Started By
Message

The problem with saying the last 8 years are the hottest on record

Posted on 7/29/23 at 8:55 am
Posted by stout
Smoking Crack with Hunter Biden
Member since Sep 2006
167288 posts
Posted on 7/29/23 at 8:55 am
I don't think anyone saying this has really looked at how that determination is made so I looked into it some.

First, let's look at the baseline they use to make that determination

quote:

Indeed, the warming continues. The 10-year average for the period 2013-2022 is estimated to be 1.14 [1.02 to 1.27] °C above the 1850-1900 pre-industrial baseline. This compares with 1.09°C from 2011 to 2020, as estimated by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Sixth Assessment report.


World Meteorological Organization

The problem with using 1850 to 1900 as a baseline is their data is junk or nonexistent. Since it was nonexistent they acknowledge it is mostly estimations based on what little data they do have.

quote:

Three of the world’s most complete temperature tracking records – from NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s National Climactic Data Center and the UK Meteorological Office’s Hadley Centre – begin in 1880. Prior to 1880, temperature measurements were made with instruments like thermometers. The oldest continuous temperature record is the Central England Temperature Data Series, which began in 1659, and the Hadley Centre has some measurements beginning in 1850, but there are too few data before 1880 for scientists to estimate average temperatures for the entire planet. Data from earlier years are reconstructed from proxy records like tree rings, pollen counts, and ice cores. Because these are different kinds of data, scientists generally don’t put proxy-based estimates on the same charts as the “instrumental record.”

The above-mentioned agencies and others collect temperature data from thousands of weather stations worldwide, including over the ocean, in Antarctica, and from satellites. However, instruments are not perfectly distributed around the globe, and some measurement sites have been deforested or urbanized since 1880, affecting temperatures nearby. Each agency uses algorithms to filter the effects of these changes out of the temperature record and interpolate where data are sparse, like over the vast Southern Ocean, when calculating global averages.


NASA

Even the U.S. Historical Climatology Network has changed several times how they quantify national and regional-scale temperature changes. When was the most recent change? 2012

quote:

Version 2.5 was released as a revision to the version 2.0 dataset In October 2012. The processing steps for version 2 and 2.5 are essentially the same, but the version number change reflects modifications to the underlying database as well as coding changes to the pairwise homogenization algorithm (PHA) that improve its overall efficiency. Table 1 (below) lists these modifications. NCEI Technical Reports GHCNM-12-01R (Williams et al., 2012a) and GHCNM-12-02 (Williams et al. 2012b) provide details regarding the PHA modifications.

Version 2 monthly temperature data incorporated an expanded database of raw temperature values from COOP stations, a new set of quality control checks, and a more comprehensive homogenization algorithm. The version 2 temperature dataset and processing steps detailed description are in Menne et al. (2009).

Version 1 is made up of three dataset releases (described in Quinlan et al. 1987, Karl et al., 1990 and Easterling et al., 1996). These datasets contained adjustments to the monthly mean maximum, minimum, and average temperature data that addressed potential documented in NCEI’s station history archives. The documented changes that were addressed include changes to the time of observation (Karl et al. 1986), station moves, and instrument changes (Karl and Williams, 1987; Quayle et al., 1991). Apparent urbanization effects were also addressed in version 1 with a specific urban bias correction (Karl et al. 1988).

In 2007, USHCN version 2 serial monthly temperature data were released and updates to the version 1 datasets were discontinued.


LINK

The original version was built on the old data previously mentioned. They refer to it as COOP stations

quote:

The National Weather Service (NWS) Cooperative Observer Program (COOP) is a network of daily weather observations taken by more than 8,500 volunteers. These data, which include observations from the late 1800’s, are vital to understanding the U.S. climate, and also provide near real-time information that supports forecasts, warnings and alerts, and other public service programs. Observations taken from around the U.S. and its territories at National Parks, seashores, mountaintops, farms, and many urban and suburban areas. COOP data usually consist of daily maximum and minimum temperatures, snowfall, snow depth, and 24-hour precipitation totals. Observations may include additional hydrological or meteorological data such as evaporation or soil temperatures.


noaa.gov

Again when you look at this you have to take into account that they have admitted data prior to 1900 was mostly estimations based on what little data they do have

Now let's look at the number of weather stations worldwide over the years.

quote:

This data set contains monthly temperature, precipitation, sea-level pressure, and station-pressure data for thousands of meteorological stations worldwide. The database was compiled from pre-existing national, regional, and global collections of data as part of the Global Historical Climatology Network (GHCN) project, the goal of which is to produce, maintain, and make available a comprehensive global surface baseline climate data set for monitoring climate and detecting climate change. It contains data from roughly 6000 temperature stations, 7500 precipitation stations, 1800 sea level pressure stations, and 1800 station pressure stations. Each station has at least 10 years of data, 40% have more than 50 years of data. Spatial coverage is good over most of the globe, particularly for the United States and Europe. Data gaps are evident over the Amazon rainforest, the Sahara Desert, Greenland, and Antarctica.


LINK

Less than half have more than 50 years of data

Here is the progress of those 7500 rain gauges over the decades 6000 of which are also temperature stations

>

LINK

2017 is the peak of all stations and since 2015 we have been claiming the past 8 years (including this one) are the hottest on record

No doubt with the advancement of technology and more stations we are able to measure temperatures more accurately than at any time in history. The problem with this new data is that we are comparing it to estimates from the 1800s as a baseline despite the fact that less than half of all stations have more than 50 years of data.

Have the last 8 years really been the hottest on record or are they just the most accurately measured years in history?






Posted by stout
Smoking Crack with Hunter Biden
Member since Sep 2006
167288 posts
Posted on 7/29/23 at 8:55 am to
I ran out of characters in my OP so I want to say if any of this is off then please educate me
Posted by aTmTexas Dillo
East Texas Lake
Member since Sep 2018
15101 posts
Posted on 7/29/23 at 8:58 am to
quote:

Have the last 8 years really been the hottest on record or are they just the most accurately measured years in history?


Dunno. What year are we shooting for as the baseline for what we want to go back to?
Posted by stout
Smoking Crack with Hunter Biden
Member since Sep 2006
167288 posts
Posted on 7/29/23 at 8:58 am to
quote:

What year are we shooting for as the baseline


Addressed in the OP

Their baseline is the problem with making the claim. The data used for the baseline is junk
This post was edited on 7/29/23 at 8:59 am
Posted by GregMaddux
LSU Fan
Member since Jun 2011
18212 posts
Posted on 7/29/23 at 9:09 am to
I don’t really care what the records say. We've had some incredibly mild summers in recent years.

Source: me in the dirty south.
This post was edited on 7/29/23 at 9:10 am
Posted by Nosevens
Member since Apr 2019
10328 posts
Posted on 7/29/23 at 9:13 am to
Good report, but like all hood democrats they have their own “facts”.
Posted by Nosevens
Member since Apr 2019
10328 posts
Posted on 7/29/23 at 9:16 am to
Well democrats just used the last eight years as their record. As a dillo I’m guessing you will scratch around a bit but will ultimately will eat the government bugs
Posted by stout
Smoking Crack with Hunter Biden
Member since Sep 2006
167288 posts
Posted on 7/29/23 at 9:24 am to
quote:

I don’t really care what the records say. We've had some incredibly mild summers in recent years.

Source: me in the dirty south.



It stayed cool spring weather longer this year than anytime I can remember in the past at least 10 years.
Posted by Lynxrufus2012
Central Kentucky
Member since Mar 2020
12193 posts
Posted on 7/29/23 at 9:27 am to
You are using facts for your argument. The alarmists use emotion to appeal to people. Facts take effort to read and understand. Emotion doesn't have to deal with data gaps, outliers or errors. Emotion doesn't have to determine if this is natural, it can jump immediately to an anthropogenic causation.

Because if this "warming" is natural, then it can't be used to control people.

Posted by stout
Smoking Crack with Hunter Biden
Member since Sep 2006
167288 posts
Posted on 7/29/23 at 9:29 am to
quote:

Emotion doesn't have to determine if this is natural, it can jump immediately to an anthropogenic causation.


I wish the people downvoting my OP would explain why they disagree with it
Posted by ChineseBandit58
Pearland, TX
Member since Aug 2005
42616 posts
Posted on 7/29/23 at 9:32 am to
quote:

like all hood democrats they have their own “facts”.

the only fact they need is that the MSM will report any problem they 'find' as an 'existential threat because of Trump" - and anything they 'plan' as the "only way to save the world from Trump."
Posted by ShinerHorns
El Paso
Member since Jul 2021
3921 posts
Posted on 7/29/23 at 9:33 am to
quote:

I wish the people downvoting my OP would explain why they disagree with it


They won’t. This board is full of liberals that are sissies.
Posted by loogaroo
Welsh
Member since Dec 2005
30700 posts
Posted on 7/29/23 at 9:45 am to
quote:

I ran out of characters in my OP so I want to say if any of this is off then please educate me


Nothing is off.

What better way to scam a civilization than something unprovable.
Posted by loogaroo
Welsh
Member since Dec 2005
30700 posts
Posted on 7/29/23 at 9:49 am to
Growing up the radio meteorologist called the heat domes a death ridge of high pressure. This was 30 years ago.

Sinking air gets hot. Thunderstorms cannot break through the cap and we get heat waves. Some are more severe than others, but they happen every so often. It’s not uncommon. The media is just using the current situation because people have short memories.
Posted by jimmy the leg
Member since Aug 2007
34165 posts
Posted on 7/29/23 at 9:51 am to
quote:

Have the last 8 years really been the hottest on record or are they just the most accurately measured years in history?


If by accurate, you mean manipulated in order to reach a desired outcome, then…yes.
Posted by bhtigerfan
Baton Rouge
Member since Sep 2008
29481 posts
Posted on 7/29/23 at 9:52 am to
It’s going to hit 100 degrees here in Lafayette tomorrow and the next several days. I don’t remember the last time I’ve seen it hit 100 here, yet I still don’t believe in anthropogenic global warming.

I’m smart enough to realize that “climate change” is simply cyclical and the earth has been going through climate changes for as long as it has existed. Most climate change zealots (Powerman and the other useful idiots) simply refuse to acknowledge this. It’s like the ice ages and the subsequent warming periods never happened to them.
This post was edited on 7/29/23 at 9:59 am
Posted by doubleb
Baton Rouge
Member since Aug 2006
36051 posts
Posted on 7/29/23 at 9:54 am to
quote:

Have the last 8 years really been the hottest on record or are they just the most accurately measured years in history?


Frequently I’ve read articles talking about record temps. They bring up readings from the 30s or sone other time period back in the day that were higher, but then they say the instruments weren’t reliable.

We do have different and better instruments, and they are using them in a political way and not in a scientific way.
Posted by Motownsix
Boise
Member since Oct 2022
1982 posts
Posted on 7/29/23 at 9:55 am to
That’s a lot effort to just say global warming triggers you. It’s ok you don’t have to accept it as something real. If the weatherman says it’s the hottest day or the coldest day ever most people can just go on with their lives.
Posted by Zach
Gizmonic Institute
Member since May 2005
112492 posts
Posted on 7/29/23 at 10:02 am to
quote:

Good report, but like all hood democrats they have their own “facts”.


It's more than democrats. I researched GW critiques in the library before getting internet. Falsification of data was constantly found but never in newspapers.
The culprits were not specifically democrats. It was globalists ...a bunch of agencies wanting bigger budgets were getting paid to exaggerate numbers by mega rich foundations with the goal of centralized power.
That's why NASA got caught. They were losing money due to lack of interest in space exploration so they took up another 'urgent' job.
That's why the U.N. is the loudest voice for GW. When we become World Land they will be in charge instead of being a bunch of clowns getting paid to hang out in NYC.
Posted by tigerfan 64
in the LP
Member since Sep 2016
3822 posts
Posted on 7/29/23 at 10:03 am to
Such radical conspiracy theories are thwarting honest debate of our overlords narratives.

You should feel ashamed.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 4Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram