In Case You Hadn’t Noticed It Was Hot

Global land/sea temperature anomaly in June

Source: NOAA, accessed 7/13/2023. Green line is LOESS filter.

 

98 thoughts on “In Case You Hadn’t Noticed It Was Hot

    1. ltr

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_Caucus

      Freedom Caucus

      The Freedom Caucus, also known as the House Freedom Caucus, is a congressional caucus consisting of Republican members of the United States House of Representatives. It is generally considered to be the most conservative and farthest-right bloc within the House Republican Conference.

    2. ltr

      “——– ——- has turned Freedom Caucus style deficit hawk.”

      Writing with the mere purpose of personal insult is despicable.

    3. Moses Herzog

      I don’t think everything Larry Summers says is incorrect (gaaaaaawwwwd that was really hard to type out). But where was he when donald trump passed tax cuts for large corporations and the ultra-rich?? It strikes me that Summers was uncharacteristically quiet compared to his usual obsessive love of attention during that period. I don’t think Annie Lowrey is a bad writer either. I can’t remember, it was either James Kwak or Mike Konczal’s blog that introduced me to her journalism. Most of the time she gets it right.

      I think it was Warren Buffett who said the best barometer of debt was as a percentage of GDP. So I think this is the number economists and government officials should focus on, making sure GDP is growing faster, than debt costs, and Lowrey rightly quotes the number in her article:
      https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/FYOIGDA188S

      The moment I always go back to is Walter Mondale in the 1984 presidential debates. That was the moment of truth that Americans wanted a road in front of their house, and a bridge over the waterway head to their job, but didn’t want to pay for that. They want the benefits, but they don’t want to pay for them. Republicans won 1984 and many elections since buy telling wealthy Americans, “Yes, we’ll let you have these things without having to pay for them.” It’s a selfish culture, and I argue that sefishness didn’t really hit in the 1960s, that American selfishness really became a bonfire under Ronald Reagan.

      1. pgl

        Thanks for the excellent comment. Mondale was indeed correct back in 1984. Not sure if Summers ever criticized that stupid 2017 tax cut for the rich (I’ll try to find out) but if he did not – shame on him.

    4. pgl

      Huh? Summers was a critique of that 2017 tax cut for rich people after all:

      https://www.cnbc.com/2017/04/27/ex-treasury-sec-larry-summers-just-completely-trashed-the-trump-tax-plan.html

      Ex-Treasury Secretary Larry Summers just completely trashed the Trump tax plan

      President Donald Trump’s plan to roll back taxes in the hope that doing so will generate robust economic growth with little impact on debt and deficits is “absurd,” former Treasury Secretary and White House economic advisor Larry Summers said. In fact, Summers added in an interview with CNBC, that had he been asked to present such a plan with the notion that it would pay for itself, he would have refused. “If I had been asked by the White House to assert a proposition as demonstrably false as the claim that this plan would produce revenue, I would have resigned rather than put the credibility of the department behind a proposition that no one with real experience would believe was true,” he said.

      Of course Republicans have never listened to Lawrence Summers as their economic “expert” is Lawrence Kudlow aka the Klass Klown.

        1. pgl

          Nice take down of the Republicans supply-side claims by Furman and Summers. Yea – the Republicans were misrepresenting their own studies. Sort of reminds me of most of CoRev’s comments.

    5. Ivan

      Oh nooooo – Larry has gone to the dark side. Or should I say has also done to THAT dark side.

  1. pgl

    I heard a woman who reminded me of Bruce Hall saying this is all a good thing for people who want to swim in the Great Lakes. Even in NYC last winter, I had to wear my favorite coat only a handful of times. Of course, I’m being a bit light here as we all are getting ready for the usual CoRev rant machine.

  2. CoRev

    Sure was! Just like in 1998, 2011, 2016 and now in 2023 we are in an el Nino year, and the hottest evah claims prevail. Why have we not heard that temperatures have fallen for the past ~8 years?

    If its all about CO2 being the control know for ?Climate Change?, why do we have these periods of falling temperatures while CO2 keeps rising?

    1. pgl

      Seriously? OK I’m outsourcing my reply to this garbage to:

      Macroduck
      July 13, 2023 at 12:27 pm

    2. Macroduck

      CoVid: “Ignore the green line! Nothing to see here!”

      pgl: “CoVid rant, right on schedule.”

      1. pgl

        As I noted – this comment by CoRev was dumb even by his standards. Something like confusing a random walk with no drift and a random walk with drift.

      2. CoRev

        McQuack, says: “Ignore the green line! Nothing to see here!”, just ignore the up/done line when ERCOT initiated blackouts BEFORE thermals failed and while renewable outputs were on a long term fall, or like answering a question citing the failed and incomplete LCOE with a set of cost estimates using the (you guessed it) the LCOE, or like claiming that Biden has removed the soybean tariffs, when they are still in place, or failing to list Biden’s/liberals’ successful policies, etc.

        Are these the examples you want to ignore or discuss?

        the denying liberal mind is an amazement.

        1. pgl

          ERCOT? WTF does this have to do with this post? Come on CoRev – you are just babbling BS.

          Do you need us to pay for an upgrade of your obviously corrupt version of ChatGPT?

    3. Macroduck

      In case you hadn’t noticed, the data represented in the chart are deviations from the 20th century average. CoVid wants to draw our attention to year to year variations, away from the fact that the average global temperature in every June since 1978 has been above the 20th century average – including “1998, 2011, 2016 and now in 2023” but in every intervening year as well.

      CoVid is engaged in climate propaganda for dummies.

    4. 2slugbaits

      CoRev So you seem to agree that el Nino and la Nina events are one factor in global temperatures. Good. Then that knowledge should help you answer why temperatures over the last year have been relatively flat (not “have fallen” as you claimed). So let’s do a quick back-of-the-envelope toy model that incorporates el Nino and la Nina events. Let’s include a dummy variable for el Nino years and another dummy variable for la Nina years. The constant will capture in the model will capture the neutral years. Looking at annual data from 1980 thru 2022 here’s what we find using an ARMA (1,0) model with three regressors (e.g., el Nino dummy, la Nina dummy and a time trend) plus a constant. Here are the results:

      anomaly = 0.132 + phi(0.405) + el_Nino(0.059) – la_Nina(0.094) + time(0.019)

      Notice that all of the signs are what you would expect. The adjusted R-sq is 0.911. Residuals are normally distributed and show no residual autocorrelation. All coefficients are statistically significant at the 0.01 level.

      That should answer your question. If not, then you have no business getting involved in this discussion.

        1. pgl

          Just wait for it. CoRev is going to ask 2slug if he used celsius or fahrenheit?

          And when 2slug answers one way of the other. CoRev will go off has the choice biased his statistical results.

          Of course it would not matter which one 2slug used but count on CoRev making a big deal out of this distinction without a difference. It is after all CoRev’s style.

      1. CoRev

        2slugs, as I understand you have shown that for your period period, 1980 -2022 there is warming. Now calculate how much of that warming is due to
        ACO2, CO2, NCO2 and finally natural caused, and then define their various processes. These processes must apply for the entire current glacial/interglacial period.

        Then and only then should you get involved in this discussion. It’s a question I have asked many, many times over, especially for just an individual mitigation effort, and never answered.

        I’ll continue to wait.

        The ideology driven but ignorant liberal mind is an amazement.

          1. baffling

            I told you, it’s over his head. but you gotta piss on the electric fence for yourself!

          2. CoRev

            2slugs, in your arrogance you have again hit a foul ball. Please answer these questions: “how much of that warming is due to
            ACO2, CO2, NCO2 and finally natural caused, and then define their various processes. These processes must apply for the entire current glacial/interglacial period.”

            Your period is wrong. Your arguments are too few. Your assumptions are not defined, and above all they do not hold true for glacial/interglacial periods. Only you and the other ignoranti here think you have answered any of these questions.

            The ignorant and ideologically driven liberal mind is an amazement.

        1. pgl

          Oh good grief – you are the weasel of all time. Maybe you should do the research. And please use reliable sources for the first time in your lying little life.

        2. pgl

          ACO2?

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ACO2
          Aconitase 2, mitochondrial is a protein that in humans is encoded by the ACO2 gene.

          CoRev just makes up BS as he goes! Now NCO2 must be a mix of CO2 with Nitrogen. WTF this has to do with anything is something CoRev never bothered to say. Yea – he is once again trying to deflect and avoid the obvious. It is all this troll has.

          1. CoRev

            Ole Bark, bark the fact that you needed to look up a term is unique in itself, but getting ACO2 wrong in a comment re: ?Climate Change? and CO2’s influence is priceless and ignorant. BTW A=Anthropogenic and N= Natural Occurring and CO2 is the sum of the two. For a knowledgeable person those definitions wouldn’t be needed, but for you it’s necessary.

            The ignorant liberal mind is an amazement.

          2. CoRev

            Menzie, not understanding an acronym in common use in a science under discussion, is an example of the ignorance of those claiming knowledge. Even that pales in comparison when claims of warming is backed up with a graph of annual average temperatures, when data collection for the end month selected has not been completed, is another example of ignorance of the data and science.

            Of course the peanut gallery followers who do not realize what averages do to the peaks and valley of the sub-unit data is just (well you can fill in the word).

            The ignorance of the liberal mind is an amazement.

          3. Menzie Chinn Post author

            CoRev: Examination of Google Scholar reveals no widespread (actually no) usage of term ACO2. Feel free to investigate Web of Science to see if you have any better luck.

          4. CoRev

            Menzie, Dr Curry’s blog: “Define anthropogenic CO2, ACO2, as excess atmospheric CO2 above 280 ppm. The following graph plots log₂(ACO2) since 1970. We can think of log₂(ACO2) as the number of doublings since ACO2 was 1. However the ±5 ppm variability in CO2 over its thousand-year history makes ACO2=1 a rather virtual notion.” https://judithcurry.com/2019/12/27/two-more-degrees-by-2100/#more-25576
            and
            CO2-induced Benefits to Plant Water Use Efficiency: [Video]

            By Craig Idso, CO2 Science, Dec 19, 2019

            https://twitter.com/co2science/status/1207665819489980416?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Eembeddedtimeline%7Ctwterm%5Eprofile%3Aco2science%7Ctwcon%5Etimelinechrome&ref_url=http%3A%2F%2Fco2science.org%2F

          5. Baffling

            This should be a clue that perhaps covids information sources are not nearly as robust and authorative as he thinks they are. But that may be expecting a bit too much from ghostbuster.

          6. CoRev

            Manzie, I’m going to bookmark this comment for future use of nit picking commentary on economics blogs that go off their lanes. It reminds me of using LCOE to prove costs have gone down in a comment about the failure of LCOE, and even more of the failure to depict Actual short termpeaks in temperatures with a graph of ANNUAL averages. https://econbrowser.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/june_globallandseatemp-1.png

            The ignorance of lane jumping liberal minds is an amazement. 😉

      2. Ivan

        Beautiful work. The fact that the person you wrote this for didn’t understand that it documents how much of the year to year data variability could be explained by the el-Nino/la-Nina parameter and still find an undeniable global warming – just show that you can throw pearl to swine and they will still be swine. However, the pearls will still be pearls and the rest of us enjoyed your pearls – thank you.

        1. CoRev

          Ivan, please help 2slugs answer the real questions about warming and its causes fora really significant period. He needs it.

          I’ll wait. Even longer, just like I’m waiting for that list of liberal/Bide’;s successful policies and the discussion of the 35-38 times cost increases needed to implement renewables to support demand.

        2. pgl

          Of course CoRev has Judith Curry and her worthless blog! I’m telling you – CoRev will one day catch JohnH for 2023 troll of the year!

          1. CoRev

            ;-), Judith Curry no expert her! ” is an American climatologist and former chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology. Her research interests include hurricanes, remote sensing, atmospheric modeling, polar climates, air-sea interactions, climate models, and the use of unmanned aerial vehicles for atmospheric research. She was a member of the National Research Council’s Climate Research Committee,[1] published over a hundred scientific papers, and co-edited several major works.[2] Curry retired from academia in 2017 at age 63.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judith_Curry

            Unlike Ole Bark, bark, !?! Just look at his credentials in climate science ….

            The trolling failures of the liberal mind is an amazement.

          2. baffling

            Judith curry has taken a contrarian view to the climate. in a field of her peers, her views are in contradiction to almost all individuals with expertise on the topic. there is a reason very few experts agree with her-she is not supported by the data. if you are betting on her, then you are betting on a very long shot. I will take the field against her EVERY SINGLE TIME. only people who bet on long shots, or believe in conspiracy theories, should be taking her side of the bet. she was not always like this.

            it is ok to be contrarian. that can promote changes. but you need to be contrarian and correct.

    5. ltr

      “Why have we not heard that temperatures have fallen for the past ~8 years?”

      The last 8 years, since 2015, each and all, have been the warmest years globally since 1880. This year promises to add to these warmest of years, and will likely be near the very warmest ever recorded. The model of James Hansen and colleagues, and the beginning of an El Nino cycle this year explain just what is happening:

      http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/abs/ha00410c.html

      December, 2008

      Target Atmospheric CO2: Where Should Humanity Aim?
      By James Hansen, Makiko Sato, Pushker Kharecha, David Beerling, Robert Berner, Valerie Masson-Delmotte, Mark Pagani, Maureen Raymo, Dana L. Royer and James C. Zachos

      Abstract

      Paleoclimate data show that climate sensitivity is ~ 3°C for doubled CO2, including only fast feedback processes. Equilibrium sensitivity, including slower surface albedo feedbacks, * is ~ 6°C for doubled CO2 for the range of climate states between glacial conditions and ice-free Antarctica. Decreasing CO2 was the main cause of a cooling trend that began 50 million years ago, the planet being nearly ice-free until CO2 fell to 450 ± 100 ppm; barring prompt policy changes, that critical level will be passed, in the opposite direction, within decades. If humanity wishes to preserve a planet similar to that on which civilization developed and to which life on Earth is adapted, paleoclimate evidence and ongoing climate change suggest that CO2 will need to be reduced from its current 385 ppm ** to at most 350 ppm, but likely less than that. The largest uncertainty in the target arises from possible changes of non-CO2 forcings. *** An initial 350 ppm CO2 target may be achievable by phasing out coal use except where CO2 is captured and adopting agricultural and forestry practices that sequester carbon. If the present overshoot of this target CO2 is not brief, there is a possibility of seeding irreversible catastrophic effects. ****

      * Surface reflectivity of sun’s radiation

      ** Currently ~ 420 ppm: https://gml.noaa.gov/ccgg/trends/

      *** Net change in radiant emittance or irradiance

      **** https://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/docs/2008/2008_Hansen_ha00410c.pdf

      1. CoRev

        ltr, citing the fact that we have and continue to warm out of the LIA is fascinating, but proves NOTHING. Explain why there was a LIA and even more importantly why we have glacial and interglacial periods. If you can not explain these phenomena with your theory then you have no explanation.

        It boggles the mind that any science focusing of the recorded temperatures can not or will not explain them is a sample of bogus science.

        1. pgl

          LIA? Oh the Little Ice Age. Little is a good term to describe CoRev’s retarded little brain.

        2. 2slugbaits

          CoRev The Little Ice Age was a natural phenomenon. The real question is why we are not still in the LIA. Most of the natural processes that drove temperatures down during the LIA are still in play today. So why isn’t it cooler than it is? That’s the real question. The answer is that manmade global GHG emissions are more than offsetting the natural forces that would otherwise have cooled the planet.

          1. CoRev

            2slugs, ideologically driven another foul ball answer: “ Most of the natural processes that drove temperatures down during the LIA are still in play today.” So define them and tell us which are no longer in play and the various impacts for each natural process.

            Since you believe: “that manmade global GHG emissions are more than offsetting the natural forces that would otherwise have cooled the planet.”, then you can explain the previous 16 year pause and the current 8+ year drop in temperatures. While your at it explain the causes of the glacial/interglacial periods due to the Natural factors and those so powerful manmade GHGs.

            You’ve used an ARMA (1,1) model to back out ENSO from temperature change, so go for the remaining ?Climate Change? factors that apply for an entire glacial/interglacial cycle and at every location on the planet. Maybe you can get clouds correct, since the current climate models can not.

            There’s a Nobel award in it for you.

            The arrogant, ideologically and not science driven liberal mind is an amazement. Maybe your fellow ignoranti can help you.

    6. ltr

      “Why have we not heard that temperatures have fallen for the past ~8 years?”

      http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/

      January 15, 2023

      Atmospheric Concentration of Carbon Dioxide, 1980-2022

      (Parts per million by volume)

      1980 ( 338.76) (Low)
      1981 ( 340.12)
      1982 ( 341.48)
      1983 ( 343.15)
      1984 ( 344.87)

      1985 ( 346.35)
      1986 ( 347.61)
      1987 ( 349.31)
      1988 ( 351.69)
      1989 ( 353.20)

      1990 ( 354.45)
      1991 ( 355.70)
      1992 ( 356.54)
      1993 ( 357.21)
      1994 ( 358.96)

      1995 ( 360.97)
      1996 ( 362.74)
      1997 ( 363.88)
      1998 ( 366.84)
      1999 ( 368.54)

      2000 ( 369.71)
      2001 ( 371.32)
      2002 ( 373.45)
      2003 ( 375.98)
      2004 ( 377.70)

      2005 ( 379.98)
      2006 ( 382.09)
      2007 ( 384.02)
      2008 ( 385.83)
      2009 ( 387.64)

      2010 ( 390.10)
      2011 ( 391.85)
      2012 ( 394.06)
      2013 ( 396.74)
      2014 ( 398.81)

      2015 ( 401.01)
      2016 ( 404.41)
      2017 ( 406.76)
      2018 ( 408.72)
      2019 ( 411.66)

      2020 ( 414.24)
      2021 ( 416.45)
      2022 ( 418.56) (High)

    7. ltr

      “Why have we not heard that temperatures have fallen for the past ~8 years?”

      https://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata_v4/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt
      https://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/

      January 15, 2023

      Average Global Temperature, 1980-2022

      (Degrees Celsius)

      1980 ( 14.26) *
      1981 ( 14.32)
      1982 ( 14.14)
      1983 ( 14.31)
      1984 ( 14.16)

      1985 ( 14.12) (Low)
      1986 ( 14.18)
      1987 ( 14.32)
      1988 ( 14.39)
      1989 ( 14.27)

      1990 ( 14.45)
      1991 ( 14.40)
      1992 ( 14.22)
      1993 ( 14.23)
      1994 ( 14.32)

      1995 ( 14.45)
      1996 ( 14.33)
      1997 ( 14.46)
      1998 ( 14.61)
      1999 ( 14.38)

      2000 ( 14.39)
      2001 ( 14.54)
      2002 ( 14.63)
      2003 ( 14.62)
      2004 ( 14.53)

      2005 ( 14.68)
      2006 ( 14.64)
      2007 ( 14.67)
      2008 ( 14.54)
      2009 ( 14.66)

      2010 ( 14.73)
      2011 ( 14.61)
      2012 ( 14.65)
      2013 ( 14.68)
      2014 ( 14.75)

      2015 ( 14.90)
      2016 ( 15.02) (High)
      2017 ( 14.92)
      2018 ( 14.85)
      2019 ( 14.98)

      2020 ( 15.02)
      2021 ( 14.85)
      2022 ( 14.90)

      * Base temperatures, 1951-1980

        1. pgl

          WTF – you are citing data before apes evolved into man. Oh wait – little CoRev still has the brain of an ape.

        1. 2slugbaits

          CoRev You’re the one who insisted on the importance of el Nino and la Nina effects, but then you link to some simpleminded tool that doesn’t account for those very effects you claimed were so important!!! Do you not understand how stupid that makes you look? Is this “woodfortrees” tool your idea of sophisticated analysis? Spoiler alert…it’s not.

          It’s quite sad when someone spends the last few months of his life embarrassing himself with inane and contradictory posts all because his fragile ego cannot accept the fact that he has been wrong about his life’s project; viz., trying to dispute the reality of manmade global warming.

          1. CoRev

            2slugs, I’m ROFLMAO. You disproved what again? For which period? Certainly not the past 8 years of temperatures. Let’s try this tool: https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/access/monitoring/climate-at-a-glance/global/time-series/globe/land_ocean/all/6/1980-2023?trend=true&trend_base=100&begtrendyear=2015&endtrendyear=2023&filter=true&filterType=binomial

            Is NOAA manipulating the data? Was Menzie’s use of annual data smoothed with a LOESS filter naive or deliberate misinformation (a term liberals frequently use)? Or like your above ARMA (1:1) model just more confirmation bias?

            I dunno, but just asking for a friend.

            The biased and question ducking liberal mind is an amazement.

          2. pgl

            “CoRev
            July 15, 2023 at 4:55 am
            2slugs, I’m ROFLMAO. You disproved what again? For which period? Certainly not the past 8 years of temperatures. ”

            First CoRev insists on using data from the Little Ice Age and now he wants to restrict the data to the last 8 years? Damn CoRev – your panties are showing and it seems you have made a horrible mess out of them. Get some toilet tissue and clean up.

  3. pgl

    Limitless ‘white’ hydrogen under our feet may soon shatter all energy assumptions

    Interesting title but haven’t we been talking about this for decades? Here’s the story. Is this time different?

    https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/limitless-white-hydrogen-under-our-feet-may-soon-shatter-all-energy-assumptions/ar-AA1dPluA?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=bedce356a45b4922b886aca4be5fc364&ei=31

    We are suddenly waking up to the very real possibility that vast reserves of natural hydrogen lie under our feet and can plausibly be extracted at costs that blow away the competition, ultimately undercutting methane on pure price. Scientists have long argued that pockets of exploitable geological hydrogen are more abundant than hitherto supposed.

    The perpetual burning gas at Chimaera in Turkey – believed to be the source of the Olympic flame – has a hydrogen content reaching 11.3pc. There is another such marvel at Los Fuegos Eternos in the Philippines. It has been known since 2012 that hydrogen beneath the village of Bourakébougou in Mali has 98pc purity. The site was discovered in the 1980s when it blew up in the face of a local man smoking a cigarette while drilling for water. Professor Alain Prinzhofer from the Institute of Physics in Paris found that the gas flow remained constant over time – the pressure even rose – confirming a hypothesis that hydrogen can keep renewing itself by a chemical reaction underground.

    What is new is that the world now needs that hydrogen and is acting on the insights. The US Geological Survey concluded in April that there is probably enough accessible hydrogen in the earth’s subsurface to meet total global demand for “hundreds of years”. The US Energy Department is drawing up plans to help kick start the industry, deeming the potential “astronomical”. Viacheslav Zgonnik, a Ukrainian geologist, thinks white geologic hydrogen could be so cheap and abundant that it conquers the energy market.

    “We think that we can reach $1 a kilo in the long-run and provide baseload power 24/7. It can be compressed for storage in steel tanks. It is not that expensive,” he said. If so, that raises awkward questions about the eye-watering subsidies going into green variants (from electrolysis) and blue variants (natural gas with carbon capture). Green hydrogen costs $3 to $4 today. It will become cheaper with scale, but getting much below $2 will be hard: you currently lose 70pc of the original energy in the making, and it requires a massive electrolyser industry that does not yet exist.

  4. pgl

    It seems the Wagner Group is still working on Putin’s evil agenda:

    https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/wagner-ready-to-spread-terror-along-nato-border-and-ignite-hybrid-warfare-from-belarus/ar-AA1dPhjR?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=e03b453f097649feb235e371a23da5db&ei=19

    Wagner Group fighters and military equipment have flooded into Belarus following the mercenary group’s short-lived mutiny. The sudden influx of Prigozhin’s mercenaries has sparked concerns that the group could be used to reignite border clashes between Belarus and Poland. Belarusian leader Alexander Lukashenko has already been accused of carrying out a textbook “hybrid warfare operation” by ordering Belarus border guards to direct migrants to the Polish border. Leading regional security expert Jacek Raubo has warned that the introduction of Wagner may provide Russia and Belarus with the cover needed to carry out clandestine operations designed to destabilise Poland, a NATO member and major backer of Ukraine.

    Prigozhin is an evil person never to be trusted. Lukashenko is a Putin puppet. If Poland is attacked by these war criminals, that trips Article 5 in my view. Maybe it is time NATO puts an end to this farce once and for all.

  5. Econned

    Menzie Chinn,
    In fact, I hadn’t noticed it was hot because June was quite mild in NYC.
    In case you hadn’t noticed, weather is a local phenomenon.

    1. pgl

      I doubt you even live in NYC. I do. And dude – on average it has been quite warm here. Any more worthless whining from the peanut gallery?

    2. Macroduck

      In case you hadn’t noticed, climate is less local. And the temperatures represented in the chart are global averages.

      So what’s your point, stalker?

      1. Econned

        Macroduck,
        Hi my stalker. I’m happy to inform you that this will be my last reply to you due to the continued utter lack of substance in your comments. I hope you’re able to cope to this info better than the others who continue to seek my attention to no avail. Unrequited attention is a hilariously sad look even when you’re anonymous. I do appreciate your (and the others I ignore) efforts at making my time here easier… the fewer shallow responses I waste my time on, the better.

        Don’t say you don’t care (your stalking me is prove you do) and don’t say I didn’t warn you (it was spelled out clearly).

        https://econbrowser.com/archives/2023/07/remembering-history-texas-generation-outages-in-the-2020-crisis#comment-301356

        Best of luck, or whatever.

        1. Macroduck

          Warn me? Oooooo, I’ve been warned! Woe is me!

          Your whole “my comments can beat up your comment”s schtick is a hoot, really.

          Happy to have you desist from responding to my comments. The less we hear from you, the better. But when you write vain, bitter little stalker comments, I’ll probably still make fun of you.

          1. pgl

            Awww – you no longer have Econned as a stalker. Now I have little Jonny boy as MY stalker. Lucky me I guess. Arrrgh!

      2. CoRev

        McQuack blithely states: ” the temperatures represented in the chart are global (annual) averages.” There fixed for you. You are another that doesn’t seem the understand the impacts of averaging on the averaged unit (monthly) data. Next you are going to be insisting that seasonality must be considered in annual averaged data, just like 2slugs has in the past.

        You’re all ignorant, and your minds are an amazement.

    3. baffling

      “In case you hadn’t noticed, weather is a local phenomenon.”
      which is why prof. chinn provided us with global averages. but then again, if you are simply posting due to professional jealousy, one would overlook that your criticism was actually answered in the post itself. commenting just to complain, as usual, econned.

      1. CoRev

        Global ANNUAL averages not daily or even MONTHLY averages when he writes an article on DAILY PEAK TEMPERATURES.

        We get these kinds of apples to kumquat comparisons all the time where claims are not actually supported by the examples. It’s like you folks don’t understand what averaging does to DAILY peaks and valleys in data. Or like answering claims that the LCOE is a flawed and incomplete cost model with cost estimates using the very same model.

        I dunno, but the liberal mind is an amazement.

        1. pgl

          “Global ANNUAL averages not daily or even MONTHLY averages”

          ANNUAL? Really? That is not what Dr. Chinn presented. But lie all you want little boy – that is all you do.

          What’s your point CoRev? That you can manipulate and misrepresent? We got that years ago.

          1. CoRev

            Ole BArk, bark steps again on his own crank: “ANNUAL? Really? That is not what Dr. Chinn presented. But lie all you want little boy – that is all you do. ” Your are so ignorant that you can not even recognize your own error, let alone Menzie’s.

            This the NOAA MONTHLY data showing the trend for the past 8 years: https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/access/monitoring/climate-at-a-glance/global/time-series/globe/land_ocean/all/6/1850-2023?trend=true&trend_base=100&begtrendyear=2015&endtrendyear=2023&filter=true&filterType=binomial

            Your ignorance and claims others lie is an amazement

          2. pgl

            CoRev
            July 15, 2023 at 5:08 am

            Wow another truly pointless misdirection – directed this time at me. CoRev – master debating or masterbater?

  6. Macroduck

    But, but, but…the decline in the June average between 2020 and 2021 clearly meant that climate change is just the fevered imagining of “the liberal mind”, didn’t it? I mean, just look at the chart – no trend, right?

    1. pgl

      Check out Econned nut ball comment. And to think Econned earlier said Dr. Chinn did not need to go after the stupidity from CoRev? Now this troll is adopting CoRev’s stupidity?!

    2. pgl

      CoRev
      July 13, 2023 at 11:30 am

      is so incredibly STUPID which of course is why “just look at the chart – no trend, right?” is precisely the point.

      But I guess in CoRevLand any series that has any variability cannot have a trend as well. Not the dumbest comment by CoRev but close.

      1. pgl

        Dude – your babbling is so incoherent that the professionals are coming to take you off to the Cuckoo’s Nest.

  7. pgl

    “Please note, global and hemispheric anomalies are with respect to the 1901-2000 average.

    Interesting inactive tool. I checked on March 2023 as well as yea – it was warm for March!

    1. Macroduck

      For those interested in full-year, as oppsed to June, temperature anomoloes, here’s the record over roughly the same period:

      https://berkeleyearth.org/2019-temperatures/

      Same picture, though; an accelerating rise beginning early in the 20th century, with year-to-year variation which climate denialists like CoRev cling to as evidence there is no warming trend.

      1. pgl

        “Berkeley Earth, a California-based non-profit research organization, has been preparing independent analyses of global mean temperature changes since 2013.”

        I used to live in Berkeley. But that was back in the days when Clinton was President.

      2. CoRev

        McQuack again falls for the averaging error when comparing daily temps to ANNUAL averages: “For those interested in full-year, as oppsed (sic) to June,…” Why did you not just look at the MONTHLY NOAA data? For the liberals here that is the “All Month” option: https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/access/monitoring/climate-at-a-glance/global/time-series/globe/land_ocean/all/6/1850-2023?filter=true&filterType=loess

        Or we can look at the same NOAA data using a binomial filter: https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/access/monitoring/climate-at-a-glance/global/time-series/globe/land_ocean/12/6/1850-2022?filter=true&filterType=binomial

        Pictures look different don’t they.

        The ideologically desperate liberal minds are an amazement.

      3. CoRev

        McQuack repeatedly making the same mistake. “<b?Annual Temperature Anomaly” comparing daily and even monthly data to an <b?Annual average.

        Sometimes shaking your head in amazement of the liberal mind is all that can be done

    1. ltr

      A brutal 78 Deg F in Madison, Wisconsin just now.

      [ Writing with the sole purpose of misleading is despicable. ]

    2. ltr

      https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/10/climate/heat-waves-europe-deaths.html

      July 10, 2023

      Summer Heat Waves Killed 61,000 in Europe Last Year, Study Says
      Researchers suggest that strategies to cope with higher temperatures aren’t keeping pace with global warming.
      By Delger Erdenesanaa

      More than 61,000 people died because of last year’s brutal summer heat waves across Europe, according to a study * published on Monday in the journal Nature Medicine.

      The findings suggest that two decades of efforts in Europe to adapt to a hotter world have failed to keep up with the pace of global warming.

      “In an ideal society, nobody should die because of heat,” said Joan Ballester, a research professor at the Barcelona Institute for Global Health and the study’s lead author.

      This summer is likely to be even worse: On top of climate change, the Earth has entered a natural El Niño weather pattern during summer for the first time in four years, bringing about conditions that will turn up the heat in many parts of the world. The season is already shattering various global temperature records.

      The researchers who studied last year’s heat waves used data collected by the European Union from 35 countries, including some nonmember states.

      Most of the people who died were women, especially those older than 80. Among younger people, men died at higher rates. Mediterranean countries, where temperatures were highest at the time, suffered most: Italy, Spain and Portugal had the highest heat-related mortality rates….

      * https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-023-02419-z

    3. ltr

      https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/15/climate/oceans-global-warming.html

      June 15, 2023

      Ocean Warmth Set a Record for May
      By Delger Erdenesanaa

      Temperatures are already breaking records this year: Last month was the warmest May for the world’s oceans since record-keeping began in 1850, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

      The average ocean temperature throughout May was 1.53 degrees Fahrenheit, or 0.85 degree Celsius, higher than normal for the month….

      https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/12/climate/florida-ocean-temperatures-reefs.html

      July 12, 2023

      How Hot Is the Sea Off Florida Right Now? Think 90s Fahrenheit.
      Researchers are recording ocean temperatures that pose severe risks to coral reefs and other marine life.
      By Catrin Einhorn and Elena Shao

      Florida’s coral reefs are facing what could be an unprecedented threat from a marine heat wave that is warming the Gulf of Mexico, pushing water temperatures into the 90s Fahrenheit.

      The biggest concern for coral isn’t just the current sea surface temperatures in the Florida Keys, even though they are the hottest on record. The daily average surface temperature off the Keys on Monday was just over 90 degrees Fahrenheit, or 32.4 Celsius, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

      The real worry, scientists say, is that it’s only July. Corals typically experience the most heat stress in August and September….

  8. pgl

    Is CoRev’s real name Scott Perry?

    https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/us-climate-envoy-john-kerry-spars-heated-exchanges-101223301

    U.S. climate envoy John Kerry defended his negotiations with China — and angrily rebuffed what he called a “stupid” lie that he routinely travels by private jet — during a grilling by House Republicans on Thursday before he sets out on his next climate mission to Beijing…. The questioning in Thursday’s hearing by the Republican-led House Foreign Affairs Committee’s oversight subcommittee underscored the risks for Kerry that rising tensions between the two rival countries will stymie progress in what scientists stress are essential cuts in fossil fuel emissions over this decade. Republicans’ questioning of Kerry on his climate diplomacy at times broke down into challenging the existence of the scientifically established fact of climate change and openly insulting the former secretary of state, who is a longtime target of political hardliners. In the most heated confrontation, Republican Rep. Scott Perry accused Kerry of drumming up a “problem that doesn’t exist” in global warming. When Kerry asked why the world’s scientists and the 195 global governments behind the Paris climate accord would make up global warming, Perry responded, “Because they’re grifting, like you are,” drawing gasps from lawmakers.

    1. CoRev

      Buffoons, Ole Bark, bark and John Kerry, are desperate to prove their ignorance.

      No worry, the succeeded spectacularly

      The ignorant liberal mind is an amazement. I think Ole Bark, bark may be the record holder for this “amazement” comment.

      1. pgl

        Seriously? John Kerry is ignorant and your MAGA clowns are smart?

        Hey CoRev – please join Mike Lindell at tonight’s Stop the Steal rally. He might even give you a pair of his new slippers!

  9. JohnH

    Awww-does this mean that people saving for a new house, college for their kids, or retirement might actually get a positive real return on their secure investments? Maybe even a positive after tax return on their secure investments?

    pgl must think that such a development is totally un-American!

    1. pgl

      Jonny boy has such an emotional melt down that he has no clue what the post is about.

      But gee – I have a stalker who is mentally retarded. So special.

  10. JohnH

    “To Stop Global Heating, Cut Military Spending…The U.S. military is the largest institutional oil consumer in the world. In fact, the Pentagon’s ships, jets, bombers, and Humvees — and its global network of over 800 bases, all with buildings to heat, cool, and maintain — produce more carbon emissions each year than entire countries like Sweden, Denmark, and Portugal.

    Under President Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act and other new laws, the U.S. is expected to spend about $50 billion per year on climate for next decade. But these welcome investments are dwarfed by much bigger spending on our polluting military.”
    https://www.juancole.com/2023/07/heating-military-spending.html

  11. Moses Herzog

    For the record, I did notice it was hot.

    126 ℉ heat index inside of the last 3 days (I forgot which weekday). YES, someone whose LEAST favorite time of year is summer. I noticed the heat. I am the boiling frog who is bitching loudly in Fran Drescher/ Harvey Fierstein voice.

Comments are closed.