NOAA Satellite records second largest 2-month temperature drop in history

[ReinyDays]

<nitpick>
Carbon dioxide levels in our atmosphere fluctuate 15 ppm per season ...
</nitpick>

 

[Sunsettommy]

Ha ha, it is clear you didn't read the article, I never originated the word unusual, it was written by Anthony Watts.

No that .53C drop in a two month period is actually unusual, which Dr. Spenser makes clear with his satellite data spanning 40 years, only one larger than that in a TWO month period, that was in 1987-88 time frame.

Here is why you are looking silly here:

The Version 6.0 global average lower tropospheric temperature (LT) anomaly for April, 2020 was +0.38 deg. C, down from the March, 2020 value of +0.48 deg. C.

The Northern Hemisphere temperature anomaly fell from +0.96 deg. C to 0.43 deg. C from February to April, a 0.53 deg. C drop which is the 2nd largest 2-month drop in the 497-month satellite record. The largest 2-month drop was -0.69 deg. C from December 1987 to February 1988.

bolding mine

Notice the word ANOMALY?

You seem to be at war with Dr. Spenser, you are invited to tell him how wrong he is at his blog.

You post it here ... you own it here ... if you can't back up your claims, then maybe you shouldn't have posted them here ...

This happens on average every 20 years ... if you'd have read the article, you'd have seen near the end some of the physics involves with this data ... and thus we see how normal and natural your click-bait is ...

It's stupid to say "497 months" instead of 41 years ... or it's deceptive ... you posted it, you own it ...

You are a mess since it was Dr. Spenser who wrote 497 months, I simply quoted it, nothing deceptive about it since I QUOTED that whole section, not being deceptive at all since it was a simple observation, which YOU refuse to accept, you want to add a whole bunch of stupid RED HERRINGS into it, you flog the Professor for not talking about standard deviations, while you IGNORE Anomaly, which actually defused your entire stupid standard deviation argument!



Like I said before he made a simple observation, nothing more. He doesn't go on and on why this is a big freaking deal. The depth of the drop was rare, that is all he talked about.

No he didn't talk about the "physics" involved with data, that is YOUR delusion.

Here is his entire presentation minus the temperature chart and numerical temperature chart:

UPDATE: Changed emphasis from Northern Hemisphere extratropics to entire Northern Hemisphere (h/t John Christy)

In April, 2020, the Northern Hemisphere experienced its 2nd largest 2-month drop in temperature in the 497-month satellite record.

The Version 6.0 global average lower tropospheric temperature (LT) anomaly for April, 2020 was +0.38 deg. C, down from the March, 2020 value of +0.48 deg. C.

The Northern Hemisphere temperature anomaly fell from +0.96 deg. C to 0.43 deg. C from February to April, a 0.53 deg. C drop which is the 2nd largest 2-month drop in the 497-month satellite record. The largest 2-month drop was -0.69 deg. C from December 1987 to February 1988.

The linear warming trend since January, 1979 has now increased to +0.14 C/decade (but remains statistically unchanged at +0.12 C/decade over the global-averaged oceans, and +0.18 C/decade over global-averaged land).

Various regional LT departures from the 30-year (1981-2010) average for the last 16 months are:

The UAH LT global gridpoint anomaly image for April, 2020 should be available within the next week here.

The global and regional monthly anomalies for the various atmospheric layers we monitor should be available in the next few days at the following locations:

Lower Troposphere: http://vortex.nsstc.uah.edu/data/msu/v6.0/tlt/uahncdc_lt_6.0.txt
Mid-Troposphere: http://vortex.nsstc.uah.edu/data/msu/v6.0/tmt/uahncdc_mt_6.0.txt
Tropopause: http://vortex.nsstc.uah.edu/data/msu/v6.0/ttp/uahncdc_tp_6.0.txt
Lower Stratosphere: http://vortex.nsstc.uah.edu/data/msu/v6.0/tls/uahncdc_ls_6.0.txt

===

No mention of "physics" at all. When are you going to stop complaining about what didn't write?

I notice you didn't go over there to ask him why de doesn't talk about "Standard Deviation", you too scared of his answer?

He already brought up Anomaly In his post.

 

[White 6]

Of course things are getting better. Humans aren't running around and crapping up the planet.

In India, they can again see the Himalaya's. In Venice, the water has cleared and the fish are starting to come back. LA has the best air quality they have ever had.

That was my thought also, that world wide during this shut down, we are putting less particulate into the air to catch/reflect sunlight and trap heat.

Hahaha....OMG.....no.... The Particulate count takes decades to change....lol....please try not to embarrass yourself. The Co2 concentrations have held steady which tells you all you need to know.

JO

OK, I'll be glad to listen to your theory. What ya got?

Do you understand the chart in post 1?

The chart appears to be raising trend of mean change of seawater temperature from 1979 to now. showing between .3 Deg C and a little over .5 Deg C between 1979 and 2020. Typical of trend chart used to make a case for global warming. Wasn't planning to getting sucked into global warming debate, as it is often not productive, time consuming, I am uncomfortable with methodology and data collection, and have no way personally verifyy the measurements used to project the trend lines.
Is that not a basic understanding of the chart?

The chart is from satellite data, the temperature data is also from Satellite data.

There is NO CO2 fingerprint in the water temperature data, but its warming trend runs parallel to temperature data.

Why do you key simply on CO2? I can assure you there was no appreciable change in CO2 during the 2 month period. to account for the anomaly you brought up. I don't think it is removed that fast.

Read this again,

The chart is from satellite data, the temperature data is also from Satellite data.

There is NO CO2 fingerprint in the water temperature data, but its warming trend runs parallel to temperature data.

CO2 doesn't warm up the ocean waters, the SUN does that....

I read it. I read it again. Your theory is that all warming or cooling, long term or very short (2 month) must be tied to CO2 in some direct way? Did you pitch the tidbit about a 2 month drop in temperatures as an unassociated bit of information (with no link supporting the claum that I saw), in no way relating to the 40 year diagram you posted? You showed nothing to even verify size of area or location of seawater study, some specific area or some extrapolation on all ocean water on the planet. Are you making a point you do not wish to state or are you asking a question?

Oh dear I think you are very confused here, I am pointing out that CO2 IS NOT much of a factor since 1979 for warming, but the ocean waters are major factor in warming. The SUN is the dominant factor in warming the ocean waters with covers over 71% of the planets surface.

I didn't make any kind of "theory" (a badly used word) about anything, what I made clear was a near perfect association between ocean warming and subsequent atmosphere warming trends, it was almost parallel, as the chart showed, which doesn't allow much room for a CO2 warm forcing influence.

The Temperature chart are from HADLEY SEA SURFACE TEMPERATURE and from UAHv6 Satellite data. I gave you the links to it, yet you keep saying I didn't provide links to them, you have a problem here...., it is obvious you are being lazy about looking into the links.

This was right above the chart I posted......

Here is a chart from HERE, Wood for Trees: Interactive Graphs

The first link is from the post one article you didn't read, the chart and source is in there, right in the open too.

You are a very lazy reader.

Reading skills fine. You are just not good at making your point, and when you have, it doesn't appear you have much understanding of the subject matter (probably why your point has to be dragged out of you) and wish others would help you find it.
Like I said, 2 months is nothing to write home about. Guess we'll have to wait another 40 years for you to get something on the subject.

 

[Sunsettommy]

Of course things are getting better. Humans aren't running around and crapping up the planet.

In India, they can again see the Himalaya's. In Venice, the water has cleared and the fish are starting to come back. LA has the best air quality they have ever had.

That was my thought also, that world wide during this shut down, we are putting less particulate into the air to catch/reflect sunlight and trap heat.

Hahaha....OMG.....no.... The Particulate count takes decades to change....lol....please try not to embarrass yourself. The Co2 concentrations have held steady which tells you all you need to know.

JO

OK, I'll be glad to listen to your theory. What ya got?

Do you understand the chart in post 1?

The chart appears to be raising trend of mean change of seawater temperature from 1979 to now. showing between .3 Deg C and a little over .5 Deg C between 1979 and 2020. Typical of trend chart used to make a case for global warming. Wasn't planning to getting sucked into global warming debate, as it is often not productive, time consuming, I am uncomfortable with methodology and data collection, and have no way personally verifyy the measurements used to project the trend lines.
Is that not a basic understanding of the chart?

The chart is from satellite data, the temperature data is also from Satellite data.

There is NO CO2 fingerprint in the water temperature data, but its warming trend runs parallel to temperature data.

Why do you key simply on CO2? I can assure you there was no appreciable change in CO2 during the 2 month period. to account for the anomaly you brought up. I don't think it is removed that fast.

Read this again,

The chart is from satellite data, the temperature data is also from Satellite data.

There is NO CO2 fingerprint in the water temperature data, but its warming trend runs parallel to temperature data.

CO2 doesn't warm up the ocean waters, the SUN does that....

I read it. I read it again. Your theory is that all warming or cooling, long term or very short (2 month) must be tied to CO2 in some direct way? Did you pitch the tidbit about a 2 month drop in temperatures as an unassociated bit of information (with no link supporting the claum that I saw), in no way relating to the 40 year diagram you posted? You showed nothing to even verify size of area or location of seawater study, some specific area or some extrapolation on all ocean water on the planet. Are you making a point you do not wish to state or are you asking a question?

Oh dear I think you are very confused here, I am pointing out that CO2 IS NOT much of a factor since 1979 for warming, but the ocean waters are major factor in warming. The SUN is the dominant factor in warming the ocean waters with covers over 71% of the planets surface.

I didn't make any kind of "theory" (a badly used word) about anything, what I made clear was a near perfect association between ocean warming and subsequent atmosphere warming trends, it was almost parallel, as the chart showed, which doesn't allow much room for a CO2 warm forcing influence.

The Temperature chart are from HADLEY SEA SURFACE TEMPERATURE and from UAHv6 Satellite data. I gave you the links to it, yet you keep saying I didn't provide links to them, you have a problem here...., it is obvious you are being lazy about looking into the links.

This was right above the chart I posted......

Here is a chart from HERE, Wood for Trees: Interactive Graphs

The first link is from the post one article you didn't read, the chart and source is in there, right in the open too.

You are a very lazy reader.

Reading skills fine. You are just not good at making your point, and when you have, it doesn't appear you have much understanding of the subject matter (probably why your point has to be dragged out of you) and wish others would help you find it.
Like I said, 2 months is nothing to write home about. Guess we'll have to wait another 40 years for you to get something on the subject.

Actually you make clear, that you don't understand WHY it was something special, the ANOMALY deviation (see that ReinyDays?) was exceptional, that is why it was being talked about.

Never made any claims beyond it.

If you had bothered to read the article, you would have learned that was all it was, about a rare very large Anomaly drop, in a two month period. Dr. Spenser didn't elaborate on it for the future at all.

The Sea temperature chart was a separate statement, completely outside of Dr. Spenser's article. I brought it up to point out that Sea Surface temperature warming lines up very well with Atmosphere temperature warming rate, thus CO2 warming fingerprint is not visible in the record, something YOU have yet to counter it at all.

You seem too ignorant on the over all subject of the AGW conjecture, which is why you don't understand the insignificance of CO2 warming effect, when based on either sea surface temperature or satellite data.

That is why you struggle to understand why my attack on CO2's insignificance based on the temperature data was relevant.

 

[mamooth]

CO2 doesn't warm the ocean water, that is why there can't me much of a CO2 fingerprint.

Of course not, silly. The increased IR backradiation due to the increased CO2 warms the ocean water. That's the CO2 fingerprint. Most people understand that without difficulty. What is your excuse?

Anyways, you've failed to tell us what evidence could disprove your "There's no fingerprint!" theory, putting that theory in the category of a religious belief.

 

[mamooth]

How does atmospheric CO2 warm the deep ocean?

Disrupting the deep: Ocean warming reaches the abyss

www.earthmagazine.org

 

[Sunsettommy]

CO2 doesn't warm the ocean water, that is why there can't me much of a CO2 fingerprint.

Of course not, silly. The increased IR backradiation due to the increased CO2 warms the ocean water. That's the CO2 fingerprint. Most people understand that without difficulty. What is your excuse?

Anyways, you've failed to tell us what evidence could disprove your "There's no fingerprint!" theory, putting that theory in the category of a religious belief.

But of course no evidence of that is posted. meanwhile you seem completely oblivious to the overwhelming heat capacity of water over a tiny atmosphere capacity. The Oceans through El-Nino phases lose far more energy than CO2 could add to it, it is why the atmosphere temperature can soar rapidly during El-Nino phase.

I have already showed the lack of a CO2 finger print with that chart in post one, too bad you still resist the obvious.

The Sun is the well know dominant source of energy to the waters, which has been known for many decades, why do you still resist it?

 

[White 6]

Of course things are getting better. Humans aren't running around and crapping up the planet.

In India, they can again see the Himalaya's. In Venice, the water has cleared and the fish are starting to come back. LA has the best air quality they have ever had.

That was my thought also, that world wide during this shut down, we are putting less particulate into the air to catch/reflect sunlight and trap heat.

Hahaha....OMG.....no.... The Particulate count takes decades to change....lol....please try not to embarrass yourself. The Co2 concentrations have held steady which tells you all you need to know.

JO

OK, I'll be glad to listen to your theory. What ya got?

Do you understand the chart in post 1?

The chart appears to be raising trend of mean change of seawater temperature from 1979 to now. showing between .3 Deg C and a little over .5 Deg C between 1979 and 2020. Typical of trend chart used to make a case for global warming. Wasn't planning to getting sucked into global warming debate, as it is often not productive, time consuming, I am uncomfortable with methodology and data collection, and have no way personally verifyy the measurements used to project the trend lines.
Is that not a basic understanding of the chart?

The chart is from satellite data, the temperature data is also from Satellite data.

There is NO CO2 fingerprint in the water temperature data, but its warming trend runs parallel to temperature data.

Why do you key simply on CO2? I can assure you there was no appreciable change in CO2 during the 2 month period. to account for the anomaly you brought up. I don't think it is removed that fast.

Read this again,

The chart is from satellite data, the temperature data is also from Satellite data.

There is NO CO2 fingerprint in the water temperature data, but its warming trend runs parallel to temperature data.

CO2 doesn't warm up the ocean waters, the SUN does that....

I read it. I read it again. Your theory is that all warming or cooling, long term or very short (2 month) must be tied to CO2 in some direct way? Did you pitch the tidbit about a 2 month drop in temperatures as an unassociated bit of information (with no link supporting the claum that I saw), in no way relating to the 40 year diagram you posted? You showed nothing to even verify size of area or location of seawater study, some specific area or some extrapolation on all ocean water on the planet. Are you making a point you do not wish to state or are you asking a question?

Oh dear I think you are very confused here, I am pointing out that CO2 IS NOT much of a factor since 1979 for warming, but the ocean waters are major factor in warming. The SUN is the dominant factor in warming the ocean waters with covers over 71% of the planets surface.

I didn't make any kind of "theory" (a badly used word) about anything, what I made clear was a near perfect association between ocean warming and subsequent atmosphere warming trends, it was almost parallel, as the chart showed, which doesn't allow much room for a CO2 warm forcing influence.

The Temperature chart are from HADLEY SEA SURFACE TEMPERATURE and from UAHv6 Satellite data. I gave you the links to it, yet you keep saying I didn't provide links to them, you have a problem here...., it is obvious you are being lazy about looking into the links.

This was right above the chart I posted......

Here is a chart from HERE, Wood for Trees: Interactive Graphs

The first link is from the post one article you didn't read, the chart and source is in there, right in the open too.

You are a very lazy reader.

Reading skills fine. You are just not good at making your point, and when you have, it doesn't appear you have much understanding of the subject matter (probably why your point has to be dragged out of you) and wish others would help you find it.
Like I said, 2 months is nothing to write home about. Guess we'll have to wait another 40 years for you to get something on the subject.

Actually you make clear, that you don't understand WHY it was something special, the ANOMALY deviation (see that ReinyDays?) was exceptional, that is why it was being talked about.

Never made any claims beyond it.

If you had bothered to read the article, you would have learned that was all it was, about a rare very large Anomaly drop, in a two month period. Dr. Spenser didn't elaborate on it for the future at all.

The Sea temperature chart was a separate statement, completely outside of Dr. Spenser's article. I brought it up to point out that Sea Surface temperature warming lines up very well with Atmosphere temperature warming rate, thus CO2 warming fingerprint is not visible in the record, something YOU have yet to counter it at all.

You seem too ignorant on the over all subject of the AGW conjecture, which is why you don't understand the insignificance of CO2 warming effect, when based on either sea surface temperature or satellite data.

That is why you struggle to understand why my attack on CO2's insignificance based on the temperature data was relevant.

You are just upset that nobody on here apparently appreciates you brilliance, due to you not being able to prove or explain anything, you conceited doofus.

 

[mamooth]

Year 2016 is nearly .60C warmer than now,

Only if you use the wonky fudged UAH model, which nobody does, at least nobody outside of your cult.

Honest people use the best data, which is the surface temperature data, which says that the current temps are barely below 2016, even though 2016 was a strong El Nino year, and 2020 isn't. So, the directly measured evidence demonstrates the ongoing warming.

https://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata_v4/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt

you must he convinced there will be a huge El-Nino coming up,

If you can't argue with what I say, just say so. Making up stories about what I supposedly really think is pathetic.

when YOU just said: "And meanwhile, the actual prediction is for a near-neutral ENSO for the next 6 months.",

Yes, because that's the prediction. It's a habit I have, reporting the facts accurately. I'd still do it even if it didn't trigger you; that's just a bonus.

See? It's just below the El Nino threshold now. The forecast is that it declines a bit, but stays in positive territory.

otherwise there couldn't be much warming coming up.

Your logic is clearly not like our mere earth logic, and I'm not going to try to figure it out. Like Nietzsche sort of said, when you gaze into the stupid, the stupid gazes back into you. Trying to fathom denier logic is a risk to a person's sanity.

 

[mamooth]

But of course no evidence of that is posted.

Being I just posted the study confirming the warming oceans, that seems a peculiar claim.

If you'd like, I can post the studies confirming the increased backradiation. But since you'd just ignore them as well, what's the point? Tell you what, if you state ahead of time that you'll accept the rising backradiation levels as proof of AGW theory, I'll post them. Otherwise, I won't waste my time. Yes, that is mighty reasonable of me, thank you.

meanwhile you seem completely oblivious to the overwhelming heat capacity of water over a tiny atmosphere capacity.

I'm aware that has zilch to do with any crazy argument that CO2 can't warm the oceans. I'm wondering why you think it's relevant at all. Please explain your train of logic there.

The Oceans through El-Nino phases lose far more energy than CO2 could add to it, it is why the atmosphere temperature can soar rapidly during El-Nino phase.

Which is not relevant to the fact that the oceans are warming in the long term due to the increased backradiation. The fact that you can't grasp a simple topic doesn't invalidate the topic. Everyone else can grasp it, so you just look ridiculous.

I have already showed the lack of a CO2 finger print with that chart in post one, too bad you still resist the obvious.

No, you didn't. Not in any way. That's just crazy talk on your part.

If you disagree, explain yourself. Go step by step, and tell everyone exactly why your chart supposedly shows a lack of CO2 fingerprinting.

The Sun is the well know dominant source of energy to the waters, which has been known for many decades, why do you still resist it?

Again, your inability to grasp simple concepts like "perturbations in an equilibrium system" does not invalidate those concepts. It just makes you look like a poster boy for Dunning-Kruger Syndrome.

Now, get cracking with that explanation about how you've invalidated CO2 fingerprinting. This should be hilarious. I'm guessing it's just your usual inability to understand the very basic concept of noise on an increasing trend line. It's easy to tell who has never taken a statistics class.

 

[ReinyDays]

You are a mess since it was Dr. Spenser who wrote 497 months, I simply quoted it, nothing deceptive about it since I QUOTED that whole section, not being deceptive at all since it was a simple observation, which YOU refuse to accept, you want to add a whole bunch of stupid RED HERRINGS into it, you flog the Professor for not talking about standard deviations, while you IGNORE Anomaly, which actually defused your entire stupid standard deviation argument!

That statement is under your account, not Dr Spenser's ... fine, not deceptive, just plain stupid then ... you are solely responsible for posting 497 months to begin with ...

The simple observation is temperatures dropped 0.5 ºC over 2 months time ... and that this happens every 20 years on average ... it is you who are adding all the weasel words ... and then resort to personal attacks when I question the meaning of these weasel words ...

497 months boggles the small minded far more than 41 years ... and that who the article was written for, the small minded ... the small minded doesn't understand that Dr Spenser reduced the sample pool to drive up his percentages, a very common trick to deceive the small minded ... the Southern Hemisphere didn't change over the same time span, so the global change was only - 0.25 ºC ... and for good reasons, although the small minded would just be more confused if I tried to explain it (continentality is a real thing) ...

You need to speak for yourself, and let the 14-year-old who runs the "What's Up with That" website speak for himself ...

No he didn't talk about the "physics" involved with data, that is YOUR delusion.

Yes, he did, you just didn't recognize it as physics is all ... can't help you there ... I don't have the time to explain oscillations to you ...

=====

Normal and natural ... something we should expect on a regular basis ... as clockwork as El Nino ...

 

[Crick]

Watts Up With That?

NOAA Satellite records second largest 2-month temperature drop in history

Anthony Watts

May 1, 2020

Excerpt:

In April, 2020, the Northern Hemisphere experienced its 2nd largest 2-month drop in temperature in the 497-month satellite record.

The Version 6.0 global average lower tropospheric temperature (LT) anomaly for April, 2020 was +0.38 deg. C, down from the March, 2020 value of +0.48 deg. C.

The Northern Hemisphere temperature anomaly fell from +0.96 deg. C to 0.43 deg. C from February to April, a 0.53 deg. C drop which is the 2nd largest 2-month drop in the 497-month satellite record. The largest 2-month drop was -0.69 deg. C from December 1987 to February 1988.
LINK

=====

CO2 effect doesn't show up on the chart below at all.

Here is a chart from HERE, Wood for Trees: Interactive Graphs

View attachment 330556

"Averaged as a whole, the global land and ocean surface temperature for March 2020 was 1.16°C (2.09°F) above the 20th century average of 12.7°C (54.9°F) and the second highest in the 141-year record. Only March 2016 was warmer at 1.31°C (2.36°F). The 10 warmest Marches have all occurred since 1990, with Marches of 2016, 2017, 2019, and 2020 having a global land and ocean surface temperature departure from average above 1.0°C (1.8°F). The March 2020 global land and ocean surface temperature departure tied with February 2020 and December 2015 as the third highest monthly temperature departure from average in the 1,683-month record. "

March 2020 Global Climate Report | National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI)

An analysis of global temperatures and precipitation, placing the data into a historical perspective

www.ncdc.noaa.gov

How about you show us an actual NOAA site that supports your claim, cause this NOAA site says you're lying.

 

[ReinyDays]

How about you show us an actual NOAA site that supports your claim, cause this NOAA site says you're lying.

Careful ... it's always the liar who first accuses others of lying ... I'm not calling either of you liars, just you're both using different statistics to make your points ... but fill in the blanks: "Statistics don't ______ , but ______ use statistics" ...

But a GREAT juxtaposition of how to limit the sample pool to skew the averages how we want them ... S'tommy is just using Northern Hemisphere data from satellites and you're using just March data from ground thermometers ... too funny ...

I can show average temperatures are down close to 15ºC in the past 100 years ... just limit ourselves to southern Inyo County, California ... and only look at July 9th through 11th, 1913 compared to May 2nd through 4th, 2020 ... ICE AGE COMETH ... that data is from NOAA, so it's got to be true ...

(ha ha ha ... right ... this is the Furnace Visitors Center in Death Valley NP ... 135ºF there in 1913 is the hottest surface temperature ever measured ... plus I'm comparing two different seasons, that's a thing in temperate climates ... how I'm trying to fool the reader is by comparing temperatures well in excess of a 100 years apart ... and I'm running fast and loose with the word /average/ ... now stop fondling your gun thinking of shooting my balls off for this deceit and learn something ... statistics are only useful if you understand the underlying physics ... if you don't understand the physics, then the statistics will be meaningless)

 

[Sunsettommy]

How about you show us an actual NOAA site that supports your claim, cause this NOAA site says you're lying.

Careful ... it's always the liar who first accuses others of lying ... I'm not calling either of you liars, just you're both using different statistics to make your points ... but fill in the blanks: "Statistics don't ______ , but ______ use statistics" ...

But a GREAT juxtaposition of how to limit the sample pool to skew the averages how we want them ... S'tommy is just using Northern Hemisphere data from satellites and you're using just March data from ground thermometers ... too funny ...

I can show average temperatures are down close to 15ºC in the past 100 years ... just limit ourselves to southern Inyo County, California ... and only look at July 9th through 11th, 1913 compared to May 2nd through 4th, 2020 ... ICE AGE COMETH ... that data is from NOAA, so it's got to be true ...

(ha ha ha ... right ... this is the Furnace Visitors Center in Death Valley NP ... 135ºF there in 1913 is the hottest surface temperature ever measured ... plus I'm comparing two different seasons, that's a thing in temperate climates ... how I'm trying to fool the reader is by comparing temperatures well in excess of a 100 years apart ... and I'm running fast and loose with the word /average/ ... now stop fondling your gun thinking of shooting my balls off for this deceit and learn something ... statistics are only useful if you understand the underlying physics ... if you don't understand the physics, then the statistics will be meaningless)

Here is what the article stated:

In April, 2020, the Northern Hemisphere experienced its 2nd largest 2-month drop in temperature in the 497-month satellite record.

That was the very first paragraph in the article. At post 19, I wrote this to point out WHY I posted the article:

I posted this because it is an unusual drop in temperature, the second biggest since 1979. Neither the article or myself claimed this was a trend, just pointing out an unusual drop, but the chart in post one has so far eluded every one here, the significance of it has yet to be noticed.

In the post one article itself are these words:

"The Northern Hemisphere temperature anomaly fell from +0.96 deg. C to 0.43 deg. C from February to April, a 0.53 deg. C drop which is the 2nd largest 2-month drop in the 497-month satellite record. The largest 2-month drop was -0.69 deg. C from December 1987 to February 1988."

bolding mine



The Chart at POST ONE, isn't from the article, I posted it to show how hard it is to find the CO2 fingerprint in it, to which several stumbling replies indicate they can't address it well.

Crick falls flat on his face once again......, I thought you can figure out this elementary math level out very easily since you are an engineer...….., but you forgot your glasses......

"The Northern Hemisphere temperature anomaly fell from +0.96 deg. C to 0.43 deg. C from February to April, a 0.53 deg. C drop"

Math is very hard for leftist engineers after all...…...

 

[Crick]

How about you show us an actual NOAA site that supports your claim, cause this NOAA site says you're lying.

Careful ... it's always the liar who first accuses others of lying ... I'm not calling either of you liars, just you're both using different statistics to make your points ... but fill in the blanks: "Statistics don't ______ , but ______ use statistics" ...

But a GREAT juxtaposition of how to limit the sample pool to skew the averages how we want them ... S'tommy is just using Northern Hemisphere data from satellites and you're using just March data from ground thermometers ... too funny ...

I can show average temperatures are down close to 15ºC in the past 100 years ... just limit ourselves to southern Inyo County, California ... and only look at July 9th through 11th, 1913 compared to May 2nd through 4th, 2020 ... ICE AGE COMETH ... that data is from NOAA, so it's got to be true ...

(ha ha ha ... right ... this is the Furnace Visitors Center in Death Valley NP ... 135ºF there in 1913 is the hottest surface temperature ever measured ... plus I'm comparing two different seasons, that's a thing in temperate climates ... how I'm trying to fool the reader is by comparing temperatures well in excess of a 100 years apart ... and I'm running fast and loose with the word /average/ ... now stop fondling your gun thinking of shooting my balls off for this deceit and learn something ... statistics are only useful if you understand the underlying physics ... if you don't understand the physics, then the statistics will be meaningless)

Here is what the article stated:

In April, 2020, the Northern Hemisphere experienced its 2nd largest 2-month drop in temperature in the 497-month satellite record.

That was the very first paragraph in the article. At post 19, I wrote this to point out WHY I posted the article:

I posted this because it is an unusual drop in temperature, the second biggest since 1979. Neither the article or myself claimed this was a trend, just pointing out an unusual drop, but the chart in post one has so far eluded every one here, the significance of it has yet to be noticed.

In the post one article itself are these words:

"The Northern Hemisphere temperature anomaly fell from +0.96 deg. C to 0.43 deg. C from February to April, a 0.53 deg. C drop which is the 2nd largest 2-month drop in the 497-month satellite record. The largest 2-month drop was -0.69 deg. C from December 1987 to February 1988."

bolding mine



The Chart at POST ONE, isn't from the article, I posted it to show how hard it is to find the CO2 fingerprint in it, to which several stumbling replies indicate they can't address it well.

Crick falls flat on his face once again......, I thought you can figure out this elementary math level out very easily since you are an engineer...….., but you forgot your glasses......

"The Northern Hemisphere temperature anomaly fell from +0.96 deg. C to 0.43 deg. C from February to April, a 0.53 deg. C drop"

Math is very hard for leftist engineers after all...…...

It must have been my missing reading glasses that prevented me from seeing your OP's title's use of the term "NORTHERN HEMISPHERE".

But, but, but WAIT JUST A MINUTE. It DOESN'T use the term "NORTHERN HEMISPHERE". Fucking twat.

 

[ReinyDays]

It must have been my missing reading glasses that prevented me from seeing your OP's title's use of the term "NORTHERN HEMISPHERE".
But, but, but WAIT JUST A MINUTE. It DOESN'T use the term "NORTHERN HEMISPHERE". Fucking twat.

In April, 2020, the Northern Hemisphere experienced its 2nd largest 2-month drop in temperature in the 497-month satellite record.

Well ... no ... the OP used lower-case letters to spell out the term ... ask you're mommy why ... it's very complicated ...

 

[Crick]

And you think that refutes the 150 years of increasing global temperatures?

 

[ReinyDays]

And you think that refutes the 150 years of increasing global temperatures?

It refutes climate change ... simply because temperature has little if anything to do with climate ... a tertiary or quaternary factor at best ... did your mommy tie your shoes this morning? ...

What was the climate 150 years ago ... what is the climate today ... what will be the climate 150 years from now ... are all three answers the same, then climate isn't changing ...

 

[Crick]

And you think that refutes the 150 years of increasing global temperatures?

It refutes climate change ... simply because temperature has little if anything to do with climate ... a tertiary or quaternary factor at best ... did your mommy tie your shoes this morning? ...

What was the climate 150 years ago ... what is the climate today ... what will be the climate 150 years from now ... are all three answers the same, then climate isn't changing ...

A quaternary factor? Where the fuck did you ever get that idea?

Climate is a dynamic process. It is powered entirely by solar energy. That energy is held in a few different ways: the kinetic energy of moving air and water, the potential energy of atmosphere lifted against the force of gravity and by temperature. The thermal energy of the atmosphere is by far the largest factor in powering the system. Your comment is complete nonsense. And since I turned 66 a few years ago and my mother has been dead for quite a few years, no, she did not tie my shoes this morning. What you think that might have to do with this conversation is beyond me.

As to the original point, the Earth's average temperature has been climbing for the last 150 years or so and the climb has steadily accelerated till today we are setting new records on an almost daily basis. During that time, local temperatures have still varied as much or more as they ever did. That the northern hemisphere should cool for two months, in light of that history, is effectively irrelevant.

 

[ReinyDays]

Climate is a dynamic process. It is powered entirely by solar energy. That energy is held in a few different ways: the kinetic energy of moving air and water, the potential energy of atmosphere lifted against the force of gravity and by temperature. The thermal energy of the atmosphere is by far the largest factor in powering the system. Your comment is complete nonsense. And since I turned 66 a few years ago and my mother has been dead for quite a few years, no, she did not tie my shoes this morning. What you think that might have to do with this conversation is beyond me.

As to the original point, the Earth's average temperature has been climbing for the last 150 years or so and the climb has steadily accelerated till today we are setting new records on an almost daily basis. During that time, local temperatures have still varied as much or more as they ever did. That the northern hemisphere should cool for two months, in light of that history, is effectively irrelevant.

Weather is a dynamic process ... weather is powered by solar energy (and gravity) ... the energy is held as kinetic energy of the atmospheric molecules, which by definition is it's temperature ... where did you learn your meteorology, Jason's Flight Academy? ...

Climate attempts to "average out" these dynamic fluctuations ... generally over 100 year time periods as this includes four solar cycles, and out of every four solar cycles we'll more likely remove this from our climate averages than just a single cycle ... the law of large numbers ... we use ∆t = 100 years instead of dt ...

Earth's average temperature as risen 1ºC in the past 150 years, and the IPCC report claims it will rise another 2ºC over the next 150 years ... drive an hour or two south and tell me the climate changed ... catastrophically ...

The large scale circulation drives cyclonic activity which in turn drives thunderstorm activity which in turn drives temperature ... of the fourth order of consideration ... that's right, average wind direction is the single most important factor in climate ...