The climate change controversy rolls on and we continue to do stupid things in the quest to stop the “destruction of the planet” in some sort of man-made climate disaster.
It is interesting to look at some of the things we are told and see if any of it makes sense.
There are five main sources of the “global mean temperature” and they all give different results. The satellite data, which has only been available since 1979, is analysed by two different organisations and one result is 60% greater than the other. One wonders how this happens when the data comes from the same source. There are three different “ground sources”, two of which are within 10% of each other and the third is about 40% higher. Historical data gets manipulated and changed over time and areas where there is no data get “estimated” readings to fill in the gaps so it is a moving feast. If anyone would like a source to see the extent of these changes go to http://www.climate4you.com where you can see what has been done to keep the narrative alive. This is an excellent resource full of all sorts of information covering the whole “climate” scene.
We are used to seeing graphs like the one below that show a rising temperature over time.
Again none of the 3 sets graphed agree. UAH shows 0.22 degrees for 30 years which is 0.07 degrees per decade or 0.7 degrees in 100 years. The other satellite data set (RSS) is 77% higher. Note the temperature scale on the Y axis.
The graph below shows what happens when the temperature scale is modified to show some realistic temperature range rather than fractions of a degree.
The next question is what exactly is the “global mean temperature”? No one really wants to put a definitive number on it but the quote from NASA below puts it into perspective, (my underlining):
“To measure Surface Air Temperature we have to agree on what it is and, as far as I know, no such standard has been suggested or generally adopted……For the global mean, the most trusted models produce a value of roughly 14°C, i.e. 57.2°F, but it may easily be anywhere between 56 (13.3C) and 58°F (14.4C) and regionally, let alone locally, the situation is even worse.”
“The average annual temperature for the globe between 1951 and 1980 was around 57.2 degrees Fahrenheit (14 degrees Celsius). That calculation comes from NASA and NOAA. Other agencies may come up with a slightly different number because there are several techniques for calculating a global average, depending on how one accounts for temperatures above the data-sparse oceans and other poorly sampled regions”.
Note the use of the words “roughly”, “models” and “calculation”. It seems that no one actually knows what they are measuring/calculating and it is worth asking why anyone bothers to do it when the result is so nebulous and ultimately pointless.
Temperature is not a quantity it is a measurement. It is impossible to take 2 temperatures and add them together or subtract them from one another, multiply or divide or average them. It is meaningless. 1 cup of water at 100 degrees C and another the same do not add up to 2 cups at 200 degrees.
The “average temperature” measure becomes more bizarre when the list of average temperatures for countries for the period 1961-1990 is considered. In the list of 191 countries 129 or 68% have “30 year averages” above 14 degrees C. Burkina Fasso tops the list at 28.25 degrees C, twice the “average”. Canada takes bottom spot atminus 5.35 C, 19 degrees below “average” with Russia next at minus 5.1 C. The USA is 8.55 C, (this is the home of Death Valley), Australia comes in at 21.65 C. Argentina (14.8) and Monaco (13.55) are the only places within a bull’s roar of the “30 year average”.
An average is just a statistical construct that tells you some of the data is greater and some less than the “average”. For a mean there is the same number above as below. So what? It is like having your head in an oven and your feet in freezer and “on average” you are at a comfortable temperature.
If this bullshit was just a scientific curiosity it would be OK. The problem is we have all been taken hostage by some doomsday cult that rivals Marion Keech’s “Seekers” and no one is prepared to call it out. Billions of dollars are spent trying to prove the unprovable, people vilify each other, politicians milk it for all its worth, greenies foam at the mouth, renewable energy producers’ rape and pillage at will and the citizens pay – as they always do.
We destroy good power stations, pay subsidies for useless wind and solar generators, batteries, “pumped storage” solutions and the costs go through the roof while the reliability goes through the floor.
In SA wholesale “average” electricity prices have tripled over the last 4 years from $55/MWh to $147/MWh to date in 2018 and there is no sensible end in sight given the degree of political incompetence that we have in all governments and all parties.
The climate change cult needs “global warming” to keep its CO2 driven “climate change” garbage going so they can continue to have a firm grip on our goolies. As Theodore Roosevelt said, “when you have them by the balls their hearts and minds will follow”.