Tracking Crucial Metrics of Earth's Global Warming
climatechangetracker.org
Tracking Crucial Metrics of Earth's Global Warming
1–10 of 72 posts
Re: Tracking Crucial Metrics of Earth's Global Warming
#2Does anyone know why the change at the north pole is bigger than the south pole? Is this because the north pole is floating on water?
Re: Tracking Crucial Metrics of Earth's Global Warming
#3I really dislike the use of the word "anomaly" in climate change circles. It may be technically correct, but it feels like propaganda. All it is is the difference to the average of an arbitrarily chosen time frame.
It would actually be strange if temperatures where exactly like the average all the time, so calling it an anomaly if they are different from the average really seems misleading. Again, it may be the technically correct term, but it has a different meaning in "normal language" imo.
The trend of the temperature may be "anomal", but that is not what they call an "anomaly".
Re: Tracking Crucial Metrics of Earth's Global Warming
#4I really dislike the use of the word "anomaly" in climate change circles. It may be technically correct, but it feels like propaganda. All it is is the difference to the average of an arbitrarily chosen time frame. It would actually be strange if temperatures where exactly like the average all the time, so calling it an anomaly if they are different from the average really seems misleading. Again, it may be the techn…
Anomaly relative to the climate without the extra human forcings, like how you could call the dead forest from acid rains an "anomaly". A simple average of a reference period is used as reference for simplicity but is by the fact that climate change is happening much faster than typical climate variations so it's fine for now: the difference is (still) essentially entirely out fault.
Re: Tracking Crucial Metrics of Earth's Global Warming
#5Does anyone know why the change at the north pole is bigger than the south pole? Is this because the north pole is floating on water?
I think the biggest factor differentiating the climate on the halves of the globe is that there's more landmass on the upper* bit of the Earth, so my first guess would be that the difference is tied to this overall difference.
*Comment by the North Hemisphere Gang
Re: Tracking Crucial Metrics of Earth's Global Warming
#6I really dislike the use of the word "anomaly" in climate change circles. It may be technically correct, but it feels like propaganda. All it is is the difference to the average of an arbitrarily chosen time frame. It would actually be strange if temperatures where exactly like the average all the time, so calling it an anomaly if they are different from the average really seems misleading. Again, it may be the techn…
Anomaly relative to the climate without the extra human forcings, like how you could call the dead forest from acid rains an "anomaly". A simple average of a reference period is used as reference for simplicity but is by the fact that climate change is happening much faster than typical climate variations so it's fine for now: the difference is (still) essentially entirely out fault.
I think the point parent is making is that it is possible to cherrypick a reference period.
You can say that the melting of glaciers is an anomaly but when an ancient forest appears below the melted glacier how can we agree on what an anomaly is?
I don't want to deny global warming but I agree with the parent that it's difficult to state what an anomaly is.
Re: Tracking Crucial Metrics of Earth's Global Warming
#7I really dislike the use of the word "anomaly" in climate change circles. It may be technically correct, but it feels like propaganda. All it is is the difference to the average of an arbitrarily chosen time frame. It would actually be strange if temperatures where exactly like the average all the time, so calling it an anomaly if they are different from the average really seems misleading. Again, it may be the techn…
To add to your post, where and how did they determine that 30 years was the appropriate time scale to use?
>The value we show is a 30 year rolling average of temperature change. We have chosen that long term trend because it fits the time scale of the climate and its changes.
Re: Tracking Crucial Metrics of Earth's Global Warming
#8I really dislike the use of the word "anomaly" in climate change circles. It may be technically correct, but it feels like propaganda. All it is is the difference to the average of an arbitrarily chosen time frame. It would actually be strange if temperatures where exactly like the average all the time, so calling it an anomaly if they are different from the average really seems misleading. Again, it may be the techn…
How and why does it feel like propaganda? What is being compared is averages with and without CO2 induced forcing.
Re: Tracking Crucial Metrics of Earth's Global Warming
#9+6 degrees above the 30 year average in the north pole this year
I knew it was up but that is a LOT
Re: Tracking Crucial Metrics of Earth's Global Warming
#10I really dislike the use of the word "anomaly" in climate change circles. It may be technically correct, but it feels like propaganda. All it is is the difference to the average of an arbitrarily chosen time frame. It would actually be strange if temperatures where exactly like the average all the time, so calling it an anomaly if they are different from the average really seems misleading. Again, it may be the techn…
It is a comparison of two averages, not of a single temperature to an average. A changing average suggests a change in the underlying factors at play, because while a single observation may not ever match the average as you say, a system in equilibrium should not see the average changing. This is why it is called anomalous: the mean is changing continuously.
It’s a crude metric but in the framework of the analysis (pre-industrial vs post-industrial) it is an appropriate comparison.