Hot Days Down Under

A recent post at WUWT discusses projections for increase in the number of very hot days in northern Australia, based on expected temperature change estimated by computer models. It’s actually a follow-up to a previous post on that topic. The theme seems to be doubt about the projections based on general incredulity, combined with devising some “rules” designed to make people mistrust computer models in general.

Global Temperature HOT

NASA has just released their latest global temperature data, including the month of August 2016. It’s hot.

XKCD

See the original here.

Climate Deniers Embarrass Themselves about Arctic Sea Ice

This year, the extent of sea ice in the Arctic has already plunged to its 2nd-lowest annual minimum on record. Here are the yearly minima, although this year’s value is provisional because it may well dip even lower:

Deniers: Is This Really the Hill You Want to Die On?

Of all the lies we constantly hear from deniers, one of the most common (and with them, most popular) is some variation of “no global warming for 15 years.” It started many years ago with “no global warming since 1998,” has since been revised to “no global warming since 1997” and “no global warming since 2001” and “no global warming since 2002,” has run through “no global warming for 18 years” and “no global warming for 20 years,” but now seems to have settled on “no global warming for 15 years.”

The reason it keeps changing is that whenever they decide on what to bellow about, it quickly becomes obvious it’s not true. None of their claims is true. That’s no problem for them. Doubt is their product.

You Bet!

In an old post way back in 2008, I set out the conditions for a “bet” (not that I’m a betting man), which could better be looked on as a test of the idea that “global warming has stopped.”

Trend and Fluctuation (One More Time)

A recent comment says:

The Gistemp temperature anomaly for June 2015 was 0.79 degrees Celsius.
The Gistemp temperature anomaly for February 2016 was 1.32 degrees Celsius.
In 8 months the temperature anomaly increased by 0.53 degrees Celsius.

The question is, how much of the 0.53 degrees Celsius increase was caused by man-made global warming?

Let me propose an analogous question:

The temperature on March 1st reached 2°C. The temperature on March 2nd reached 18°C. In 1 day the temperature increased by 16°C. How much of the 16°C increase was due to the progress of the seasons from winter toward spring and on to summer?

Maybe it’s obvious, even to the author of the aforementioned comment. But just in case, the answer is: the day-to-day fluctuation in temperature swamps the amount of trend change in a single day.

Only a fool would claim that most, or even a sizeable fraction of, the 16°C rise from one day to the next was due to the passing of the seasons. Only a bigger fool would ask the question with a straight face. Only the biggest fool would attempt to use the day-to-day fluctuations in temperature as evidence that there’s no seasonal trend and no reliable evidence that summer will be hotter than winter.

Global average temperature data from NASA GISS looks like this:

The black line follows the monthly average temperature anomaly. The thicker red line shows the trend estimated by linear regression. The blue circles mark the values in June 2015 and February 2016.

Fluctuations come and go, but over the long haul they average out to nothing. Trends persist, so over the long haul they can accumulate to large changes in spite of the fact that in the short term they amount to very little. That’s why, just since 1970, the net trend change in the NASA GISS data is 0.84°C, considerably bigger than the short-term change from June 2015 to February 2016 which is due to fluctuation.

Global warming is about the trend, not about the fluctuations. The progress of the seasons is about the trend, not the fluctuations.

If the trend continues at the present rate, then by January 2100 the net warming due to trend will be 2.34°C above the 1970 value. And of course, it’s possible the average rate over the remainder of this century will be higher than it has been recently, especially if warming triggers feedback in the carbon cycle (releasing natural stores of CO₂ or CH₄).

Let’s avoid that.

Let’s also stop treating claims or questions which conflate trend and fluctuation in the most ludicrous way, as being serious claims or questions, let alone worthy of “debate.”

---

This blog is made possible by readers like you; join others by donating at Peaseblossom’s Closet.