About 170 years ago, there were only 1.2 billion people in the world. Most of the cities were only single-digit million people living there. There was plenty of farmland and resources. The trees were still making forests look like jungles. The pollution levels in cities were probably worse back then than now for many places. And we could not reliably measure temperature and air pressure variations accurately.

In the year 2021, we have 7.8 billion people. Cities have plenty of millions of people residing. Plenty of medium-sized cities. The forests have been cut down to a third of what they were. Pollution levels, although widely kept in check, have been more widespread. Meanwhile, we have some of the most accurate weather measuring devices ever. And we can basically predict what weather patters will be like inside a 2 week period with good accuracy.

The thing is that people have claimed that since 1880 (incidentally when our last cold period eventuated), climate change has seen a 1.5-degree Celsius rise in average temperatures globally. Some estimated as high as 2 degrees celsius. And considering that was an increase in average global temperature measured based on the rise since the period that was a temporary cool period, it leaves me wondering why we should be panicking about "global warming". I mean, we should consider ourselves lucky that it is only 2 degrees.

The_Barnacle wrote on May 30^th, 2021 at 1:28pm:



You do realise that GISTEMP is also an adjusted series?

"The NASA GISS Surface Temperature (GISTEMP) analysis provides a measure of the changing global surface temperature with monthly resolution for the period since 1880, when a reasonably global distribution of meteorological stations was established. The input data that the GISTEMP Team use for the analysis, collected by many national meteorological services around the world, are the adjusted data of the Global Historical Climatology Network (GHCN) Vs. 3 (this represents a change from prior use of unadjusted Vs. 2 data) (Peterson and Vose, 1997 and 1998), United States Historical Climatology Network (USHCN) data, and SCAR (Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research) data from Antarctic stations. Documentation of the basic analysis method is provided by Hansen et al. (1999), with several modifications described by Hansen et al. (2001). The GISS analysis is updated monthly, however CDIAC's presentation of the data here is updated annually. "

"Significant updates to the GISTEMP Team methods are described in a 2010 paper. They describe the use of satellite-observed nightlights to identify measurement stations located in extreme darkness and adjust temperature trends of urban and peri-urban stations for non-climatic factors, verifying that urban effects on analyzed global change are small. "

https://cdiac.ess-dive.lbl.gov/trends/temp/hansen/hansen.html

They apparently adjust for UHI. Although the 2010 paper link at the page comes back as "Not Found".

As I have said before temperature adjustments are a no-no. Temperature is an intensive property.

Ajax wrote on May 30^th, 2021 at 3:45pm:



Um you did Ajax in your OP 

Ajax wrote on May 30^th, 2021 at 12:16pm:

Ajax wrote on May 30^th, 2021 at 4:23pm:



Poor barney likes to repeat things that are not said.

It doesn't matter what the graphs are showing to us here in Australia.
Nothing we can do is going to change it.

The_Barnacle wrote on May 31^st, 2021 at 7:41am:


Real Climate scientists use Kelvin. so 288 Kelvin +1 Kelvin is really small. About 0.35%. Now that is stable.

The_Barnacle wrote on May 31^st, 2021 at 7:41am:


Sea level has been both higher and lower than now. You can't make any predictions.

Crops? What will happen to crops? Drown? DustBowl dryness? You should try science instead of emotion.

The_Barnacle wrote on May 31^st, 2021 at 7:41am:


Empirical evidence or is that what the models tell you. You know the models that haven't been right once.

The_Barnacle wrote on May 31^st, 2021 at 7:41am:


Poor petal. Can't even try to be honest. Why is that?