This October Was the Hottest Ever Measured (scienceblogs.com)

GregLaden writes: Scientists track the global surface temperature, an average of readings from thermometers at approximately head height, and an estimate of sea surface temperatures, in order to track global warming. Over the last year or so we have been seeing many record-breaking months. Now, both the Japan Meteorological Agency and NASA have identified October as an extraordinary month. October 2016 is significantly warmer than any other in the NASA record, which goes back to 1880.

Comments

Data manipulation

[Anonymous Coward]

The data are being manipulated to make it look like the Earth is getting warmer. The NCDC "adjustments" to the GHCN temperature data produce almost the entire warming. Look at Steven Goddard's blog for details about this. In other words, the warming is fictional. There has been no substantive warming since 1998. Global temperatures have been essentially flat. Were it actually the hottest month rather than a consequence of data manipulation, it would simply be an extreme weather event, nothing more. The Earth isn't getting warmer due to human activities. There isn't a correlation with greenhouse gases, otherwise there should have been warming after 1998.

Tiny sample size, evolving measurement methodology

[kenh]

Let's say, for the sake of argument, that all the measurements are accurate, and that our data from 1880 is as accurate as today's data - it isn't, but let's just say that.

We have data that goes back about 135 years - how long has man been on the planet? The most 'conservative' estimates I've heard, which are resoundingly mocked by many here is around 10,000 years, which would put our sample size at about 1.35%. If man has been rolling around the planet longer than that (and we know he has), the sample size becomes even smaller.

So October 2016 was the warmest in the past 135 years... So what? If you're going to argue that a single anomalous weather event neither proves nor disproves 'climate change', how can you infer anything from data for one month out of 135 years, when the devices used to collect the data have improved in accuracy and scope over the sample period? (How did they average surface temperatures across the seas - they didn't have a global network of weather satellites for the first half of the sample period.)

Re: Good to know

[kenh]

Guys in fishing boats dropped thermometers to a random depth under the water surface and recorded their temperatures as accurately as they cared to (maybe to the closest half a degree?) whenever they chose to.

What you have a problem accepting conclusions based on an ever-changing measurement methodology/technology?

Re:Climate has never not been changing.

[Vidar Leathershod]

You know, other people who are disagreeing are at least attempting to make an intelligent argument. You are posting little "quips" that you must think are very clever barbs. The first is this accurate predictor of the quality of your future posts,

"You see the difference between here and Ars on the climate threads. Slashdot is full of spastics like you who can't face reality and take comfort in spouting meaningless shit like this. Beyond pathetic."

That's actually hilarious, since Ars is kind of known for being an echo chamber, full of armchair scientists. The difference is that Slashdot is full of armchair scientists of a more varied and diverse background. The next is this well-sourced, point by point refutal of the parent's argument,

"The fact that you think that any of that is evidence against AGW speaks volumes."

And the amazingly awesome straw man,

"Yeah congrats you're playing the role of the creationist, but in the climate arena. Take a bow son."

Next, a challenge,

"Make your own prediction, let's see what happens. Put your money where your mouth is."

Then, an apology,

"Sorry, your disingenuous characterization of people who accept the overwhelming evidence is fucking pathetic. Nobody wants this to be true. There are people who accept it, and people who immaturely and childishly talk shit because they're too fucking cowardly to face up to it, and you are clearly of the latter."

Aren't you the big man? Spend a few more years out of high school, and perhaps you can join the rest of us immature adults here in some vitriolic discourse of a more elevated sort.