The trend continues in August; The World is Warming as NASA says hottest on record

a reply to: Rezlooper


Look, the Marxists have a new cover.... Global Warming. Best of luck comrade.

What does it matter if its hot or cold it only matters pollution is poison and we are doing more of it than ever.

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: DAZ21
Hold on didn't you guys just have one of the coldest winters in decades?

Oh also they are predicting another freezing winter this year. So which is it global warming or cooling, you can't pick and choose.

In case people just don't get this, March is usually the hottest month of the year. In the northern hemisphere, this might seem kind of strange. Part of the reason for this is that the Earth is closest to the Sun in January, and furthest from the Sun in July.

Average monthly temperature from data.giss.nasa.gov...
From 1979-2014:
Mar: 14.46ºC
Feb: 14.43ºC
Jan: 14.42ºC
Apr: 14.42ºC
May: 14.399ºC
Jun: 14.39ºC
Oct: 14.39ºC
Nov: 14.39ºC
Dec: 14.39ºC
Aug: 14.3889ºC
Sep: 14.385ºC
Jul: 14.38ºC

Over the longer term, the trend is slightly different - but it's possible that could be from less accurate measurements.
From 1930-2014:
Mar: 14.18ºC
Jan: 14.17ºC
Feb: 14.17ºC
Apr: 14.16ºC
Oct: 14.16ºC
May: 14.152ºC
Nov: 14.15ºC
Jul: 14.15ºC
Aug: 14.148ºC
Sep: 14.148ºC
Jun: 14.14ºC
Dec: 14.14ºC

I call total BS on this one Greven.

In my entire lifetime, I have never lived through a March that was warmer than a July while living anywhere in the US. On average, in the several states I have lived in, March is still coming off the heels of long winters in some cases while July is full blown summer and scorching hot. I don't think anyone that lives in the US would argue that. A few warm days doesn't make it the hottest month, besides the fact that the northern hemisphere has longer summers than the southern, and July is when summer peaks with the longest day of the year.

Can you please provide a reference to the claim that March is the hottest month of the year due to the distance of the Earth from the Sun?

The tilt of the planet is what drives the seasons and the temperature changes.

The proximity of the Earth as it relates to the sun has nothing to do with temperatures (from a seasonal or yearly perspective), so I fail to see where you are deriving your answer from and have never seen a paper written or anyone cite such a claim. The change in distance is not enough to cause a temperature change (unless it was drastically more), but the change in tilt is enough.

I'd be curious as to why didn't you go all the way back to 1880 and why you decided to stop at 1930 for your "long-term" numbers.

At first glance, it appears as though you have mis-calculated your averages from the GISS data but I don't have time to validate your post...

The link you provided is for global land-ocean temperature changes from a base temperature of 14ºC, and it looks like you've taken the delta for each month and then averaged it. If so, you should have taken the actual temperature, not the delta, to get the average temperature.

You can't / don't average a delta in temperature over a time series.

Even if your numbers are accurate, you've chosen an arbitrary period of time that excludes additional data for 50 more years of data, which seems rather fitting given the argument of cherry-picking data.

~Namaste

Who cares?????? Seriously??? If this whole climate change debate is actually a result of man it's not like we can do much about it right now!!!! I mean what can the average joe consumer do to REALLY make a difference? Eat vegetables instead of red meat? Buy groceries with canvas shopping bags? Drive a Prius? Install solar panels on their roof? Please!!! In the grand scheme of the planet that crap is trivial! Maybe if everybody put down their cellphones and abandoned 21st century life as we know it! That isn't going to happen so what's the point of F'ing wasting your time worrying a d arguing about this crap, most of you are a bunch of armchair scientists when it comes to the issues. Human beings have been polluting and destroying the earth on a massive scale since the industrial revolution. Gee did we think cutting down all those trees and shooting our toxic factory waste into our rivers and streams wasn't going to have repercussions? Hmmmm maybe a billion plus people weren't all meant to drive a car! Our economic model is completely unsustainable on a global scale. Yeah infinite growth on a finite planet! Who's the Harvard Six Sigma genius who came up with the idea of perpetual corporate profits. We as humans will end up destroying our civilization and eventually either kill ourselves off or reduce life to hunter gatherer status once again and have a big F'ing do over! Climate change is a stupid catch all umbrella phrase for "humans taking a big dump on their planet"!

I don't fear death anymore so whatever happens I adapt or die and I'll teach my kids the same thing.

a reply to: GreenMtnBoys

A lot of good points that I can't argue with. What can we do? Not much until the big money boys lead the way. Are we all screwd anyways, yeah, most likely. And why, cuz we dumped on ourselves. Agreed. And it's clearly beyond man made now, even if it was the cause to begin with, it's natural sources now.

Certainly just another report to support the "Agenda".

I love their report........Perth Australia had a hot day in August, but Darwin Australia has recorded COLDER than average temps...

For people who dont know, Perth is on the edge of a desert, and is subject to both Indian Ocean weather, and the massive high pressure zones bringing warm air from central Australia.....it is always warm in Perth.
Darwin on the other hand, has only two seasons, Hot and wet, and Hot and dry...It is in the Tropics.

Darwin getting cooler, would be a much more worrying development than Perth have a warm spell.

I live in the Southern part of Australia, It has been a Very Cold winter for us.
Yes, it will get hot, and have bushfires etc etc, just like the past 10,000 + years.

a reply to: Rezlooper

Global warming LOL. My tea just blew out my nose from laughing again. It isn't even the end of September and my furnace is cycling. I use to go fishing and sleep in tents right up to the end of October in the 60's and 70's, it sure as hell isn't that warm anymore.

Anything that comes out of a politically motivated mouthpiece, generally means the opposite of what is said is true. We're going into an ice-age again, sh**t happens.

Cheers - Dave

a reply to: bobs_uruncle

You're going into an ice-age. You mustn't speak for the entire planet based on your local weather perceptions.

It is all a bunch of lies. It has been cold here in northern Ontario in August and currently still is. We have definitely had warmer weather this time of the year but not this year or last. Furthermore, I was in Florida in July and found it no different than any other July. In fact, the locals found that the weather had been cooler this year overal. Someone is always screaming global warming and they are the ones who want money.

The OP is refering to the US only, i guess. Because here in Europe, we've had the coolest summer in decades- it never got hot. It's like we went from spring right on into fall.

Even in the Antartic, it was the coolest summer ever recorded. wattsupwiththat.com...


If there is a global trend, it would have to be extreme weather in general- not extreme heat. It would have been less misleading if the title of the thread specified it was refering only to the US....
-but this being page 8, I imagine that has already been said repeatedly...

On the fake science front.

I wanted to share this you tube vid from another thread (C-8 and the Business of Misinformation

It's about "The Weinberg Group" and other companies that sell scientific papers and scientists to say anything a company wants them to say - even right the papers. "Lie Brokers"

a reply to: SonOfTheLawOfOne
Please, by all means, correct my math. I can't prove a negative, so you'll have to correct me yourself or someone else who finds fault in my interpretation of the data.

It does change if you go back all the way to the beginning, but I wonder if that isn't because of less accurate measurements 120+ years ago. In the full record, March falls to second place behind October. Since you asked, here's the full 135 year record for monthly average.
From 1880-2014:
Oct: 14.0125ºC
Mar: 14.0122ºC
Sep: 14.0053ºC
Nov: 14.0007ºC
Jul: 13.9984ºC
Aug: 13.9980ºC
Feb: 13.9977ºC
Apr: 13.9919ºC
Jan: 13.9861ºC
May: 13.9836ºC
Dec: 13.9768ºC
Jun: 13.9717ºC

Perhaps things have changed, though. Cutting the first 20 years yields a different result, one closer to the 1930-2014 lineup.
From 1900-2014:
Mar: 14.0573ºC
Feb: 14.0481ºC
Oct: 14.0481ºC
Jan: 14.0447ºC
Nov: 14.0447ºC
Sep: 14.0366ºC
Apr: 14.0362ºC
Jul: 14.0313ºC
Aug: 14.0307ºC
May: 14.0247ºC
Dec: 14.0147ºC
Jun: 14.0128ºC

Here's a silly fact from the GISTEMP data - the hottest month and the coldest month in the record are the same month in vastly different years... January of 2007 and January of 1893, respectively. Hence, part of my concern about temperature measurements that long ago. Again, the northern hemisphere is not the only hemisphere. Please consider the perihelion and aphelion. The Earth is something like 3.4% closer to the Sun during the perihelion in January than it is during the aphelion in July.

Asking a physics professor helps:

The Earth's orbit is not a circle. The Earth is closest to the Sun in January. It is furthest six months later. The entire Earth receives a greater radiation during January. It receives less radiation during July.

This is not a new thing and there is little reason you should be calling it BS:

The total amount of energy received at ground level from the sun at the zenith depends on the distance to the sun and thus on the time of year. It is about 3.3% higher than average in January and 3.3% lower in July.

I'm not making this up:

In a point at the top of Earth’s atmosphere, the beam of nearly parallel incident
sunrays is referred to as extraterrestrial radiation (ETR). ETR fluctuates about
6.9 % during a year (from 1412.0 Wm-2 in January to 1321.0 Wm-2 in July) due
to the Earth’s varying distance from the Sun.

What's interesting though is that your denial made me look closer at the RSS and UAH data. Satellite measurements seem to be quite a bit different from land/ocean measurements. Unfortunately, I'm having issues finding the baseline for these, which is annoying in establishing absolute temperature, so I'm doing this fairly roughly.
UAH: www.nsstc.uah.edu...
Warmest to coolest month on average, 1979-2014:
September, June, July, October, August, May, November, December, January, April, February, March
Warmest month: April 1998
Coolest month: September 1984

RSS: data.remss.com...
Warmest to coolest month on average, 1979-2014:
September, April, January, July, August, October, February, March, May, November, June, December
Warmest month: February 1998
Coolest month: September 1984

Rather a difference of opinion amongst these sets, huh? Well, at least they agree on a thing or two.

edit: quick addition since I didn't do it for the same range (1979-2014) for GISTEMP
Warmest month: January 2007
Coolest month: February 1979

originally posted by: Bilk22
I'm very happy for you. Ever vote republican? I was a registered democrat for 25 years. Only democrat I ever voted for was Ed Koch.

Frequently at the state and local level, but as I'm more libertarian than many Republicans these days, I don't tend to vote for Republican national candidates. Ron Paul was an exception, for obvious reasons.

a reply to: SonOfTheLawOfOne
I'm curious as to what research you are thinking of. Perhaps you can elaborate. Oh, and also on the ".03% increase from humans" bit, please.

The image you link is not representative of temperatures during the time period, but rather differences between two different data sets, hence the "minus" part in the title of the graph. The comparison appears to be between GISTEMP and the RCP6.0 model. It seems you've taken that graph from here without attribution. I'm curious as to what point you are making at this juncture, as this is not a representation of temperature but data set differences.

We have to omit some data. For example, we cannot record every microsecond everywhere on the globe - we just don't have the resources. Pole-to-pole climate monitoring satellites scan higher latitudes more frequently than areas near the equator - sometime a difference of days between measurements. Smoothing trendlines isn't particularly egregious, and I don't really see why you are complaining about it.

You seem to take that text file from John Daly at face value, as it supposedly documents the temperatures before it was nefariously deleted from NASA's servers. You could just look at the WayBackMachine's stored copy from May 2001 (had to shortlink it, bbc won't take), which is remarkably different from the text file you have linked. Both are, of course, different from what NASA has there now.

What I did find out is that the WayBackMachine's copy is identical to this copy. Unfortunately, the last copy on WayBackMachine before the file became decrepit is from 2003, which is prior to John Daly's death in Jan. 2004 and the subsequent claimed changed file in June 2004 (wonder who's updating it). Supposing that it did change, there isn't a lot of context. Perhaps the "update" directory was a frequently-changing file based on more refined elimination of outliers (like maybe they dreaded heat island effect)? I certainly don't know. This is a claimed reconstruction of the supposedly removed data.

Why does anyone even give a crap if the world is warming or not? Are you going to snap your Captain Planet fingers to fix it?

Didn't think so, so let's calm down, relax and enjoy our lives.

Thanks.

a reply to: BasementWarriorKryptonite

Well, it'd be nice if the Earth doesn't get so messed up that we no longer have descendents.

That's just my opinion, though.

a reply to: Greven

I agree. Who's to say it's entirely our fault, or that it wouldn't happen anyway and either way - what's there to do?

Hold hands and recycle while we all sing folk songs?

a reply to: Greven

It is precisely the science that is incorrect. The data was cherry picked by the IPCC in order to justify the implementation of the UN's Agenda 21.

Carbon taxation is the goal and is nothing but a blunt instrument which will be used to beat us into submitting to a New World Order.

Sorry to burst your bubble but it is the ultimate end game. Don't blame me when you are blind sided when it happens due to your ignorance of this Inconvenient Truth.

a reply to: Rezlooper

I agree...local anomalies and anecdotal evidence do not prove a thing.

However, I would point out that you linked a story to forest fires in California. How can you poopoo others for describing what is happening in their neck of the woods when you did the same?

All of your links are newspapers or blogs. Nothing academic.

Our temperatures have not reached the levels that existed in previous interglacial periods. It is common, in interglacials, for temperatures to rise. Then they hit a peak and drop like a rock.

We are not outside of those norms.

99.99% of Doom Porn is just that: Doom Porn.

originally posted by: Bluesma
The OP is refering to the US only, i guess. Because here in Europe, we've had the coolest summer in decades- it never got hot. It's like we went from spring right on into fall.

Even in the Antartic, it was the coolest summer ever recorded. wattsupwiththat.com...


If there is a global trend, it would have to be extreme weather in general- not extreme heat. It would have been less misleading if the title of the thread specified it was refering only to the US....
-but this being page 8, I imagine that has already been said repeatedly...

Actually it hasn't been said. The US is cooler this year, and I've also said that *parts* of Europe are cooler to. And they aren't the only two spots, but there are many more that are hot. And, also, I have a part in the OP about Antarctica and it says that it's much hotter than usual, at least where the ice is increasing.