• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Perspectives on Temperature

Jack Hays

Traveler
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
94,823
Reaction score
28,236
Location
Williamsburg, Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
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]
Reference-Figure-2.png
[/FONT]



[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]


 

Media_Truth

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 31, 2016
Messages
11,375
Reaction score
2,648
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
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

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 25, 2012
Messages
31,647
Reaction score
10,363
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
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

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2017
Messages
341
Reaction score
132
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
...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

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Dec 22, 2012
Messages
47,468
Reaction score
13,905
Location
Portlandia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
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

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 7, 2013
Messages
1,812
Reaction score
1,198
Location
USA - Milwaukee, WI
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
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.
 

longview

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 25, 2012
Messages
31,647
Reaction score
10,363
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
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.
 

expat_panama

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2017
Messages
341
Reaction score
132
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
...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

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2017
Messages
341
Reaction score
132
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
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

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2017
Messages
341
Reaction score
132
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
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

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2017
Messages
341
Reaction score
132
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
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

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 25, 2012
Messages
31,647
Reaction score
10,363
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
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

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Dec 22, 2012
Messages
47,468
Reaction score
13,905
Location
Portlandia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
--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

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Dec 22, 2012
Messages
47,468
Reaction score
13,905
Location
Portlandia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
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

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 20, 2016
Messages
3,244
Reaction score
1,228
Location
English Midlands
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Centrist
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

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2017
Messages
341
Reaction score
132
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
...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

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2017
Messages
341
Reaction score
132
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
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

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 25, 2012
Messages
31,647
Reaction score
10,363
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
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

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 25, 2012
Messages
31,647
Reaction score
10,363
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
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

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2017
Messages
341
Reaction score
132
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
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.
 
Top Bottom