Earth annual global mean land+ocean surface temperature anomaly data, referred to on the graph as GMST for Global Mean Surface Temperature. For illustration purposes, and depending on the data for the individual country, I shift the curve [of the] GMST data so that it remains between the curves of the TMIN and TMAX data. With some countries, it’s not necessary and the GMST curve hugs 0.0 deg C. Also included on the graphs for each country are the trends—the warming rates as calculated by MS EXCEL—for the highest annual TMAX temperatures and the lowest annual TMIN temperatures.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Now notice how small the short- and long-term variations in global mean surface temperature (GMST) look. That’s because they are small, but you wouldn’t know that looking at a graph like the one prepared by NASA GISS in Reference Figure 1, above.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]

[/FONT]


[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]

 

[Media_Truth]

Silly... If you took even an entry level science class you would realize that graphers often use wider scales to show more resolution. That's only smart. In your first and last graph, you should use more resolution to demonstrate your point.

 

[longview]

Silly... If you took even an entry level science class you would realize that graphers often use wider scales to show more resolution. That's only smart. In your first and last graph, you should use more resolution to demonstrate your point.

The graphs demonstrate that to diurnal and seasonal asymmetry observed in the US is a global observation.
The minimum temperature have been warming much faster than the maximum temperatures.

 

[expat_panama]

...a global observation. The minimum temperature have been warming...

Many share the understanding that the biosphere's heated up 1.5C since 1850. The fact that there's no agreement on what the temperature is now (much less what it was in 1850) is a big problem undermining the entire warming theory.

 

[Lord of Planar]

Many share the understanding that the biosphere's heated up 1.5C since 1850. The fact that there's no agreement on what the temperature is now (much less what it was in 1850) is a big problem undermining the entire warming theory.

There is an unknown factor of how the heat island effect has skewed those readings though.

 

[Steve Case]

Many share the understanding that the biosphere's heated up 1.5C since 1850.

Just the biosphere? First time for everything.
My understanding is that the average global
temperature is up about a degree (0.8°C & 1.4°F)

The fact that there's no agreement on what the temperature is now (much less what it was in 1850) is a big problem undermining the entire warming theory.

Bingo - That's why I stole your quote for a tagline.

 

[Surface Detail]

Just the biosphere? First time for everything.
My understanding is that the average global
temperature is up about a degree (0.8°C & 1.4°F)



Bingo - That's why I stole your quote for a tagline.

It's not a big problem at all, as NASA explains:

Anomalies vs. Temperature

 

[Steve Case]

It's not a big problem at all, as NASA explains:

Anomalies vs. Temperature

I'd provide a longer response if I could figure out what your point is.

 

[longview]

Many share the understanding that the biosphere's heated up 1.5C since 1850. The fact that there's no agreement on what the temperature is now (much less what it was in 1850) is a big problem undermining the entire warming theory.

The anomaly temperature is closer to .94 C since 1850.
Based on the GISS, the average of the 1880 to 1900 is -.21c while the last decade average is .728 C.
https://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata_v3/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt
The data shows that that most of that average increase has occurred in the minimum temperatures with little in the maximum.

 

[Lord of Planar]

It's not a big problem at all, as NASA explains:

Anomalies vs. Temperature

Anomalies also may contain instrument drift, and factors that affect the instrument readings or proxy used. To deny that, is to be a denier of science.

 

[Media_Truth]

It's not a big problem at all, as NASA explains:

Anomalies vs. Temperature

It's a big deal to non-scientific educated minds. To them, this absolutely means that AGW isn't happening.

 

[expat_panama]

...there's no agreement on what the temperature is now (much less what it was in 1850)...

The anomaly temperature is closer to .94 C since 1850...

That's the answer we usually hear, it's sounds impressive and means nothing. If some kid wants to stay home from school saying he's got a fever of "plus 5C anomaly", you tell him to go to school even if he watched TV when he should have been doing his homework.

You tell the air conditioner salesman that you're paying $300 for an AC that lowers the temp to 70°F and after the check clears he says that the AC's guaranteed to keep the room at -4°F anomaly, not 70°F. You demand your money back.

Someone tell me what "anomaly" temp does ice melt?

 

[expat_panama]

There is an unknown factor of how the heat island effect has skewed those readings though.

The observed data are "unknown", yet the increase in taxes for fixing the whatever is announced to the exact penny.

 

[expat_panama]

Just the biosphere? First time for everything.
My understanding is that the average global
temperature is up about a degree (0.8°C & 1.4°F) ...

--more or less depending on how hysterical we're supposed to get, that's how we know this is politics, not science.

Science tells us that the mass of the earth is 5.972 × 10^24 kg. Not 5.973 and not 5.971. We also know that that the sun provides 173,000 terawatts continuously, and we know it's not 172,000 and not 174,000 terawatts. If we say the average specific heat of the entire earth is like what granite is (0.790 J/gm K) then it would take ALL the suns energy tens of hundreds of thousands of years to heat the entire earth 1 degree C.

That's when the alarmists say there's no global warming, just biosphere warming...

 

[expat_panama]

It's not a big problem at all, as NASA explains: Anomalies vs. Temperature

--and if it comes from NASA we don't have to rely on our lying eyes. After all, they explain--

In climate change studies, temperature anomalies are more important than absolute temperature. A temperature anomaly is the difference from an average, or baseline, temperature. The baseline temperature is typically computed by averaging 30 or more years of temperature data. A positive anomaly indicates the observed temperature was warmer than the baseline, while a negative anomaly indicates the observed temperature was cooler than the baseline. When calculating an average of absolute temperatures, things like station location or elevation will have an effect on the data (ex. higher elevations tend to be cooler than lower elevations and urban areas tend to be warmer than rural areas). However, when looking at anomalies, those factors are less critical. For example, a summer month over an area may be cooler than average, both at a mountain top and in a nearby valley, but the absolute temperatures will be quite different at the two locations.

Using anomalies also helps minimize problems when stations are added, removed, or missing from the monitoring network. The above diagram shows absolute temperatures (lines) for five neighboring stations, with the 2008 anomalies as symbols. Notice how all of the anomalies fit into a tiny range when compared to the absolute temperatures. Even if one station were removed from the record, the average anomaly would not change significantly, but the overall average temperature could change significantly depending on which station dropped out of the record. For example, if the coolest station (Mt. Mitchell) were removed from the record, the average absolute temperature would become significantly warmer. However, because its anomaly is similar to the neighboring stations, the average anomaly would change much less.​

Meanwhile, in real life nobody measures temperature w/ an "anomaluremeter". Science is not some clown w/ a white coat, science is observation that we can reproduce.

 

[longview]

That's the answer we usually hear, it's sounds impressive and means nothing. If some kid wants to stay home from school saying he's got a fever of "plus 5C anomaly", you tell him to go to school even if he watched TV when he should have been doing his homework.

You tell the air conditioner salesman that you're paying $300 for an AC that lowers the temp to 70°F and after the check clears he says that the AC's guaranteed to keep the room at -4°F anomaly, not 70°F. You demand your money back.

Someone tell me what "anomaly" temp does ice melt?

I know the anomaly temperatures mean nothing now, the GISS used to say the reference number was 14 C, but no longer say that.
I am not even sure we can safely say the same measuring stick is used across the board.

 

[Lord of Planar]

--more or less depending on how hysterical we're supposed to get, that's how we know this is politics, not science.

Science tells us that the mass of the earth is 5.972 × 10^24 kg. Not 5.973 and not 5.971. We also know that that the sun provides 173,000 terawatts continuously, and we know it's not 172,000 and not 174,000 terawatts. If we say the average specific heat of the entire earth is like what granite is (0.790 J/gm K) then it would take ALL the suns energy tens of hundreds of thousands of years to heat the entire earth 1 degree C.

That's when the alarmists say there's no global warming, just biosphere warming...

Except the heat conduction doesn't travel very deep.

 

[Lord of Planar]

There is also the fact, that the land is opaque and solid, vs. the oceans which are transparent and fluid to shortwave energy, but opaque and fluid to longwave.

 

[Surface Detail]

I know the anomaly temperatures mean nothing now, the GISS used to say the reference number was 14 C, but no longer say that.
I am not even sure we can safely say the same measuring stick is used across the board.

There is no reference number, nor does there need to be one - that's exactly the point. While it is difficult to define the temperature of the Earth as a whole, it is perfectly possible to determine how much its temperature has risen or fallen, i.e. the temperature anomaly.

Just think about it. Say you have 100 thermometers dotted around the globe - what is the average temperature of the Earth? The mean of these temperature readings? No, not necessarily, because the thermometers may not be in representative locations. Now imagine that, over time, the mean temperature indicated by the thermometers rises by 1 C. We still don't know for sure what the absolute temperature of the Earth is, but do know that its temperature has risen by about 1 C. This is the temperature anomaly.

 

[expat_panama]

...not even sure we can safely say the same measuring stick is used across the board.

It's amazing that the scientific community can agree that the temperature of the sun's surface is 5,778K (a hundred miles away they got four significant figures) but with the earth's surface we're getting some kind of 'science blackout' where nobody wants to say anything.

 

[expat_panama]

Except the heat conduction doesn't travel very deep.

47 terawatts of heat are conducted from below to the surface, but the rate of conductivity is low enough that the effect is ignored for most applications. Advocates of AGW ignore heat conduction in the crust and talk only about the heating of the atmosphere and oceans.

What's amazing though is that there's so much money funding so many studies of the heating of the atmosphere&oceans, but nobody wants to say what the average temp is. A hundred million miles away everyone agrees that the surface of the sun is exactly 5,778K, but right here at home everyone's close-lipped about the temp of the earth's surface.

 

[longview]

It's amazing that the scientific community can agree that the temperature of the sun's surface is 5,778K (a hundred miles away they got four significant figures) but with the earth's surface we're getting some kind of 'science blackout' where nobody wants to say anything.

The surface of the sun is determined differently.
The GISS cannot even agree on how to collect the data.
The errors from the different collection methodologies could be greater than the observed increase.

 

[longview]

There is no reference number, nor does there need to be one - that's exactly the point. While it is difficult to define the temperature of the Earth as a whole, it is perfectly possible to determine how much its temperature has risen or fallen, i.e. the temperature anomaly.

Just think about it. Say you have 100 thermometers dotted around the globe - what is the average temperature of the Earth? The mean of these temperature readings? No, not necessarily, because the thermometers may not be in representative locations. Now imagine that, over time, the mean temperature indicated by the thermometers rises by 1 C. We still don't know for sure what the absolute temperature of the Earth is, but do know that its temperature has risen by about 1 C. This is the temperature anomaly.

At some point all the thermometers need to be calibrated to a standard.

 

[expat_panama]

The surface of the sun is determined differently.
The GISS cannot even agree on how to collect the data.
The errors from the different collection methodologies could be greater than the observed increase.

---which is why my thinking always ends up w/ the conclusion that if we don't know what temperatures things are, then we can't say which is hotter or cooler than the other.

 

[Surface Detail]

At some point all the thermometers need to be calibrated to a standard.

Yes, typically the freezing and boiling points of pure water at standard pressure. But what does that have to do with this discussion?