If I launched a new
stock market average
just after a bull
(up) market began,
and newspapers
excitedly announced
"Highest stock
average on record"
almost every month
during that bull market,
you'd wonder why
that was news --
because that's what
bull markets do.
That's not news
worth reporting !
Claiming 2018 was the
"fourth hottest year
on record"
is also not news,
for a similar reason.
The average global
temperature "record"
begins in 1880,
DURING a warming trend
that started in 1850.
That means ALL data
"on record" are DURING
a warming trend.
( see Note 1 )
Measuring DURING
a warming trend
means new
warmest 'evah
"records"
are EXPECTED
in every decade,
until the warming
trend ends.
Two examples of
real climate news,
that are worthy
of headlines,
but are ignored:
(1)
Real news would be
if any decade since
1880 was NOT
"the warmest decade
on record".
That actually happened
in the 1940's and 1950's.
Average global
temperatures,
generally rising
since 1850,
went DOWN from
1940 to 1975,
even as CO2
levels in the air
rose a lot !
(2)
Weather satellite
average global
temperature data
reflected almost
no warming
from 2003
through 2018.
( see Note 2 )
That's statistically insignificant
warming, for those 15 years,
when including the
margins of error assumed
for the measurements.
That's real news !
Unfortunately, real news
completely ignored by
every mainstream media
source, even Fox News,
because they don't think
you need to know !
No need to provide
you with any evidence
that contradicts
their coming climate change
catastrophe fairy tales,
that get people all excited
... fairy tales we've been hearing
about since the 1960's !
Note 1:
Studies of ice cores
in Antarctica revealed
many warming / cooling
cycles, lasting hundreds
of years for a full cycle
-- usually 500 to 1,500 years.
These temperature cycles
are mild, and harmless,
but do take a long time.
All warming trends
were followed by
cooling trends,
completing a full cycle.
Note 2:
Since 1979, average
temperatures have
been compiled
using data from
weather satellites.
They are more accurate
than surface weather
stations with thermometers,
for two main reasons:
(1)
Satellites are located in
a very stable environment,
not affected by
economic growth
near weather stations,
unlike land surface
measurements,
and
(2)
Satellites require
far less wild guessing
by government bureaucrats,
to "infill" those areas
they can't measure.
Satellite infilling
is only required
for small areas
around both poles,.
Surface measurements
need infilling for over half
of Earth's surface,
because most of our planet's
surface has no thermometers,
or has missing monthly data.
( Yes, there is more "infilling"
than actual measurements,
for the surface measurements,
with the globe's surface,
divided into 2,592
5 degree latitude by
5 degree longitude "grid cells". )