Earth just experienced its hottest September ever recorded

[Buzz]

So you acknowledge, they keep changing the numbers...

They corrected it, this morning.

Do you two not know that the entire GISS record is recalculated every time there is new data?? So... it is not unusual to have a small change for a specific time period.

 

[flogger]

Hottest September on record, after many other record hot month this year.

Following the hottest summer on record, 2019 continues to head for the history books. Last month was officially the hottest September on record, just slightly hotter (.04 degrees Fahrenheit) than the previous record-holder, September 2016.

Last month was 1.02 degrees Fahrenheit warmer than the average September from 1981-2010 and about 1.2 degrees Fahrenheit above the preindustrial level, according to data released Friday by the Copernicus Climate Change Service, an organization that tracks global temperatures.

According to AFP, the organization is treating the two months as joint record-holders because the difference is negligible.

September follows a record-setting summer, which recorded the hottest June and July, and the second hottest August. This July was the hottest month on record since record-keeping began 140 years ago.

Climate Change: Earth just experienced its hottest September ever recorded - CBS News

There also 2014-2019 are set to become the warmest recorded five year period.

Five-year period ending 2019 set to be hottest on record

Given the very limited duration of our record why do you want that to matter ?

 

[Media_Truth]

Given the very limited duration of our record why do you want that to matter ?

The current warming is unprecedented, even if we consider the extensive history of the earth. From the National Academy of Science --->

http://dels.nas.edu/resources/static-assets/exec-office-other/climate-change-QA.pdf

Measurements of air in ice cores show that for the past 800,000 years up until the 20th century, the
atmospheric CO2 concentration stayed within the range 170 to 300 parts per million (ppm), making the recent
rapid rise to nearly 400 ppm over 200 years particularly remarkable [figure 3]. During the glacial cycles of
the past 800,000 years both CO2 and methane have acted as important amplifiers of the climate changes
triggered by variations in Earth’s orbit around the Sun. As Earth warmed from the last ice age, temperature
started to rise at approximately the same time and continued to rise in tandem from about 18,000 to
11,000 years ago. Changes in ocean temperature, circulation, chemistry and biology caused CO2
to be released to the atmosphere, which combined with other feedbacks to push Earth into an even an
even warmer state.

 

[longview]

Do you two not know that the entire GISS record is recalculated every time there is new data?? So... it is not unusual to have a small change for a specific time period.

I was unaware that the baseline of the GISS had changed.
https://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata_v4/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt

GLOBAL Land-Ocean Temperature Index in 0.01 degrees Celsius base period: 1951-1980

Nope, still like it has been for years 1951-1980, so they are still recalculating the base period?

 

[PoS]

I was unaware that the baseline of the GISS had changed.
https://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata_v4/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt

Nope, still like it has been for years 1951-1980, so they are still recalculating the base period?

To fit their agenda in making every year hotter than it actually is.

The current warming is unprecedented, even if we consider the extensive history of the earth. From the National Academy of Science --->

http://dels.nas.edu/resources/static-assets/exec-office-other/climate-change-QA.pdf

Measurements of air in ice cores show that for the past 800,000 years up until the 20th century, the
atmospheric CO2 concentration stayed within the range 170 to 300 parts per million (ppm), making the recent
rapid rise to nearly 400 ppm over 200 years particularly remarkable [figure 3]. During the glacial cycles of
the past 800,000 years both CO2 and methane have acted as important amplifiers of the climate changes
triggered by variations in Earth’s orbit around the Sun. As Earth warmed from the last ice age, temperature
started to rise at approximately the same time and continued to rise in tandem from about 18,000 to
11,000 years ago. Changes in ocean temperature, circulation, chemistry and biology caused CO2
to be released to the atmosphere, which combined with other feedbacks to push Earth into an even an
even warmer state.

LOL more climate proxy silliness.

 

[Media_Truth]

To fit their agenda in making every year hotter than it actually is.

LOL more climate proxy silliness.

You have never posted a scientific post since I've been visiting these forums, and you call the National Academy of Science "silly".:lol:

 

[CaughtInThe]

I'm really hoping the Republican party is right about climate change. If they're wrong the whole world is screwed.

 

[Surface Detail]

Yes, but also reloaded at as of 10/16 7:28 am, where Sept was not posted yet,
and September 2016 was still at .92 C.

According to the page info, that page was last modified on October 11, 2019 at 19:56:49. So you are wrong. The page was posted days before you claim. Admit it: you simply forgot to reload the page, didn't you! :lol:

 

[Surface Detail]

The text says it uses a five year smoothing.

You're looking at the wrong graph :roll:

The monthly data are (obviously, one would think!) given under "Monthly Mean Global Surface Temperature".

 

[Surface Detail]

I was unaware that the baseline of the GISS had changed.
https://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata_v4/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt

Nope, still like it has been for years 1951-1980, so they are still recalculating the base period?

It has nothing to do with the base period.

What you and your fellows seem to misunderstand is that the mean monthly averages are not direct measurements. The are values that are calculated using a model whose inputs are the thousands of measurements taken around the globe, each of which is subject to possible correction, or omission if it is determined to be unreliable. This means that the mean monthly averages are simply our current best estimate, and that they may indeed change as data is added, corrected or removed.

 

[longview]

According to the page info, that page was last modified on October 11, 2019 at 19:56:49. So you are wrong. The page was posted days before you claim. Admit it: you simply forgot to reload the page, didn't you! :lol:

Nope, I cut and pasted from the refreshed page that same morning.

 

[longview]

It has nothing to do with the base period.

What you and your fellows seem to misunderstand is that the mean monthly averages are not direct measurements. The are values that are calculated using a model whose inputs are the thousands of measurements taken around the globe, each of which is subject to possible correction, or omission if it is determined to be unreliable. This means that the mean monthly averages are simply our current best estimate, and that they may indeed change as data is added, corrected or removed.

What you do not seem to understand is that the inputs from 1951-1980 should be thoroughly adjusted by now,
and that they should not be making adjustments to the base line 39 years after the fact.

 

[Media_Truth]

I was unaware that the baseline of the GISS had changed.
https://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata_v4/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt

Nope, still like it has been for years 1951-1980, so they are still recalculating the base period?

This is a link of all data gathered and used from 1880 to 2019. It does not discuss the calculation of the "base period", which I believe is fixed. If you suspect otherwise, provide a link that supports your argument.

It's interesting that months that are 1 deg C above the base period are all 2015 and later, other than January of 2007 - incredible evidence of a warming earth!

 

[longview]

This is a link of all data gathered and used from 1880 to 2019. It does not discuss the calculation of the "base period", which I believe is fixed. If you suspect otherwise, provide a link that supports your argument.

It's interesting that months that are 1 deg C above the base period are all 2015 and later, other than January of 2007 - incredible evidence of a warming earth!

The base line for the GISS is published 1951-1980, since past temperatures are based on a difference from that base line,
the only real reason for past temperatures to change, is if the base line changes.
https://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata_v4/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt

GLOBAL Land-Ocean Temperature Index in 0.01 degrees Celsius base period: 1951-1980

 

[Media_Truth]

The base line for the GISS is published 1951-1980, since past temperatures are based on a difference from that base line,
the only real reason for past temperatures to change, is if the base line changes.
https://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata_v4/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt

You're making no sense.

 

[Buzz]

I was unaware that the baseline of the GISS had changed.
https://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata_v4/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt

Nope, still like it has been for years 1951-1980, so they are still recalculating the base period?

Who said anything about baselines changing?

For someone who frequently cites NASA's Gistemp, you are awfully uninformed on how it is determined.

Maybe you should brush up on your knowledge...

Data.GISS:
GISS Surface Temperature Analysis (GISTEMP v4)

Here is some relevant info from the faq page.

Note these two specifically.

As new data become available, the offset determined using that method may change. This explains why additional recent data can impact also much earlier data in any regional or global time series.

And...

These occasional corrections are one reason why monthly updates not only add e.g. global mean estimates for the new month, but may slightly change estimates for earlier months. Another reason for such changes are late reports for earlier months; finally, as more data become available, they impact the results of NOAA/NCEI's homogenization scheme and of NASA/GISS's combination scheme due to the presence of data gaps (see also the answer to the previous question).

You denialists need to quit pretending that NASA's frequent adjustments prove anything nefarious... because they don't.

 

[Surface Detail]

Nope, I cut and pasted from the refreshed page that same morning.

You must be mistaken. If you open the link in Firefox, right-click to open the context menu, and click View Page Info, you can see that the page is date-stamped October 11, well before you claim it changed.

 

[longview]

You must be mistaken. If you open the link in Firefox, right-click to open the context menu, and click View Page Info, you can see that the page is date-stamped October 11, well before you claim it changed.

I can only tell you that the cut and past was from the page loaded at about the time posted on the day it was posted, it changed a minuets later.

 

[longview]

Who said anything about baselines changing?

For someone who frequently cites NASA's Gistemp, you are awfully uninformed on how it is determined.

Maybe you should brush up on your knowledge...

Data.GISS:
GISS Surface Temperature Analysis (GISTEMP v4)

Here is some relevant info from the faq page.

Note these two specifically.



And...



You denialists need to quit pretending that NASA's frequent adjustments prove anything nefarious... because they don't.

For delta modulator counting systems, the reference needs to be stable.
The anomaly temperature record is this type of system.

 

[Surface Detail]

I can only tell you that the cut and past was from the page loaded at about the time posted on the day it was posted, it changed a minuets later.

No, it did not change then; it changed when the date-stamp said it changed. Why are you even arguing about this? Anyone can look at the page info and see when it changed! There comes a point when it is useless to argue against clear evidence and simply accept that you must have been mistaken.

 

[longview]

No, it did not change then; it changed when the date-stamp said it changed. Why are you even arguing about this? Anyone can look at the page info and see when it changed! There comes a point when it is useless to argue against clear evidence and simply accept that you must have been mistaken.

I would have no issue admitting if I were mistaken, I was not!

 

[ocean515]

Let's all give a big cheer to Willis Haviland Carrier.

 

[Steve Case]

Hottest September on record, after many other record hot month this year.

Following the hottest summer on record, 2019 continues to head for the history books. Last month was officially the hottest September on record, just slightly hotter (.04 degrees Fahrenheit) than the previous record-holder, September 2016.

Last month was 1.02 degrees Fahrenheit warmer than the average September from 1981-2010 and about 1.2 degrees Fahrenheit above the preindustrial level, according to data released Friday by the Copernicus Climate Change Service, an organization that tracks global temperatures.

According to AFP, the organization is treating the two months as joint record-holders because the difference is negligible.

September follows a record-setting summer, which recorded the hottest June and July, and the second hottest August. This July was the hottest month on record since record-keeping began 140 years ago.

Climate Change: Earth just experienced its hottest September ever recorded - CBS News

There also 2014-2019 are set to become the warmest recorded five year period.

Five-year period ending 2019 set to be hottest on record

GISTEMP just released their Land Ocean Temperature Index, LOTI for September 2019
Here's a link to their LOTI for August 2019. A side by side comparison between of LOTI for
August and September shows that of the 1677 monthly entries since 1880, 674 were adjusted.

The adjustments are in 0.01 degrees Celsius and most were either +1 or -1

All of the 453 adjustments prior to 1968 were negative except for February 1963.

All of the 221 adjustments since to 1969 were positive except for September 1994
and August 2019.

This sort of thing goes on month after month after month. Here's a rundown of the
Changes made so far in 2019:

Number of Changes to GISSTEMP's LOTI for 2019:
Jan Feb Mar Apr -May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
843 370 481 633 1359 566 281 400 674
​

 

[Bergslagstroll]

GISTEMP just released their Land Ocean Temperature Index, LOTI for September 2019
Here's a link to their LOTI for August 2019. A side by side comparison between of LOTI for
August and September shows that of the 1677 monthly entries since 1880, 674 were adjusted.

The adjustments are in 0.01 degrees Celsius and most were either +1 or -1

All of the 453 adjustments prior to 1968 were negative except for February 1963.

All of the 221 adjustments since to 1969 were positive except for September 1994
and August 2019.

This sort of thing goes on month after month after month. Here's a rundown of the
Changes made so far in 2019:

Number of Changes to GISSTEMP's LOTI for 2019:
Jan Feb Mar Apr -May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
843 370 481 633 1359 566 281 400 674
​

The fossil fuel companies are among the most profitable companies are among the most profitable companies in the world and also have operation all across the world. So they could of course have exposed any wrongdoing in the recording of global temperature. Instead is the evidence for manmade global warming that even fossil fuel companies have to acknowledge the urgent need for action.

Climate emergency: what the oil, coal and gas giants say | Environment | The Guardian

 

[Steve Case]

The fossil fuel companies are among the most profitable companies are among the most profitable companies in the world and also have operation all across the world. So they could of course have exposed any wrongdoing in the recording of global temperature. Instead is the evidence for manmade global warming that even fossil fuel companies have to acknowledge the urgent need for action.

Climate emergency: what the oil, coal and gas giants say | Environment | The Guardian

So far since 1850 the warming is about a degree. The man-made portion of that is up for grabs.
And speaking of things so far: So far we've had Acid Rain, Global Cooling, Nuclear Winter, The
Ozone Hole, Global Warming, Climate Change and now it's the Climate Emergency. I would have
bet on The Climate Crisis as it rolls off the tongue better.

https://i.postimg.cc/qRFJszFZ/image.png

Your side of the coin has made the proverbial mountain out of a molehill. It will eventually crumble,
cutting off access to energy as has started in California will eventually cause a revolt.