Warmest March on record according to the Japanese Meteorological Agency

ScienceRocks

Democrat all the way!
Mar 16, 2010
59,455
6,793
1,900
The Good insane United states of America
Warmest March on record according to the Japanese Meteorological Agency

http://ds.data.jma.g...mp/mar_wld.html


The monthly anomaly of the global average surface temperature in March 2015 (i.e. the average of the near-surface air temperature over land and the SST) was +0.31°C above the 1981-2010 average (+0.76°C above the 20th century average), and was the warmest since 1891. On a longer time scale, global average surface temperatures have risen at a rate of about 0.83°C per century.

Japan would be more truthful? With all that honor and killing themselves over dishonor. Right???
 
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #2
March GISS temp is out. The anomaly was .84C above the 1951-1980 baseline. This is good for the 3rd warmest March. It's also the warmest month since the moderate El Nino in 2010.



So far 2015 is averaging a .79 anomaly. Effectively blowing every other "developing nino" year out of the water.



Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec J-D D-N DJF MAM JJA SON Year
2001 41 46 57 51 56 53 59 48 52 47 67 52 52 50 38 55 53 55 2001
2002 71 73 88 56 62 54 58 52 62 54 58 42 61 62 66 69 55 58 2002
2003 71 54 55 52 60 46 53 65 62 72 52 72 60 57 56 56 55 62 2003
2004 55 66 62 58 40 40 22 41 50 62 69 48 51 53 64 53 34 60 2004
2005 68 55 66 66 61 64 62 59 73 76 71 64 65 64 57 64 62 73 2005
2006 52 65 59 45 43 60 50 66 59 66 69 74 59 58 61 49 59 65 2006
2007 93 65 67 71 64 56 58 57 61 56 54 46 62 65 77 68 57 57 2007
2008 22 31 69 48 46 43 54 39 59 61 62 51 49 48 33 54 45 61 2008
2009 56 49 49 57 59 62 66 61 64 58 71 58 59 58 52 55 63 64 2009
2010 65 74 87 82 70 59 57 59 55 65 75 45 66 67 66 80 58 65 2010
2011 45 44 57 60 48 54 70 69 52 60 50 48 55 55 45 55 64 54 2011
2012 38 43 52 62 71 58 50 56 68 72 69 46 57 57 43 62 55 69 2012
2013 61 51 59 48 56 60 53 61 72 60 75 60 60 58 53 54 58 69 2013
2014 68 43 70 72 78 61 50 73 81 77 63 73 67 66 57 73 61 73 2014
2015 75 78 84 **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** *** 75 **** **** **** 2015
 
Warmest March on record according to the Japanese Meteorological Agency

http://ds.data.jma.g...mp/mar_wld.html


The monthly anomaly of the global average surface temperature in March 2015 (i.e. the average of the near-surface air temperature over land and the SST) was +0.31°C above the 1981-2010 average (+0.76°C above the 20th century average), and was the warmest since 1891. On a longer time scale, global average surface temperatures have risen at a rate of about 0.83°C per century.

Japan would be more truthful? With all that honor and killing themselves over dishonor. Right???

I'm convinced, we need to spend trillions on unreliable "green" energy! Quick!
 
Given fossil fuels run out, of course we need to spend money on green energy. You'd have to be 'effin stupid to think otherwise.

That GISS chart might need to expand to 3 digits soon.
 
Where did that Pulitzer winner, the Daily Caller, get the idea that the Japanese building coal plants were defying Obama? Did you think they knew the Fukushima disaster was going to take place? Do you think the Japanese government should let millions sit in the dark cooking their meals over fires because they pledged to cut carbon emissions dramatically?

BTW, Hey Todd. Long time no see.
 



Forecast from the North American Multi-Model Ensemble (NMME) for sea surface temperature in the Nino3.4 region. NOAA Climate.gov figure by Fiona Martin, from CPC data. (Updated @ 2:30 Eastern time. The minus sign for -0.5°C was shifted up to the positive 0.5 value on the first version of this graph. It has been corrected.)

Looks like 2015 is going to be a very warm year.
 
Where did that Pulitzer winner, the Daily Caller, get the idea that the Japanese building coal plants were defying Obama? Did you think they knew the Fukushima disaster was going to take place? Do you think the Japanese government should let millions sit in the dark cooking their meals over fires because they pledged to cut carbon emissions dramatically?

BTW, Hey Todd. Long time no see.

Do you think the Japanese government should let millions sit in the dark cooking their meals over fires because they pledged to cut carbon emissions dramatically?

Of course not.
Adding "green" energy would be more expensive and they'd still be sitting in the dark.
 
:dig:

The alarmists are digging a huge hole and they are about to get buried in it..


Wolf, Wolf, wolf, wolf, wolf,wolf,wolf, wolf,wolf,wolf,wolf,wolf................ :eek-52:


All of the adjusted data is about to fall in on their heads..
 
Well, ol' Billy Boob, you have been saying that we are going to see a cooling. 2014 warmest year on
record, and 2015 already looking to beat that. Coming months we will see whose head things fall on.
 
Cliamte science has become an absolute fraud...

They cook the books and claim that this or that is the warmest ever.

screenhunter_1508-apr-14-11-30.gif


They then completely ignore the more accurate satellite data which says that they are lying.

screenhunter_1509-apr-14-11-31.gif


And then announce that the satellite data which contradict the surface data confirm the surface data.

screenhunter_8600-apr-15-07-46.gif
 
Oh shit, magic photon guy is back.


Thought I explained my position to you....sorry you didn't grasp it. Should I explain again?

I am guessing that you believe in photons? If you do, then you must believe that they exist as science says they exist? Correct?

Apply the Lorentz relativity equations to photons moving at the speed of light (c). The equations will tell you that neither time, nor space is experienced by a photon from its point of view. That means that from its point of view, it has no distance to go because all spatial length has been infinitely compressed, and time doesn't exist for it because time has come to a standstill due to infinite time dilation.

This means that a photon has no distance to travel in no time....and you must acknowledge its perspective because of the theory of relativity. This being true (if photons actually exist) then photons actually "know " (you know what quotation marks mean around when used around a word like that?) what its destination is like and therefore doesn't move from cool to warm. That being the case, you can limit radiative energy transfer to the same rules as physical contact energy transfer.

Now the question is, do you also believe in back conduction?

You either can wrap your mind around the fact that your view of what photons do has nothing to do with how photons experience time and space or you can't. If you can't, so much the sadder for you. It is no skin off my nose.

Do feel free to prove me wrong. Your explanation should be f'ing interesting.
 
Oh shit, magic photon guy is back.


Thought I explained my position to you....sorry you didn't grasp it. Should I explain again?

I am guessing that you believe in photons? If you do, then you must believe that they exist as science says they exist? Correct?

Apply the Lorentz relativity equations to photons moving at the speed of light (c). The equations will tell you that neither time, nor space is experienced by a photon from its point of view. That means that from its point of view, it has no distance to go because all spatial length has been infinitely compressed, and time doesn't exist for it because time has come to a standstill due to infinite time dilation.

This means that a photon has no distance to travel in no time....and you must acknowledge its perspective because of the theory of relativity. This being true (if photons actually exist) then photons actually "know " (you know what quotation marks mean around when used around a word like that?) what its destination is like and therefore doesn't move from cool to warm. That being the case, you can limit radiative energy transfer to the same rules as physical contact energy transfer.

Now the question is, do you also believe in back conduction?

You either can wrap your mind around the fact that your view of what photons do has nothing to do with how photons experience time and space or you can't. If you can't, so much the sadder for you. It is no skin off my nose.

Do feel free to prove me wrong. Your explanation should be f'ing interesting.

That means that from its point of view, it has no distance to go because all spatial length has been infinitely compressed, and time doesn't exist for it because time has come to a standstill due to infinite time dilation.

So, because photons don't "experience time" that means that time does not exist.
So that means photons can predict the future.
So they aren't smart, they're psychic. Cute.

then photons actually "know " (you know what quotation marks mean around when used around a word like that?) what its destination is like

What it's like now? Violating all sorts of laws of physics?
Or what it will be, millions (billions even) of years in the future?
You're always good for a laugh.


Now the question is, do you also believe in back conduction?

Why don't you explain what you feel "back conduction" means?
I'll let you know if I do.
 
So, because photons don't "experience time" that means that time does not exist.

Depends entirely on your point of view....for you time exists...for photons, it doesn't. Relativity. You have heard of it....right? Have any idea what it means?

So that means photons can predict the future.

Future is a meaningless term to an entity that doesn't experience time. Relativity. Heard of it?....any idea what it means.

So they aren't smart, they're psychic. Cute.

I had no expectation that you could wrap your mind around this so don't worry about disappointing me.

What it's like now? Violating all sorts of laws of physics?
Or what it will be, millions (billions even) of years in the future?
You're always good for a laugh.

Again, future is a meaningless term if you are traveling at the speed of light. Relativity....heard of it?....any idea what it means?

Personally, I don't believe photons exist, but if you are going to believe in them, then you must believe in them as science describes them and as science describes them, they do not experience either time or space.


Why don't you explain what you feel "back conduction" means?

It is a straight forward term....surely you can grasp it. If you can't you have my deepest sympathies.

I'll let you know if I do.

You do that.
 

Forum List

Back
Top