Not exact matches
The jist of this is that we must NOT suddenly switch off carbon / sulphur producing industries over the planet but instead we must first dramatically reduce CO2 emissions from every conceivable source, then gradually tackle coal / fossil fuel sources to smoothly remove the soot from the
air to prevent a sudden leap in average global
temps which if it is indeed 2.75 C as the UNEP predicts will permanently destroy the climates ability to regulate itself and lead to catastrophic changes on the
land and sea.
But these large reservoirs of heat warm the
air over them, that warm
air and water vapor is then transported over
land, which adds to surface
temps.
NMAT is corrected, in part by comparing to coastal
land stations, SST is corrected to conform to NMAT, then SST drives a model to recreate
air temps... I think this fails as an independent test.
Perhaps if it is so simple, you can explain it to all those simpletons who keep publishing all those graphs labeled «global warming» that only include
land surface
air temps.
NASA's «GISS»
temp uses
land and ocean - based thermometers which measure «different parts of the system [UHI affected parking lots, asphalt heat sinks, AC exhaust
air vents], different signal to noise ratio [we bias toward warm stations], different structural uncertainty [we «homogenise» our data set to cool the past and warm the present to fit the global warming narrative].»
Norbert: if you include both
land and sea temperatures combined then we are likely to see consecutive records broken month in - month out from now on until there is a large prolonged trend in
land /
air temps the other way which at the momenmt seems increasingly unlikely.
Warmer
Temps Likely to Blame The original paper gives a number of examples which show that changes in
land use, precipitation, cloudiness and humidity are superimposed on glaciers similar to those of Kilimanjaro, in terms of latitude, and that something else is at work... «most obvious would be warmer
air temperatures».