News Brief by Kip Hansen
The press is again awash with the latest hysterical news that July 2019 was the hottest July ever!
NOAA Data Confirms July Was Hottest Month Ever Recorded
by Henry Fountain appeared in the NY Times’ barely credible feature Climate Fwd:. The piece was prompted by a NOAA Press release:
July 2019 was hottest month on record for the planet
NOAA has spent billions of tax payers dollars to send up satellites to monitor the weather and thus climate of the Earth. It pays two different scientific groups, UAH and RSS to produce global temperature data sets of the Earth’s atmosphere, but routinely ignores them when is needs to push Climate Catastrophism.
Those who choose to read a full, scientific explanation as to why July 2019 was NOT the hottest ever should refer back to Dr. Roy Spencer’s piece on this site published on 2 August, July 2019 Was Not the Warmest on Record.
For those who are visual learners, I offer graphs of the two satellite based global temperature records that NOAA ignores when making “hottest ever” declarations, first the graphs from Remote Sensing Systems:
It is interesting to note how different the visual impression is between the most recent data and the longer term data. In the top image of “recent” data, the trend line from the full data set is included — it is not the trend of the recent data. Nonetheless, it is obvious that the data is functionally flat (or even downtrending if one wishes to start at the 2016 peak).
And as a reminder for those who may have forgotten the changes RSS made to it calculations in 2016, from Climate4you:
And from The National Space Science & Technology Center at The University of Alabama in Huntsville, the data set usually referred to as UAH, two visualizations, same data:
Just so we know what we are talking about, the Lower Troposphere is the part of the atmosphere in which most of us live. This little image, from UCAR, helps a bit. Earth’s tallest mountains are at almost 30,000 feet, just under the 10 km top of the troposphere. The tops of Tropical Thunderstorms can reach as high as 12.5 km. Down in the lower troposphere, we have everyday weather events, ground level temperatures, the winds that stir the trees and other weather and climate phenomena experienced by most humans. Those of your who climb or hike the high peaks of the Sierras in California, as I have, have gone up out the top of the Lower Troposphere, the same with the highest peaks of the Rocky Mountains.
UPDATE: Aug 18, 2019 4:30 PM Eastern Time
There have been several complaints in comments about the use of the Climate4you graph for RSS — which shows the difference the 2016 change made to the RSS data set, and that I did not show changes to the UAH data set. Here is the graph for UAH with changed shown (red older set, blue current set, as with RSS above):
To complete the batch, here is RSS as above (old and new) with UAH offset above RSS, to allow comparison of the SHAPES of the sets — which are nearly identical — the only big difference is the RSS change in 2016, which kicks that set upward:
Before anyone asks, YES, overlaying UAH on top of the older (red) RSS shows them very nearly identical in all aspects up the end of the red trace.
Readers are free to make of this as they will. Spencer says: “But no satellite dataset is perfect, there are uncertainties in all of the adjustments, as well as legitimate differences of opinion regarding how they should be handled.”
UPDATE #2: Aug 18, 2019 6:30 PM Eastern Time
I should add that although RSS and UAH have nearly identical shapes, the numerical values for the various time points are quite different, with RSS being about 0.3°C higher — in additional, since the 2016 change, RSS has a steeper warming trend despite having the same essential shape as UAH.
# # # # #
Authors Comment Policy:
Nothing much new here, but needed to be brought up again to counter the constant biased reporting from the media and entrenched climate forces within NOAA.
Note that the Consensus Climate Team insists on mostly ignoring satellite temperature sets, which were initially sought to help settle bias issues with the thermometer record, using instead known-to-be-upward-biased ground-based thermometer records on the spurious argument that “that’s where we live” — as if we all lived at 2 meters above ground level and not in the Lower Troposphere. In contradiction, the Consensus Climate Team insists that satellite sea level rise data be used in place of the much more accurate tide gauge/CORS combinations – preferring the higher values of Sea Level Rise in the satellite data set.
Address your comments to “Kip…” if you are speaking to me.
# # # # #
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Kip, the referral to Dr. Roy Spencer’s article is a miss, since he just proposed to switch to another methodology altogether. The claim “hottest July” should be discussed within the context of global measurements and averaging. Doubting the validity of the used data itself merely would lead to “we don’t really know anything for sure here”. Which is simply another topic altogether.
The rest of your graphics actually show that indeed July 2019 appears to be warmest on record. Although not the warmest month ever, which some headlines might appear to be saying.
In short: another article with zero content and misleading claims from Kip. Why is it even on this blog?
Dowser ==> You don’t have to like Spencer’s analysis — just offer it since UAH is his data set.
Sceptics have to be the most unlucky people in the world now. They have for decades been telling us its just natural variation and that the warming will stop soon, if it hasn’t already; or that the scientists have constructed a temperature series by setting historic temperatures down and adjusting recent ones up, and yet, so unluckily, the temperatures measured keep going up. Not even probability is on their side seemingly.
You know, believers in Catastrophic Anthropomorphic Global Warming have to be the most unlucky people in the world now. They have for decades been telling us that based on their models, temperatures are going to rise so fast as to make the earth uninhabitable and yet they continue to rise slowly from the bottom of the little ice age in a manner that is consistent with natural variation and is no where near as large as what their models predict; even with the scientists having constructed a temperature series by setting historic temperatures down and adjusting recent ones up they can’t get the temperatures to come close to matching their models, and yet, so unluckily, the temperatures measured keep going up so slowly as to prove that their models have no predictive power whatsoever. Not even probability is on their side seemingly.
👍🏼😂
RicDre,
Ole’! You are awarded the tail and both ears, for masterful defeat of that bull.
“or that the scientists have constructed a temperature series by setting historic temperatures down and adjusting recent ones up, and yet, so unluckily, the temperatures measured keep going up.”
You have to take into consideration who is doing the measuring. You would probably benefit from spending some time over at Tony Heller’s website. And a dive into the Climategate scandal would also help.
As for the temperatures going higher, it depends on what data you are looking at. The UAH data shows the global temperatures have cooled by about 0.5C since Feb. 2016. The temperatures are trending down, not up, at the current time.
Read ’em and weep:
http://www.drroyspencer.com/wp-content/uploads/UAH_LT_1979_thru_July_2019_v6.jpg
“As for the temperatures going higher, it depends on what data you are looking at. The UAH data shows the global temperatures have cooled by about 0.5C since Feb. 2016. The temperatures are trending down, not up, at the current time.”
I can’t believe you genuinely believe we are in a cooling trend given the peak in 2016 is such an obvious cherry pick. If you had any level of honesty you would be acknowledging that to achieve a record (or even near record ) in July globally in an Enso neutral world (SST’s are about average) is something quite remarkable. But you truck along denying the blindingly obvious. One can only assume you do this in the hope others less discerning will believe your nonsense.
“f you had any level of honesty you would be acknowledging that to achieve a record (or even near record ) in July globally in an Enso neutral world (SST’s are about average) is something quite remarkable. ”
I don’t believe the numbers the Data Charlatans are putting out. That doesn’t make me dishonest.
The Data Manipulators are manipulating the data to make things look “quite remarkable”. That’s the whole purpose of bastardizing the surface temperature record. And they are doing a good job of it. They fooled you, didn’t they.
Tom Abbott
OK so exactly where are the bastardizing the data. All adjustments are free to be downloaded and analysed. I have an idea, rather than taking shots from the cheap seats, why don’t you actually point our where the fiddling has been done. I mean pin point it. Don’t just climategate this and climategate that. As I recall that was the point of Berkeley. You know the last and final data analysis that was going to sent all scientists to hell. Only they found the warming was real. So Tom, lets see what you got? Where is the fraud?
Kip Hansen
“And as a reminder for those who may have forgotten the changes RSS made to it calculations in 2016, from Climate4you”
Aha. Mr Hansen seems to have a very selective memory.
What about “a reminder who may have forgotten the changes UAH made to it[s] calculations” in 2015, of course untraceable on Climate4you:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1oWCzqozGfqTXkP6LiHOUUOnrznOsKjdA/view
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rqp8B8B6vUCvDoUc5rZy75DS7fCH59R3/view
Bindi,
Your first chart could also be labeled :
“The UAH v6 diurnal drift correction of AMSU-satellites validated against a reference dataset consisting of satellites with no or little drift (that do not need adjustments).”
The validation fails..
Bindidon ==> Spencer has always been very open about his corrections due to various satellite problems — the data you point to shows less than 0.1 degrees differences — both up and down.
To understand These changes, both to RSS and UAH, read Spencer’s blog from the appropriate time periods.
The fact remains,
RSS validated their new product using nondrifting reference satellites
UAH invalidated their new product using nondrifting reference satellites
Kip Hansen
May I recommend you to read Nick Stokes’ head post about UAH’s adjustments?
https://moyhu.blogspot.com/2015/12/big-uah-adjustments.html
It is really interesting to see how they compare to those made by GISS
Bindidon ==> GISS and UAH are entirely different beasts — GISS is a thermometer based surface data set — UAH is a satellite data set.
If you are concerned about UAH adjustments and reasons for them, read Dr. Spencer’s blog and his peer-reviewed papers published with Christy and others — it is all out there for everyone to see — every nuance, wrinkle and wart.
I have already posted Spencer’s bottom line on the RSS adjustments — along the lines of “scientific opinions vary”…..
Our opinions obviously vary — but I am uncertain what point you are trying to make. I am, and have been, aware of what Nick Stokes thinks on the issue — our opinions vary as well.
We did have one hot July day in central England, when I had to remind myself to get a grip and that this was nothing compared to what I regularly walked in when living in South Carolina. But what a fuss the media made of it!
If we get a hotter than usual weather period then the BBC loves to trumpet the doom and gloom of global warming. Then, several months later, the people who’s job was other than reporting global warming (ie gardeners, sports reporters festival-goers etc) will usually recall it as a “good summer”. In nation of people who will more likely talk/complain to strangers about the weather than anything else, you can tell what people really think.
The Met Office used to threaten us with future “barbecue summers” and “a Mediterranean climate”. That is until they probably realised that not only were we not getting all the barbecues promised, but that most people quite like the idea of a warmer climate in the UK. That’s why so many choose to vacation and retire in such places.
“We did have one hot July day in central England…”
Here in Northeastern Ohio in July we did have our Killer Heat Wave when the temperatures got up into the mid to upper 90’sF for two whole days! Amazingly, the grass and trees are still green and alive and none of my neighbors were killed by this Unprecedented Heat Wave.
England got hot for a few days because the meridional jet stream allowed hot air from Africa to intrude farther north. Simultaneously, eastern Europe was anomalously cooler.
It ought to be hot, and here’s why: https://ibdst.blogspot.com/2019/04/fact-check-truth-about-global-warming.html
Excellent link Ron. Should be on everyone’s ‘must read’ list.
Wow, that’s a keeper.. Thanks Ron.
Might also want to have a look at this essay, and others on this guy’s website.
The whole history of the Greenhouse Effect is clogged with misattributions and misinterpretations.
This gives what appears to me to be the most complete and objective summary of the whole dealio all the way back:
http://greenhouse.geologist-1011.net/
Well, July 2019 was the hottest July on record according to:
surface data
Gistemp loti v4
Berkeley earth l/o
NOAA global temp
JMA (tie with 2016
TempLS (Nick Stokes)
ERA5
JRA-55
NCEP/DOE (tie with 2016)
Lower troposphere:
RSS TLT
NCEP/NCAR 500 mbar geopotential
NCEP/DOE 500 mbar geopotential
JRA-55 500 mbar geopotential
NCEP/ NCAR surface had 2019 second, close to 2016
UAH v6 is a clear outlier having July 1998 on top. Could be explained the teams belief-based choice of satellites and adjustments, not supported by data..
Any answer to Olof R?
Tamperature vs. temperature
“Any answer to Olof R?”
Climategate. Which shows that the Keepers of the Temperature Data conspired to manipulate the surface temperature record for political purposes and make it look like the tempertures are getting hotter and hotter in concert with the increase in the level of CO2 in the atmosphere. Thus, they created the Hockey Stick chart which erases all the significant warm periods in history because this was necessary in order for them to be able to claim that we are experiencing unprecedented warmth today that can only be caused by CO2 increases.
Tmax charts. Which show that it was just as warm in the recent past as it is today and puts the lie to the claim that we are experiencing the hottest month in history today. The Unted States for example is about 1C cooler today than in 1934.
I posted some Tmax charts elsewhere in this comment thread. Look them up and see the truth.
As a bonus, here’s an unmodified chart from Nigeria that shows it was just as warm in the past as it is today. No unprecedented warmth today. No CAGW today.
Please leave out the conspiracy ideation. It has no place in a sound scientific debate..
Regarding tmax, you can’t directly compare measurements from the old days with that of modern equipment.
Here’s a case from Belgium. The Royal Meteorological institute has through side by side studys of old and modern equipment found that the old Belgian tmax record 38.8 C from 1947 probably was 2.2 C too hot compared to modern standards
https://www.brusselstimes.com/all-news/belgium-all-news/health/61223/belgiums-highest-recorded-temperature-could-be-broken-on-thursday/
Anyway, the old record at Uccle, 38.8 C ( or rather 36.6) was broken by the 25 July with 39.7 C, but a new Belgian record was set elsewhere, 41.8 C.
“Please leave out the conspiracy ideation. It has no place in a sound scientific debate..”
You imply the Climategate conspiracy was not real. It was real. We have the conspirators own words in writing to prove it.
They have been true to those words ever since, continuing to this day to bastardize the official surface temperature records.
The surface temperature record has been tampered with for political purposes. It is no use to science.
Tom Abbott
You have been shown in earlier WUWT guest posts that your TMAX charts do not reflect reality at all, as they concern CONUS only. The Globe behaves completely different.
And your chart of JUST ONE station in the TROPICS showing no temperature change gives a good measure of your extraordinara competence: there is NO climate change in the Tropics, that is absolutely evident.
Why don’t you show charts concerning the Arctic?
Even UAH’s lower troposphere measurements show that the Arctic warms 2 times faster than the rest of the world. At least 95 % of the UAH 2.5° grid cells with the highest trends are located in the latitude band 80.0N-82.5N.
It wasn’t the hottest everywhere. Which is why averaging all the measurements from all over the world together is meaningless. Intensive properties people. You can’t present a single number and say “see! Hottest!” Doesn’t work that way.
Not to mention that “on record” is a very short time.
As I recall, there was a very late, cold Spring and ~1-month late crop planting in the Midwest last year , but the excellent warm summer weather made up for that.
This year, cold wet weather in the Midwest reportedly caused ~30% of the USA corn crop to not get planted – the ground was too wet for equipment.
Could these be early signs of the imminent global cooling to commence by ~2020-2030. which I (we) predicted in my Calgary Herald article published 1Sept2002?
I suggest that more research should be devoted to frost-resistant crops, because climate is about to get colder. While the average temperature may not drop much, the advent of early killer frosts will have a significant negative impact on global crop yields.
We experienced this global cooling from ~1945 to 1977, even as fossil fuel combustion accelerated, and grain crop failures were much more common, especially in Russia.
https://www.nytimes.com/1982/06/21/business/soviet-grain-crop-one-more-failure.html
Nope. Not the “hottest” ever. Checked my own records, and frankly, if 90F is not normal for July in my AO, then what is? Should it be cold and snowing instead?
Go on, media mavens, keep hollering “WOLF!!” even though you don’t go “outside” if you can help it. If you ever spend more than a five minute period outside in the fresh air, please let me know.
Can we get some numbers? Since every previous July was not pointed out in those charts, it’s possible that none of the months above that line was a July.
As always …. it depends on what you mean when you say “hot”. As Spencer notes, the maximum temps are not getting hotter, the overnight lows are what is driving the increased average. …. and the overnight lows are being driven by surface heat sinks, like asphalt.
We’ve yet to reach 100 this summer where I live. … and we frequently have several weeks above 100F.
I live in Michigan. My tomatoes were late this year. July and this entire summer has been cooler.
If they really believed in climate change they would ban all immigration, support nuclear power, and ban all private jets. All these actions are the least disruptive and easy to implement. I will believe them when they actually act like this really is an existential threat.
I live on the water in SoCal…anyone care to explain why we have a deep, persistent, resilient marine layer halfway through August?
I live in So. California in the high desert, it has been a fairly mild summer here so far. Last summer I recorded 12 days of 100 degrees or better and 17 days the previous year, this year I am at 3 days of 100 degrees or more. We also had a cold and long winter here this year. I know one location doesn’t mean much in the grand scheme but I am happy to get some cooler weather.
I would love the explanation of why, when politics was not involved, the highest temperatures recorded by state are most frequently claimed to have occurred in the 30’s. Wikipedia has the details.
“I would love the explanation of why, when politics was not involved,”
That’s the reason: Politics wasn’t involved. People back then were not conspiring to manipulate the temperature data. They had no reason to do so.
Today lots of people have reasons to manipulate the temperature data. And they do. You can’t trust any of the manipulated official surface temperature data. It’s cooled off about 0.5C over the last three years yet the Data Manipulators are still making “Hottest something Evah” claims. They are a one-trick pony, and all they have to hang their hat on is a bogus, bastardized Hockey Stick global temperature chart that is pure science fiction being sold as facts.
I wonder what the USCRN data says for July 2019?
Why is it rarely reported when it is supposed to be the mast pristine data set.
Any time I google for a plot, I only get plots that are older mostly presented by Anthony.
Why did they spend so much money establishing it while ignoring the data?
I realize it is only Continental USA but that is where many live.
Anyone have a link to the plot?
Richard A. O’Keefe: “satellites don’t measure temperature”
Then isn’t this also true: “Thermometers don’t measure temperature, they measure expansion of a liquid in a tube (glass thermometers) or the resistance of a sensor (electronic sensors). Using the output of models that interpret the height of the liquid (glass thermometers) or the resistance of the sensor (electronic sensors) as temperature makes comparing the model output to measured surface temperatures a case of “apples and oranges.”
Mr O’Keefe, as you have brought up the subject of Surface Temperatures measured by Thermometers perhaps you can explain why most of the major Continents shown by Tom Abbott further up the post do not show higher temperatures for July 2019?
Please note that they are “AS MEASURED” temperatures, which tend to agree with the UAH values.
He has shown the results for
USA
China
India
Norway
Australia
I wonder if you are aware of just how much the Temperature Values have been changed over the years?
“After calibration, there is no intervening “model” needed for the glass/electronic instrument.”
Sure there are; the model that converts the height of a liquid to a temperature or the one that converts the resistance of a sensor to a temperature. If your argument is that there are more variables in the satellite models than in the thermometer models and/or that it is easier to calibrate thermometers models than it is to calibrate a satellite model, I would agree with that, but it doesn’t negate the fact that none of them actually measure temperature.
“PS, satellites don’t measure microwave brightness at the surface, whereas you can locate glass/electronic instruments at the surface.”
True but irrelevant to the discussion about the existence of models for thermometers and satellites.
It is absolutely relevant when using satellite derived temperatures and using them to discredit the surface measurements. Apples and oranges.
PS, the linear relationships between scale marks on a glass thermometer, or between current and temp in an electronic device are much simpler than the “model” of an air column with pressure/altitude factors, and moisture content. Additionally, my personal “perception” of temperature relates very well with experience of my outside thermometer. Can’t say the same about an unseen device flying overhead at 27,000+ kph at 150 kilometers.
“It is absolutely relevant when using satellite derived temperatures and using them to discredit the surface measurements.”
This is irrelevant to our discussion of whether the devices being discussed actually measure temperature.
“PS, the linear relationships between scale marks on a glass thermometer … are much simpler than the “model” of an air column …”
True and I conceded that in my previous comment but that still does not negate the fact that none of these devices actually measure temperature.
Richard A. O’Keefe: Thank you for an interesting discussion.
Looking further I stumbled into this plot for July for USCRN .
https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/temp-and-precip/national-temperature-index/time-series?datasets%5B%5D=uscrn&datasets%5B%5D=climdiv&datasets%5B%5D=cmbushcn¶meter=anom-tavg&time_scale=1mo&begyear=2005&endyear=2019&month=7
Hey
0.81°F 0.65°F
you forgot to mention that USCRN is
HOTTER THAN THE “BAD” STATIONS
opps.
Historically CRN is a little bit warmer than the “bad” “adjusted” “hoax” data.
Go figure.
Here is the thing.
Month in and month out.
year in and year out.
decade after decade..
CRN will be there to show you guys that the “bad” stations, and “adjusted” data is
perfectly fine.
So you are claiming they are still adjusting station data since 2012 through 2019?
Are they adjusting them to be a little lower than USCRN?
By eyeball averaging, it appears we haven’t had much of any temperature change since CRN went live. I look forward to future decades.
Blame it on steam trains:
https://www.railwaymagazine.co.uk/11489/steam-lines-face-double-threat-in-crackdown-on-coal-burning/
The great irony is that by laying more asphalt and pouring more concrete in mega cities we will further the climate crusades via UHI effect with focus on surface stations.
Indeed. I have been looking up how I can model the earths energy budget using a kinetic model that focuses on joules, and was surprised to find, the heat capacity of CO2 is approx 850 j/kg, dry air itself is 1008 j/kg, asphalt is 920 j/kg. We have close to 15 billion tons of asphalt roads, we emit only 5 billion tons of CO2 per year. Asphalt never goes away, CO2 is gone in a few years. Multiply out the amount of heat absorption, and release back to the atmosphere from CO2 and asphalt, and we find that asphalt is a significantly greater contributor than CO2. Heck for that matter, if we converted ALL of the “dry air” to CO2, the heat capacity of the atmosphere would drop from 1008 j/kg to 850 j/kg.
This all smacks of fraud imo.
Significant changes in local seasonal and yearly temperature are always the result of the peculiarities of the Jet Stream. They don’t happen in the tropics. And, the earth has not warmed since the Younger Dryas. Gaia worshippers get over yourselves. The pendulum swings and ice is inevitably coming with it.
At least satellites can measure the entire earth; it is consistent data. Thermometer data are simply made up where they don’t exist, which is most of the world. It’s real science vs. imaginary science.
“At least satellites can measure the entire earth”
Actually, they don’t, at all. They fail near poles and at high altitude. But more seriously, they only look at each point once or twice a day, and have some uncertainty about climatically what that reading corresponds to. Whereas thermometers are always there. Even the old min/max scann ed the whole day, while recording the min and max.
Another serious problem is that they have to sort out a result from a single signal that is a mix of many levels in the atmosphere.
Right, Nick. And min-max LiGs have a resolution of ±0.25 C.
Except for yours, of course, which we know not only had perfect accuracy but also infinite precision.
So basically it’s all crappy data (satellite and thermometer) to try to reach any kind of certainty for policy decision making purposes.
Some coverage is missing from satellites, but nowhere near as bad as what Nick might indicate. Thermometers are not always there because they often pick and choose over the years which ones they continue to use or not. The surface coverage is always changing and not comparing like for like.
UAH measures from 85S to 85N so only about 1% of global surface is always missing.
RSS measures from 70S to 70N so about 3-4% of the global surface is always missing.
Surface temperatures actually cover less than about 0.1% of the global surface to within 25k sq km. A few stations at best over a 1000 sq km for example doesn’t represent full coverage as is often in denial.
Total surface area of Earth 510,072,000 sq km Total water surface area: 70.8% (361,132,000 sq km) Total land surface area: 29.2% (148,940,000 sq km)
There are 1408 stations used in this data series currently and one covers about 25 square kilometres. So here we have 1408 x 25 sq km =35075 sq km.
This truly represents 0.024% of the land surface without going into even less coverage of the ocean surface. Some countries have zero stations and a lot still only have a few for hundreds and even thousands of miles.
https://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/station_data_v3/
The global coverage of the surface data even now is absolutely awful, satellite for coverage are light years ahead as the surface don’t even come remotely close.
This is for mods only!!!!
Why do my posts always vanish from view recently and are in moderation?
I made an error once of using a different similar user name, but I always stick with this one.
That may not be a big deal. Here in NH, I love to keep an eye on the temperature atop Mt Washington. It’s only 6288′ high, but the peak sits in a stream of air that has little ground connection, and therefore shows little heating during the day, at least until late AM when ground level air becomes neutral buoyant and mixing begins. I suppose it might be fun to look at nighttime effects for CO2 radiation and reabsorption.
A great rule of thumb is to take it’s morning temperature, and add 30F to it (the dry adiabatic lapse) and that gives you a decent idea of the day’s high temperature.
My point is that the microwave soundings don’t have as severe a diurnal change. The bigger factor is from the shuttling of air masses through the area.
https://w1.weather.gov/data/obhistory/KMWN.html shows the temperature range in the last 24 hours between 50F and 54F. Pretty warm for mid-August, but we have a warm and humid air mass coming in. The “low troposhere” soundings are from around 14,000′ where there’s even less diurnal impact.
Hottest EVAH!!!
Hottest EVAH!!!
I guess we better get to work on those solar powered submarines.
Richard ==> Take it up with NOAA — they pay for these two satellite data sets because they help them know what is happening with the temperature of the atmosphere, which is the concern about CO2 concentrations.