Robert B. writes via email with a question that we’ve just never asked readers to weigh in on here before in post, though has been bandied about in comments. I figure it is about time to put it to rest by asking up front.
He asks:
What is the perfect temperature of Earth? I’m assuming that climate change-related taxes will be used to bring our planet back to the perfect temperature, and I need to know when that has been reached.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Kent Clizbe says:
March 7, 2014 at 5:39 pm
What IS “the temperature of the Earth?
It varies between 12.0 C and 15.8 C from January to June.
See: http://theinconvenientskeptic.com/2013/03/misunderstanding-of-the-global-temperature-anomaly/
So the coldest July in the 1800s was warmer than the warmest January in the last 20 years.
But in answer to the posted question. Who am I to be thinking of? This range is too warm for polar bears and too cold for tropical fish.
Wbrozek,
What IS “the temperature of the Earth?
It varies between 12.0 C and 15.8 C from January to June.
See: http://theinconvenientskeptic.com/2013/03/misunderstanding-of-the-global-temperature-anomaly/
But you’re describing AVERAGE temperature.
My point is that the concept of “AVERAGE temperature of Earth” is completely meaningless.
The “Average Temperature of Earth” is a fake construction of fake scientists. The numbers thrown around today do not take into account temperature readings from places located at the top of the Himalayas, nor from the remote steppes of Siberia, nor from the Gobi, Sahara or other deserts, where there is no human presence.
Even if the “data” included temperature readings from those places, which part of the day/night reading do you include in the “average?” If it is 125 F for 12 hours, then drops to 0 F for an hour, then climbs back up to 100 for 11 hours–what is the “Average temperature” for that day? Do you weight the time that the temperature stayed at 125, or 0, or 100? Or do you just average the maximum and minimum? Or do you create an equation that captures the range of temperatures experienced for each minute/second/hour of the day? Regardless of how you do the math, the result is meaningless. A human in that place would have gone from extreme, life-threatening heat
to extreme, life-threatening cold in one day. “Averaging” the temperature extremes provides no information of value–essentially, it is a meaningless number.
Or an even more obvious demonstration that “Average temperature” is a meaningless “measure,” how about this example:
During a 24 hour day, the temperature at our measuring station peaked out at 645 degrees F. At night, the measured temperature dropped down to negative 515 degrees F. Those two extreme measurements AVERAGE out to a very comfortable 65 degrees F. So, there’s our ideal “climate,” right?
What nonsense!
First, “Average temperature” is a completely meaningless concept. Locally, or globally, the number provides no meaningful information.
Second, even if “average temperature” was a useful number, how do you capture the data necessary to calculate that value? Do you just ignore the places that you do not have measuring devices–the peaks of the Himalayas, the jungles of Borneo, the rolling sand dunes a hundred miles north of Timbuktu? If you do ignore the fact that you don’t have measurements for those places, do you then just fake measurements for those places? Or do you just fake the whole thing?
Global Average Temperature is a meaningless concept used by fake scientists in their scheme to destroy Normal capitalist culture.
Don’t play their game!
23°C, no seasons allowed.
“What is the perfect temperature of Earth?”
Whatever it was before white men, capitalism, and SUVs.
There is no perfect temperature.
To cleanse the Earth, the average temperature needs to drop to 22 degrees so ice and Glaciers can grow and chill the Earth. This brings Perma-frost about as far south as Atlanta during the Ice Ages.
On the other hand with the right distance from the Sun, a good tilt in the Axis and Sunspot Acidity of 900 total average sunspots for a 11 year cycle, we have a very strong and active hurricane seasons. This pushes temps up above a 33 winter temp.
Just depends on what one is looking for. We just had the best it will get and that was from 1997 to 2006 in terms of global warming and the greatest expansion of Topography know to modern man.
The Vikings had it this good and better. They sailed around Greenland and established their colonies maybe as far west as Lake Superior.
There is no perfect temp. Many options.
Paul
The perfect temperature is where most people fly in fossil fueled aeroplanes on holiday – or to warm-mongering conferences. Apart from Copenhagen…
It doesn’t matter as all temperatures are equal, it’s just that some are more equal than others.
Frank Legge says: @ur momisugly March 7, 2014 at 5:43 pm
It is of course the wrong question….
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I am with you there. I would like to see a CO2 level of ~ 1500 ppm.
Temperature?
No lower than we are now. Excessively high temperature is not really in the cards for the next few thousand years with the current point in the Milankovitch cycle.
Our CAGW friends are about 9000 years too late in their concerns about GoreBull Warming. GRAPH
We cracked the freezing mark today south of Boston. People are walking around in teeshirts.
What is the ideal temperature?
There isn’t any, because no matter what it is the alarmists will scream “global warming.”
How about just leaving that for nature to decide, you mollusks? (The alarmists, I mean.)
There’s no such a thing as a perfect temperature for the planet, but only for specific regions in specific times of the year. Same goes for the perfect climate, it would be one in which daily conditions are always near the average conditions of that place at that time of the year. Which means lack of extremes, which has never happened anywhere in our planet at any temperature.
I think this is just about right, don’t touch a thing:
http://suyts.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/image_thumb265.png?w=636&h=294
Oh, I don’t know. Just so long as it’s never hot enough to satisfy the catastrophic cults.
We ought to offer those catastrophicists special deals on houses; specifically their own glass house greenhouses. There they can learn that yes the days can get quite toasty, but not to worry, greenhouse nights cool off just as quick.
So much for excessive CO2 effects.
I’m reminded of this little bit of news this year as the extra cold nights are tough on my orchids that were expecting March and are getting February instead.
it really does not matter. tell em they have to pass the tax to find out.
they’ll scream about it but they’ll pay. we call it ‘riding the gravy train’.
Or; I’ll settle for Janice Moore’s temperature mosaics.
Just like race reparations — even though in many areas Caucasians are a minority (by the numbers), we still feel pressure to “make it right” and “undo the wrongs of previous generations”. But there’s no standard, no idea as to how we would know we’re even making any progress whatsoever.
An excellent question. The followup, I believe, is: “How much will it cost to achieve, and what is the guarantee that the tax level selection will each the desired weaher?
Perfect temperature for the comfort of a naked human would be 22.2 degree C at 55%RH at 99kPa (embarrassment factor notwithstanding).
The Earth’s ideal temperature is 0.01 Standard Atom Bombs*.
*Denialists will no doubt complain that the Standard Atom Bomb is a unit of heat rather than temperature, but this serves only to illustrate only how out of touch with mainstream climate science they are.
3°C and it should be made law in every city and town on earth.
“What is the perfect temperature of Earth?”
This question is so absurd, I’m certain there has been a typographical error. Obviously, the question intended was, “What is the prefect temperature of Earth? The few Earthly prefects I have met had, most likely, a temperature of 98.6°F.
“I’m assuming that climate change-related taxes will be used to bring our planet back to the perfect temperature.”
Given that assumption is provably false, the pointed question is considerably less pointy than it might otherwise be.
However we can say that it is very likely during the bitter northern winters of 2035 the world will fondly remember today’s pleasant climate and yearn for the days of the Roman Climatic Optimum.
In the shivering community soup lines there will be no place for “council CO2 abatement liaison officers”. The useless would be well advised to study more practical “greenhouse issues”. A reading of “Polyethylene greenhouse construction and maintenance for beginners.” or “Snow-loading and greenhouses in high wind areas – a design guide.” would be a good start. For those with lower skill levels, the fields are always an option, although a copy of Dr. Stumps excellent (if somewhat short) work “If it’s black it’s time to hack – a field guide to frostbite” would be highly recommended.
By working together I’m sure the adversity will be overcome. Even the most useless, “climate communicators” such as Romm or Appell, should be able to make a contribution. I imagine tallow candles will be making a comeback 😉
Perfect for who or what is an important question. According to some notorious “optimizers”-a term I use derisively for people who believe the task of economists is to add “utility functions” and find the global maxima-the number would actually be slightly higher than the present temperature.
I mean. You can’t add or compare utilities across persons. But that’s an entirely different discussion.
It varies in direct proportion to James Hansen’s honoraria for speaking engagements.
72.3 degrees Fahrenheit.
You can’t prove it’s not true!!!!
Depends when and where you were brought up and how old you are now. Anything from -Brrr to +Phew +/- IIRC.