October 2015 was the warmest month in recorded history

[shira]

How warm a month is is based on the difference between the month's average temperature compared with the historical average of the temperatures for that month, not on the month's absolute average temperature. By that standard, October 2015 was the warmest month in history, almost 1°C (NOAA's dataset) warmer than the average of all preceding Octobers. That's the greatest different for ANY month (relative to the historical average for that month) in history.

The combined average temperature over global land and ocean surfaces for October 2015 was the highest for October in the 136-year period of record, at 0.98°C (1.76°F) above the 20th century average of 14.0°C (57.1°F). This marked the sixth consecutive month a monthly global temperature record has been broken and was also the greatest departure from average for any month in the 1630 months of recordkeeping, surpassing the previous record high departure set just last month by 0.13°F (0.07°C). The October temperature is currently increasing at an average rate of 0.06°C (0.11°F) per decade.

Here is a chart prepared by the Japan Meteorological Agency using its own dataset (in addition, it measures anomalies based on the average from 1981 to 2010, not the 20th-century average used by NOAA):

Because of the ongoing very large El Nino, which is expected to extend well into 2016, 2016 is expected to carry on where 2015 leaves off, which will tilt that red line upward a bit.

 

[umbrella39]

Hush you with your stats, math, temperatures, science, facts, and their extreme left leaning liberal bias...

 

[Franz316]

Um.. cycles or something?

 

[Paratus]

How warm a month is is based on the difference between the month's average temperature compared with the historical average of the temperatures for that month, not on the month's absolute average temperature. By that standard, October 2015 was the warmest month in history, almost 1°C (NOAA's dataset) warmer than the average of all preceding Octobers. That's the greatest different for ANY month (relative to the historical average for that month) in history.



Here is a chart prepared by the Japan Meteorological Agency using its own dataset (in addition, it measures anomalies based on the average from 1981 to 2010, not the 20th-century average used by NOAA):

Because of the ongoing very large El Nino, which is expected to extend well into 2016, 2016 is expected to carry on where 2015 leaves off, which will tilt that red line upward a bit.

Shira is obviously ignoring the pause.

There has been no statistically significant warming since September 2015.

(Shamelessly stolen from elsewhere )

 

[Sonikku]

This can only be a good thing as it means more Pirates.

 

[fskimospy]

Guys, but the warming we are seeing now is because of El Niño so it doesn't count. El Niño only counts when you're trying to use a year as a baseline to say global warming isn't happening.

I can't wait until next year when this exceptionally strong El Niño subsides and people start saying that temperatures dropped as compared to 2015 so it's global cooling or some nonsense.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Warmest month in recorded history...satellites say no. But it was definitely a hot one.

 

[shira]

Warmest month in recorded history...satellites say no. But it was definitely a hot one.

NOAA's professional climatologists are telling us October 2015 was the warmest month in history. The JMA - with its own independent data set and professional climatologists - is telling us October 2015 was the warmest month in history.

But you're telling us that's not true. And you even have a chart. Wow, I guess all those professional climatologists are wrong.

I will note, however, that NOAA and JMA base their evaluations on land and sea SURFACE temperatures. Your chart is for the "lower atmosphere." Last I heard, humans live on the surface of the Earth, not in the "lower atmosphere." Maybe you should have made clear that you're basing your personal, unprofessional evaluation on an entirely different metric than the professional services.

 

[Newell Steamer]

Warm?

It's downright HOT!!

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

NOAA's professional climatologists are telling us October 2015 was the warmest month in history. The JMA - with its own independent data set and professional climatologists - is telling us October 2015 was the warmest month in history.

But you're telling us that's not true. And you even have a chart. Wow, I guess all those professional climatologists are wrong.

I will note, however, that NOAA and JMA base their evaluations on land and sea SURFACE temperatures. Your chart is for the "lower atmosphere." Maybe you should have made clear that you're basing your personal, unprofessional evaluation on an entirely different metric than the professional services.

I trust the satellite record (UAH and RSS) as it gives us an accurate and comprehensive perspective of global temperature variations without all the various extrapolations and adjustments. The satellite temperature record previously tracked reasonably well with HadCrut, GISS and NOAA for decades. However, due to relatively recent surface temperature adjustment methodologies, I now expect to see continued divergence of the surface and satellite global temperature record. Time will tell.

 

[Jaskalas]

Maybe you should have made clear that you're basing your personal, unprofessional evaluation on an entirely different metric than the professional services.

That's the entire point. Why should we follow one metric or the other?
Everyone opposing you believes the Satellite data is the equal or better method for measuring global temp.

Then to correlate with the pause we have NCEP data, of which weather models use to produce their forecasts. And the entire point is the Satellite and others show a game-change as soon as the Pacific had its phase change redirecting its heat away from the coasts. And granted, ever since 2011 the "Blob" has been spoiling things, but once this El Ninio and La Nina finish the overall trend will become quite clear... on the datasets we trust.

We discard Surface Station, a spotty record that is ever-adjusted to cool the past and warm the present with infilled data based on bad or missing records. A record contaminated by up to 9F UHI.

I mean, our heat generation alone alters records by up to 9F and you think the Station record is perfectly accurate by hundreds (0.01) of a degree. Across the entire globe, for the past 150 years. Nope. That's just not possible with our methods, or lack thereof.

The other datasets are viewed as modern, global, and are showing a different result. If they continue to match the theory and show little to no warming, then its an issue the IPCC and other scientific organizations must address. If Satellite really isn't a global temp - then they need a great big explanation why we should be ignoring it over the Surface Station data.

Paratus has recently made such an argument, but he reaches a limited audience and is just one person. It would be more convincing if there was a scientific consensus on the argument of datasets.

 

[Greenman]

Just so I'm clear "recorded history" is about a millionth of of one percent of earths history?

 

[feralkid]

Just so I'm clear "recorded history" is about a millionth of of one percent of earths history?

Exactly, and since the Earth was once so much hotter, this is simply "cyclical".

This is an artist's conception of Earth at One Million Years, so don't let these climate "scientists"
tell you the planet is getting warmer;
we've got quite a ways to go before we're even a slightly molten rock.



.

 

[Blackjack200]

LMAO. "Who cares about global warming since the sun will eventually swallow the earth?"

 

[cbrunny]

Exactly, and since the Earth was once so much hotter, this is simply "cyclical".

This is an artist's conception of Earth at One Million Years, so don't let these climate "scientists"
tell you the planet is getting warmer;
we've got quite a ways to go before we're even a slightly molten rock.



.

Is this a joke post?

 

[momeNt]

LMAO. "Who cares about global warming since the sun will eventually swallow the earth?"

Not sure if sarcasm.

But why do people care about global warming?

What do people want to see done about it? And explain how that outcome is net positive?

 

[dainthomas]

How warm a month is is based on the difference between the month's average temperature compared with the historical average of the temperatures for that month, not on the month's absolute average temperature. By that standard, October 2015 was the warmest month in history, almost 1°C (NOAA's dataset) warmer than the average of all preceding Octobers. That's the greatest different for ANY month (relative to the historical average for that month) in history.



Here is a chart prepared by the Japan Meteorological Agency using its own dataset (in addition, it measures anomalies based on the average from 1981 to 2010, not the 20th-century average used by NOAA):

Because of the ongoing very large El Nino, which is expected to extend well into 2016, 2016 is expected to carry on where 2015 leaves off, which will tilt that red line upward a bit.

Starting the graph at the end of the Little Ice Age isn't biased at all.

Do we want to go back to when sea ice encased all the ports of northern Europe every winter, glaciers swallowed villages, and we had frequent crop failures from the cold?

If not, exactly what year had the ideal global average temperature that we're shooting for?

 

[Greenman]

Exactly, and since the Earth was once so much hotter, this is simply "cyclical".

This is an artist's conception of Earth at One Million Years, so don't let these climate "scientists"
tell you the planet is getting warmer;
we've got quite a ways to go before we're even a slightly molten rock.



.

And before that it was cold dust.
I was thinking more along the lines of history since life was firmly entrenched. I understand why the alarmists use such a tiny sample of data, it's all they really have that can be considered accurate, even though it's been manipulated, and it makes the graphs look great. But the body of available data goes back many millions of years beyond that, though it isn't as accurate. Including that data would make the current weather changes appear insignificant, that doesn't fit the accepted outcome, so it's not used.
Right now it appears as though we may have a problem, it could be a serious life threatening global issue, or it could be chicken little syndrome.
Personally, I don't really care if it's a real problem or not because solving it will solve a whole bunch of other issues that need to be addressed. As long as the solution doesn't involve making Al Gore rich.

 

[Blackjack200]

Not sure if sarcasm.

But why do people care about global warming?

What do people want to see done about it? And explain how that outcome is net positive?

No.

I mostly stopped arguing about global warming after the "CO2 is Plant Food" quote. http://rationallythinkingoutloud.co...ge-denier-setting-a-new-record-for-stupidity/

I'm not letting myself get trolled anymore. I just laugh at insane comments.

 

[OverVolt]

Link me an article conclusively correlating breaking weather records with global climate trends.

Last year we broke a low from the late 1800's during the winter in my area.

Good luck.

Otherwise you only prove how little of science you understand to jump to conclusions like you just did for all to see in the OP.

 

[Blackjack200]

Hi guys it was cold by my house last winter. Checkmate!

 

[OverVolt]

Hi guys it was cold by my house last winter. Checkmate!

Which is anecdotal just like the warmest October. Another science casualty. Nothing brings out the room temp IQ's like global warming I guess.

 

[fskimospy]

Which is anecdotal just like the warmest October. Another science casualty. Nothing brings out the room temp IQ's like global warming I guess.

Speaking of room temperature IQs, the global temperature averages for a month, taken by reliable instruments in a systematic fashion is not an anecdote.

It really helps not to get basic definitions of words wrong when you're trying to call other people stupid. lol.

 

[OverVolt]

Speaking of room temperature IQs, the global temperature averages for a month, taken by reliable instruments in a systematic fashion is not an anecdote.

It really helps not to get basic definitions of words wrong when you're trying to call other people stupid. lol.

You can't draw wild conclusions from one month and apply them to the climate. There is no basis for that. Its a pure appeal to emotion. It shows who is thinking and who isn't.

 

[fskimospy]

You can't draw wild conclusions from one month and apply them to the climate. There is no basis for that. Its a pure appeal to emotion. It shows who is thinking and who isn't.

You may not have noticed, but the OP came with an image that included climate trends going back more than a century. It's part of a larger trend, oh ye of little thinking.