The latest figures and weather consequences of global warming

[Did67]

If this continues, we will have to live in .... southern Spain ???

[izentrop]

If this continues, we will have to live in .... southern Spain ???

Coming from you, it's a joke , I still specify for those who have not opened the link:

Yes if that represented the temperatures ... These are the differences from normal.

For example, in Russia what is white is not snow but + 13 °, while Spain is -2 °

[Did67]

Exact, it's a joke!

This is the most "blue" area, so the one where the average is rather lower than the "normal" (which are higher, of course). It's kind of like an "increase that decreases!"

[Did67]

For example, in Russia what is white is not snow but + 13 °, ...

Last joke and then I shut up: "is that enough to cook Poutine?"

[sicetaitsimple]

For example, in Russia what is white is not snow but + 13 °, while Spain is -2 °

Degrees ° F anyway.

[ABC2019]

For example, in Russia what is white is not snow but + 13 °, while Spain is -2 °

Degrees ° F anyway.

so since the excess of 13 ° F, or about 7 ° C, is very superior at the average CR observed (the baseline is not specified, but if it is calculated over the last 30 years, the CR has been at most only 0,5 ° C on average), it is necessarily that there is a fluctuation which is added in addition different from the RC (and therefore a priori having nothing to do with the RC).

And that it is therefore this fluctuation, and not the RC, which is mainly responsible for the heat of this year on this place of the world (knowing that necessarily statistically there are also some elsewhere which are much colder than the average).

In short, it is opportunistic reasoning to attribute this fluctuation to the RC. This is the type of argumentative mistake that is commonly made in astrology. For example I could defend the theory that it is the arrival of Neptune in the constellation Aquarius that causes heat waves, and wait for all the heat waves that arrive to "prove" my theory - obviously that does not prove anything. all.

[Did67]

Of course, that an isolated fact (the January deviation map) proves nothing.

However, the variations you mention, random around a bottom line, prove no more.

To assert something, you have to be a little more cunning and better master the statistical tools:

- if the oscillations are around a horizontal straight line (time on the abscissa), there is no warming

- if the oscillations are made around an increasing straight line, there is heating.

However, all adjustment rights in France are increasing !!! And growth is accelerating. Data having been the subject of a statistical treatment, with reliability sometimes 0,1% (one chance in 1000 to be wrong).

Immerse yourself in the studies called ORACLE, in different regions:

http://www.grandest.chambre-agriculture ... e_2017.pdf

https://centre-valdeloire.chambres-agri ... diaire.pdf

Take an interest, for example, in ETP (EvapoTanspiration Potentielle) which "synthesizes" the climatic demand for water vis-à-vis a soil-plant system, and which results from a set of parameters which summarize the climate fairly well. : air temperature, hygrometry, wind speed, incident light energy ... Everywhere, it is increasing (tendentially). And almost everywhere, it accelerates ! After statistical processing, with reliability often of 0,001 ...

[GuyGadebois]

Not to mention that depending on the place on the planet where we live, warming is more or less felt. The extremes measured are frightening, averaging them is reassuring but does not mean anything. Finally, not much.
Example from Fiji where you don't feel the effects of climate change like at home, in 04:

[ABC2019]

Of course, that an isolated fact (the January deviation map) proves nothing.

However, the variations you mention, random around a bottom line, prove no more.

To assert something, you have to be a little more cunning and better master the statistical tools:

- if the oscillations are around a horizontal straight line (time on the abscissa), there is no warming

- if the oscillations are made around an increasing straight line, there is heating.

However, all adjustment rights in France are increasing !!! And growth is accelerating. Data having been the subject of a statistical treatment, with reliability sometimes 0,1% (one chance in 1000 to be wrong).

Immerse yourself in the studies called ORACLE, in different regions:

http://www.grandest.chambre-agriculture ... e_2017.pdf

https://centre-valdeloire.chambres-agri ... diaire.pdf

Take an interest, for example, in ETP (EvapoTanspiration Potentielle) which "synthesizes" the climatic demand for water vis-à-vis a soil-plant system, and which results from a set of parameters which summarize the climate fairly well. : air temperature, hygrometry, wind speed, incident light energy ... Everywhere, it is increasing (tendentially). And almost everywhere, it accelerates ! After statistical processing, with reliability often of 0,001 ...

I have never said otherwise, nor denied the average warming. But the argument to show it is the one you give: the analysis of the trend over long periods. The observation of ONE "extraordinary" fluctuation does not prove this warming, that's all.

[ABC2019]

However, all adjustment rights in France are increasing !!! And growth is accelerating ..

and apart from that, specifically, I don't really see what is accelerating in the documents you gave.