My opinion
on global average temp as published is they have no relation to the actual measurements.
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.
Dan Kellog, an engineer (not climate scientist)
on another blog, has raised the issue of once a glacier has melted away, the local
temps could rise dramatically (and perhaps,
averaged altogether around the world as glaciers melt away, increase the rate of
global warming).
Dan Kellog, an engineer (not climate scientist)
on another blog, has raised the issue of once a glacier has melted away, the local
temps could rise dramatically (and perhaps,
averaged altogether around the world as glaciers melt away, increase the rate of
global warming).
Add
on the normal summer increase (globally) of 27C / 50F and we will have
global average summer
temps of @ 49C / 122F not just over small isolated areas, but over huge areas / countries / states / counties.
Note: Excel used to calculate the 3 - year absolute temperature and CO2 level
averages; also used to calculate the moving 36 - month and 360 - month per century acceleration / deceleration trends (Excel slope function) as depicted
on chart; the absolute
temps calculated using the HadCRUT4 month anomalies and NOAA's monthly
global mean temperature estimates; and, the 3 - year
average beginning value for CO2 was offset to a zero starting place.
I just published a post
on my blog about the interaction of CO2 and
average global temps over geologic time and it seems that CO2 has had very little effect
on those
temps.
's 5 W / m2 is even close to accurate, in looking at some calculations I've seen, which show that the difference between the peak solar cycle and the minimum is about.322 W / m2 across the entire planet in terms of irradiance, and this translates into about.2 C in
global temp difference
on average, then my rough estimate of.1 C in TSI effect in 1998's El Nino versus 2009 - 2010 is an undershoot, but either way it looks like the TSI effect in 1998 is far more than the.01 C that some have suggested would be the level to be even significant.
---- Reply: This fuss will be moot in 20 years when
average global temps have NOT continued
on their upward trajectory, rising clearly above the MWP.
However, that's a different question from whether or not
global temps have
on average been rising for the past 10 or 12 years.
Nick, pretty much everyone agrees that
global temps are
on average higher now than a century or 130 years ago.
This fuss will be moot in 20 years when
average global temps have continued
on their upward trajectory, rising clearly above the MWP.
97 % of the climate scientists surveyed believe «
global average temps have increased» during the past century 84 % say they «personally believe» [implies they may NOT have actually studied the matter — IE: are NOT experts
on the topic] human - induced warming is occurring, & 74 % agree that «currently available scientific evidence» substantiates its occurrence.
tree rings as proxies of surface air
temp as proxies of
global climate heat content; or
temp anomalies as proxies of
average temperatures as proxies of
global climate heat content), might sound good
on paper to those who think they already know the truth.