Guest essay by Larry Hamlin
NASA GISS has released its El Niño driven October 2023 global average temperature anomaly value of 1.34 degrees C (2.412 degrees F) above the temperature anomaly baseline period of 1951-1980 (57.2 degrees F or 14 degrees C) which is the highest measured GISS October anomaly value (shown below). This October anomaly value represents a global absolute average temperature of 59.612 degrees F.
The second highest GISS measured October global average temperature anomaly occurred in 2015 with a value of 1.09 degrees C (1.962 degrees F) which represents a global absolute average temperature value of 59.162 degrees F reflecting a difference of 0.45 degrees F from the October 2023 value (0.75% growth during the last 8 years).
This October 2023 anomaly value is below the El Niño driven September 2023 global average temperature anomaly value of 1.47 degrees C (2.646 degrees F) with this September value representing the highest GISS global average temperature anomaly measured to date which represents a global absolute average temperature of 59.846 degrees F.
The highest GISS global average temperature anomaly value measured in September 2023 is comparable to the highest El Niño driven average temperature anomaly value that occurred in February 2016 (the last prior El Nino event) of 1.36 degrees C (2.448 degrees F) representing a global absolute average temperature of 59.648 degrees F.
These two most recent El Nino driven NASA GISS highest global average temperature anomaly values represent a global absolute average temperature difference of 0.198 degrees F (0.33% difference during the last 7.5 years) as displayed in Table 1 below.
Comparing global absolute average temperatures for the months of June, July and August 2023 show that the difference between these months and the 2nd highest value for each of these months amounts to 0.27 degrees F for June (year 2022), 0.432 degrees F for July (year 2019) and 0.306 degrees F for August (Year 2016) with global absolute average temperatures of 59.126 degrees F, 59.324 degrees F and 59.342 degrees F respectively.
The NASA GISS global average temperature anomaly values for the months of June, July, August, September and October 2023 are characterized in an L A Times article as:
“Indeed, Monday’s announcement came only weeks after officials warned that 2023 is on track to become Earth’s warmest year on record following a record-hot June, July, August, September and October. The latest milestone is noteworthy, but also a reminder that it’s not too late to change course, said Zeke Hausfather, a research scientist with Berkeley Earth.”
Table 2 below shows these 5 months which the L A Times article characterizes as “record-hot” June, July, August, September, and October with Table 2 identifying both the “record-hot” global absolute average temperature value (degrees F) along with the global absolute average temperature increase (degrees F) for each respective month’s 2nd highest value and the year it occurred.
Apparently the L A Times wants its readers to falsely fear that earth is approaching some hyped critical warming threshold because in a global El Niño year “record-hot” global absolute average temperatures for June, July, August, September and October of year 2023 occurred with increased temperatures of 0.27 degrees F, 0.432 degrees F, 0.307 degrees F, ,0.882 F and 0.45 degrees F respectively from their prior second highest values.
The. L A Times climate alarmists flawed claims that global anomaly increased temperature levels are “hot” or “hottest” are grossly misleading and based on considering only temperature anomaly increases while concealing the impacts of these increases on the baseline period temperatures.
An indicator of what is considered “hot” is provided by the World Health Organization (WHO) which has defined standards for healthy indoor temperatures. WHO recommends a minimum indoor temperature of 68 degrees Fahrenheit, but if you have children or are a senior 75 degrees would be appropriate with these temperatures far above the recent EL Nino driven “record-hot” global absolute average temperatures as discussed above.
Global absolute average temperature measured levels ranging between 59.126- and 59.846-degrees F as noted in the above tables are grossly mischaracterized by climate alarmists as being “hot” or “hottest” by alarmists that concealed these absolute temperature values from the public and addressed only their respective temperature anomaly values.
The L A Times has repeatedly mislead its readers with ridiculous climate alarmist propaganda articles that falsely use global average temperature anomaly increases to hype that these increases represent dangerous “heat” outcomes in the U.S. while concealing the absolute temperature U.S. data that shows their claims are completely wrong as addressed here, here and here.
This latest L A Times article fails to provide long established global temperature anomaly data establishing that global temperatures change significantly during periods of El Niño’s as shown below with the UAH satellite data showing significant temperature anomaly spikes occurring in prior El Niño years in 1998, 2016 and now again in 2023. These natural climate created El Niño driven temperature spikes are always followed by reduced global temperature anomalies after the El Niño event has subsided as clearly shown in the UAH data record that is concealed by the Times.
The Times article latches onto the incredibly misleading claims hyped by Europe’s Copernicus Climate Change Service that the planet’s anomaly temperature “soared 2.07 degrees Celsius above preindustrial levels, or the 1850 to 1900 average” based on a couple of mid-November 2023 days measurements threatening to reach the climate model grossly flawed IPCC’s claim that a 2-degree Celsius increase global average temperature anomaly level represents a “critical climate threshold”.
The 1850 to 1900 period used by Copernicus was at the end of the “little ice age” climate era where many global climate regions experienced extremely low temperatures.
NASA GISS uses a 1951 to 1980 baseline period average to evaluate preindustrial temperature levels for determining temperature anomalies along with evaluating temperature anomaly data in the period from 1880 to 2023. Europe’s Copernicus Climate Change Service use of a preindustrial average baseline period between 1850 to 1900 deliberately biases their anomaly data to a time of very low global temperatures that existed due to the Little Ice Age climate event between 1300 and 1850.
The flawed climate model driven 2-degree “threshold” increase in global average temperature anomaly hyped by alarmists would occur much more quickly for a low temperature biased baseline period between 1850 to 1900 versus the 1951 to 1980 period used by NASA GISS.
The flawed climate alarmist claims of a 2-degree increased global temperature anomaly climate “critical threshold” limit are absurd. These claims are based on a scientifically flawed climate model referred to as RCP8.5 that was rejected by the most recent UN Intergovernmental Panel Assessment AR6 Report. Roger Pielke Jr. addresses the misuse of the RCP8.5 climate model as:
“Like all propagandists, government entities do not abandon concepts that are effective, even if they are false. The RCP8.5 scenario was abandoned in the report of Working Group I, The Physical Science, of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Assessment Report (AR6, 2021). But the unrealistic scenario reappeared under a different name in the politically written Summary for Policymakers and the Synthesis Report, March 20, 2023.”
He further addresses the misuse of the rejected RCP8.5 climate model in the recent Fifth National Climate Assessment report by noting:
“Again, in NCA5 there is no effort to establish the warming influence of carbon dioxide based on physical evidence of what is occurring in the atmosphere. It is all speculation from global climate models that are demonstrated to be false. US government agencies will not abandon these defective models, or insist that they be reliable, because they are effective propaganda tools. Climate modelers will continue to adjust the models to comply with recorded history, then drop the adjustments when making predictions/ projections. Eventually, the US public will suffer from highly misguided policies, such as wind and solar providing affordable, reliable electricity, and trust in the government will erode.”
Climate scientist Dr. Judith Curry characterized the RCP8.5 climate model as:
“RCP8.5 is sometimes referred to as a ‘business as usual’ scenario. It is not. Rather, it is an extreme scenario”.
The graph below shows the yearly NASA GISS global surface average temperature annual comparisons for years 1880 – 2022.
The top graph format used by the GISS is incredibly misleading and grossly exaggerates reported anomaly values, that in the top graph below, have been converted to their global absolute average temperature values. The bottom graph shows the GISS yearly absolute average temperature values starting with a zero-degree F absolute temperature value, so the entire measured temperature range scale is provided for comparisons.
Both graphs show the same global absolute average temperature outcomes in degrees F, but the top graph format is used to grossly exaggerate the global average temperature anomaly results as hyped by climate alarmists. Just more climate alarmism propaganda deception and distortion.
Don’t they realise that warming from the El Nino is NOT human caused !
No, they don’t.
What they also don’t know is what drives the ENSO cycles. Imagine that: ENSO is the biggest factor in the climate worldwide and they don’t know what causes it and yet they claim to know the climate in 300 or a 100 years time. As my nan would say, hubris of biblical proportions.
Hubris is Greek myth proportions 😉
Nemesis is always following closely behind hubris
Don’t they realise that warming from the El Nino is NOT human caused !
It is caused by humans. A single little boy is disturbing our blissful climate.
When we find that boy, someone should take away his Xbox until he promises to behave.
Yes they do, but they never let a good crisis go to waste.
There is no doubt for me that a strong El Niño is underway. For me, west-central Argentina, summer conditions are here, the temperature spikes upward, the thunderstorms start earlier, our pool comes into favor earlier, and I need to wait later in the day for it to cool down a little for exercise walk. It’s going to be a great year for wine quality.
For my twin brother, living in Eugene, western Oregon, Sunday saw the official low at 24 deg F, snow is clogging the mountain passes, he has to exercise indoors, and it is an early and strong start to winter conditions. The Urban Heat Island effect is the only thing that will save the Kalifornia homeless/Democrat voters, wait for it.
““Record-Hot” Climate Change Outcomes”
I don’t care what they say, it’s bloody cold. How cold? Between 0C and 5C today.
It just goes to show that this warming world of theirs isn’t actually all that global and it certainly isn’t warming at all around these parts. But then, while many had a decent summer it passed us in the UK by completely. Even the runway temperatures disappointed them immensely after last year.
Remember that idiot, Viner? I wonder if he’s the pillock (a stupid or silly person) of the century thus far?
“Met Office forecasts snow across UK as temperatures set to drop to -8°C
Parts of the UK can expect snow and temperatures well below freezing this week as colder weather moves in, the Met Office has said. Temperatures dropped below freezing at the weekend and forecasters have said lows of -8°C (17.6F) are predicted for Tuesday in some areas. The coldest temperature so far this year of -7.7°C (18.1F) was recorded in Shap, Cumbria, on Saturday morning.”
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/weather/topstories/met-office-forecasts-snow-across-uk-as-temperatures-set-to-drop-to-8-c/ar-AA1kAxNs
It’s -3C here in Cleveland Ohio USA and snowing hard. Last year it took until January to get this cold and snowy.
Actually if you actually read what Viner said you’ll find he was fairly accurate. The snow in the forecast is for Scotland, not the SE of England.
I get it. Children (which must mean children in SE England) will never know what snow is because the snow will be in Scotland not in their 15-minute city, and it’s beyond the range of an EV which doesn’t work in cold weather anyway.
Every month GISTEMP rewrites several hundred of the monthly entries to their Land Ocean Temperature Index as shown above with the latest entry for OCT. That entry made 389 changes since SEP entry. These changes go all the way back to January 1880. Over time an obvious pattern of cooling the past and warming the recent entries appears. Here’s what that looked in in January of 2020:
What new information on data that’s over 100 years old could they possibly have to make these adjustments?
Here’s what GISS said in 2018 when asked more or less that exact question:
“Your main concern seems to be why data from 1880 get affected by the addition of 2018 January data and a few late reports from the end of 2017. To illustrate that, assume that a station moves or gets a new instrument that is placed in a different location than the old one, so that the measured temperatures are now e.g. about half a degree higher than before. To make the temperature series for that station consistent, you will either have to lower all new readings by that amount or to increase the old readings once and for all by half a degree. The second option is preferred, because you can use future readings as they are, rather than having to remember to change them. However, it has the consequence that such a change impacts all the old data back to the beginning of the station record.
Hope that answers your concern.”
And the changes and pattern continues month after month, year after year. Here’s the number of changes so far in 2023:
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
365 236 345 248 238 384 371 251 380 369
I see an error from my previous post, it’s 369 changes
SEP to OCT, not 389.
The must be constantly moving these stations around to need all those changes. Once the station move is accounted for there is no need to go back again and readjust.
The GISS response from 2018 is confusing. They said:
“… increase the old readings once and for all…”
It seems that the “Once and for all” correction occurs over and over and over again every month.
Yes, and it ripples through everything, such as in computing the average baseline and anomalies derived from it. It seems that climatologists are incompetent.
Thanks, Steve. I’ve always wondered what the logic was to those adjustments. It seems to me that just leaving them as they were originally entered into “the books” would result in the least possible interpretive error when later analysis is undertaken.
That explanation from GISS is pure BS. The global temperature in 1880 is calculated from the stations as they were placed in 1880. Moving a station now does not change the 1880 individual temperature readings and it doesn’t change the 1880 global average temperature calculated from them.
Now, if you do what they describe in order to treat the moved station as the same station, you are doing what stock market reporting does for things like share splits, and please note: the share indexes don’t change! So it is pure BS to make adjustments which change past global average temperatures.
Except that there is no guarantee that the station will remain as it is. Then all the old station records will have to be changed again — and again. Just as the baseline for anomalies is based on old temperatures, any station corrections for new readings should use the old, original readings as sacrosanct. That way, all the old readings and averages won’t have to be changed every time there is one station change. When a station is changed in some way, it is literally a new station and should be treated as though there is a calibration error in the sensor(s) (if continuity is considered of high value), and that offset should be added. That isn’t a problem in the Age of Computers.
A station in Ellensburg, WA has been relocated five times since an early pilot and then a teacher at the college (now a university) began recording weather over 100 years ago. None of the locations met good standards, and neither does the current site.
It does make “some” sense that the past numbers are changed and not the current ones.
Why anyone thinks the mid-1800s was ideal weather-wise is a total mystery. Another degree or so and I can have a decent garden.
Warming in the 2.56 million-year ice age the Earth is in is a good thing.
About 4.6 million people die every year from cold-related causes compared to about 500,000 dying every year from heat-related causes.
The cold air causes our bodies to constrict their blood vessels to conserve heat. this causes our blood pressure to rise causing increased strokes and heart attacks during the colder months.
‘Global, regional and national burden of mortality associated with nonoptimal ambient temperatures from 2000 to 2019: a three-stage modelling study’
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanplh/article/PIIS2542-5196(21)00081-4/fulltext
I “absolutely” think you need to redo your second graph using the Rankine temperature scale, but with a lower limit of zero (Rankine, instead of -20°F).
Or Réaumur 0 freezing 80 boiling points of water?
It would be great if ALL of science used Kelvin, but the don’t – sigh.
Can some of this boiling heat be sent to us in the north of England.
It’s in the queue with HS2….
https://aussiedlerbote.de/en/district-administrator-calls-on-people-to-stay-at-home-after-snow-chaos/amp/
“Following the onset of winter with numerous accidents and road closures, people in the Rheingau-Taunus district should stay at home this Tuesday. “My urgent appeal: please stay at home on Tuesday. Please also do not go for walks in the forest: there is an acute danger to life from broken branches and falling trees”, said the district administrator in the Rheingau-Taunus district, Sandro Zehner (CDU), according to a statement issued overnight.”
https://www.thelocal.de/20231124/germany-braces-for-plunging-temperatures-and-heavy-snow
“Temperatures across Germany are set to plunge this weekend as Bavaria braces for an icy spell, with parts of the Alps and the Bavarian Forest forecast to be hit by heavy snow.”
In December around 1980 I was on a training course in Munich. There was a very heavy snowfall which remained on the ground for the rest of my stay.
On the course were a couple of other Brits who went skiing in Garmisch-Partenkirchen I went along for the trip but not the skiing. Made a trip to the top of the Zugspitze which was a bit disappointing as the peak was in the clouds.
So it sounds like snow is earlier 50 years on
In 1995 I was on top of Zugspitze in July, in general a very rainy summer, Zugspitze was frozen, snow and ice, strong cold wind and no sight at all bc of clouds with snow.
A nice experience as we weren’t warned to wear warm clothes.
El Niño is the warming phase of the ENSO climate system. The ‘O’ in ENSO stands for ‘oscillation’. This means there is a cooling phase, called La Niña. Being an oscillation, the warming and cooling phases cancel one another out over time; such that the ENSO value has no long-term influence, either warming or cooling, on global temperatures.
Therefore, whilst El Niño temporarily warms global temperatures (as La Niña temporarily cools them) they do not explain the long-term statistically significant warming trend observed in all global temperature data sets.
For illustration, according to NOAA, the current El Niño is currently nowhere near as warm or as prolonged as the one that occurred in 2015, yet global temperatures are much higher and setting new monthly records. Obviously there is more going on than El Niño .
“This means there is a cooling phase” – particularly in the United Kingdom – and there has been all year; come to think of it 2022 was an outlier, definitely not a trend.
When they say global read local.
Big warm up in Denver area, 266 Kelvin currently.
The UK has been much warmer than the long-term average this year.
MUCH cooler than for most of the last 10,000 years
Tell us again.. how do trees grow under glaciers ??
All their thermometers have moved to airports… so how would anyone know. !
Who said the ENSO oscillation is distributed evenly in frequency? You’ve simply made that assumption and then are using it to pretend there’s no trend from ENSO.
Everything FN says is “made-up”
That saves “it” from having to actually gain any understanding of reality.
TFN, please.
Fungal toenail !
If ENSO wasn’t distributted evenly in frequency then it wouldn’t be an ‘oscilliation’, would it? Over the long term there is no trend in ENSO, see the NOAA link above.
Again showing your incredible IGNORANCE.
So funny !
I’m no ENSO expert but I imagine like most things in the natural world more than one cycle is involved in ENSO as well as the rest of the Climate.
Looking at charts some of which go way way back to the 19th century it would appear that El Nino events are more frequent than 50 or 100 years ago.
My guess would be that the effect on global temperature is more like a saw tooth than anything else in a closely spaced series of El Nino or La Nina events then there’ll be stepped effect on top.
My guess is that is in part what you’re seeing.
…more frequent…
My guess would be that 100 years ago, the lack of scientific investigation caused less reporting to government officials of Columbian fishermen’s observations.
There is no evidence of any increase in the frequency of the warm phase of ENSO over the cold phase in the NOAA record. If the warm phase (or the cold phase) were dominent, then it could not be described as an oscillation.
One thing we know: ENSO does not explain global warming.
Why can’t ENSO be of the form Acos(ωt+φ)+Bt? A cycle with a trend…
There is no evidence that human CO2 causes warming..
…. but you keep supporting the AGW scam..
You are displaying your ignorance of ENSO.. as always.
“You are displaying your ignorance of ENSO.. as always.”
Says the man who thinks EDSO is causing the warming. Oh the irony…..
Or, it’s just occurred to me, maybe you are trying to be funny. In that case keep going. A bit like an old uncle who thinks farting is clever.
Only a completely blind moron cannot see the step changes at each major El Nino event.
But you seem absolutely determined to be seen as such !
Even the LA Times is trumpeting the El Nino warming… that is how blatantly obvious it is. !
Still no evidence of any warming from CO2, though.. is there, simple-one.! !
Oh…. you are not joking. Tell you what, I will bow to your superior intellect if you can find a single peer reviewed paper that agrees with your mindlessly simplistic stance that the recent warming has been caused by ENSO. Even a recognised climate scientist? What have you got soldier?
I’m sure you and your “uncle” have great fun laughing at each other’s farts.
As to your intelligence.. seems it is basically non-existent.
Look at the UAH data , simple-one.
Warming ONLY happens at El Nino events.
Or are you a data-denier !!
Still that total lack of ANY evidence of human causation..
… is it still hiding under the sheets with your “uncle” ?
Yes, yes, I know you can say blah blah blah…. but does anyone actually agree with you? Or are you that besotted with yourself that the lack of anyone credible supporting you is not a red flag? One you can ignore. You must have one very big ego, but very small filter for truth.
You poor little child.
Your total inability to present one single thing to back up anything you type is quite sad and pathetic..
I’m glad you have a nice friendly “uncle” to look after you !
I’m so please that you have an uncle that thinks your continued brain-farts are clever…
.. because I can assure you… no-one else does.. !
Warm in a 2.56 million-year ice age named the Quaternary Glaciation, in a warmer but still cold interglacial period named the Holocene,isn’t saying much.
20% of the land is frozen, either as permafrost or underneath glaciers.
It is only about 2C warmer than the end of the Little Ice Age.
Everybody outside of the tropics has to live in houses with heat, work at businesses with heat, wear warm clothes half the year, and ride in warm transportation most of the year.
How old is human civilisation, with respect to the periods you mention?
Human civilisation developed during periods which were MUCH warmer than now.
Seems you are as ignorant of history as you are of everything else !!!
Human being still die from cold some 10 to 20 times more often than heat…
… that is because the planet is barely a degree C or so above the coldest period in 10,000 years.
Very much a cool/tepid period we are currently in.
Again, having ZERO comprehension of how El Nino works,..
… doesn’t help your cause.. whatever that is ?? !!
… .. except to display your incredible ignorance.
An unexamined assumption.
No, see the NOAA link. Over time they cancel out. Not an assumption; just counting.
You yet again show you don’t understand major El Nino events and how they work
Look at the atmospheric DATA…
… can you understand a simple transient spike followed by a step warming
And of course, none of that could possibly be caused by CO2.
Now.. how much warmer must it have been for forests to have grown where now there are glaciers?
Answer.. still totally MIA. !!
Yes, there’s more going on than El Nino. The current warming started over 300 years ago, and it’s not in the climate models. There’s a lot we don’t know.
There was a zero global warming trend in any of the global temerature data sets that cover the peri between 1850 and 1930. So the notion that ot has been warming steadily for the past 300 years is absurd
Sorry, hit the send button by accident. Per above, none of the data sets show any warming trend between 1850 and 1930. The current warming is exceptional in the instrument period of record.
Depending on the data set, the 1850 – 1930 slope was negative, but 1930 is a bad end point.
It’s more along the lines of
negative from 1850 – 1910
positive from 1910 – 1945
strongly negative from 1945 – 1955
slightly positive from 1955 – 1980
positive from 1980 – 2020 (slightly steeper than 1910 – 1945)
Interestingly, ocean temperatures exhibit a negative slope for 1880 – 1910, while land is slightly positive.
ln(CO2) or forcing are better metrics for correlation with CO2 concentrations, but there is definitely some sort of time component
No real data shows ANY warming between the 1979 El Nino and the 1998 El Nino
… or between the 1998 El Nino and the 2015/16 El Nino.
And actual COOLING from the 2016 El Nino to the 2023 El Nino
There is absolutely zero evidence of any human caused warming.
You keep proving that fact by your inability to present any.
The record is very short (can’t could mal-adjusted GISS crap) and started at the very depths of the Little Ice Age.
Your comment is meaningless… especially when you consider that nearly ALL the last 10,000 years were warmer than now.
Remind us again how trees grew where now there are glaciers?
You still haven’t answered even that simple question.
You just keep ducking and weaving like a headless, mindless chook !
There were NO global surface temperature even remotely covering any of that period.
Only real data is from the NH.
You have been shown a large amount temperature data from the NH, ALL of which shows rapid warming up to the 1930s.
You are yet again citing your own incredible ignorance of reality. !
Story tip:
Households warned they may face fine if they refuse to replace gas boilers with heat pumps under new proposal
Homeowners who refuse to replace their gas boilers with heat pumps on environmental grounds could face financial penalties, according to new proposals in Scotland. Scottish residents could be taxed using council tax and Land and Buildings Transaction Tax (LBTT) – the Scottish equivalent to stamp duty – to “promote behavioural change”.
…
The consultation document, which is being announced by Green Party co-leader and the zero carbon buildings minister Patrick Harvie, is expected to set out when homeowners will need to replace boilers with systems that do not burn fossil fuels.”
https://www.gbnews.com/money/heat-pump-replace-gas-boiler-fine
Another consultation? Well, we know how they go. As the man in Oxford put it: it’s going ahead – definitely.
Coal is just old dead trees that nature has heated and compressed for easy storage.
Any place that needs heat will need a secondary source of heat that does not require electricity. For example, I have a modern wood stove. When the temperature is below 10°C {50°F} and the wind is strong my well-insulated house loses heat rapidly.
This is the time of year when authorities begin warning un-informed folks not to bring the grill inside. Search up: family dies using grill inside
Patrick needs to be asked if he feels any remorse about the 2m trees in Scotland cut down in the last two years or so to make way for unreliable wind turbines. This brings the total trees cut down in Scotland to make way for the turbines now stands at 16m.
Right on cue, there’s Zeke abusing his authority to imply these temperature excursions are CO2 related and yet that somehow we can still control the climate if we just endure enough pain.
It’s 10F colder than normal where I am. Can someone please send me some of that global warming.
Get in the queue
Absolutely NO, not gonna give up our little bit of “above average”….
Without false claims, misleading statements and outright lies, where would we be? Climate change activists, like never Trumpers, seem to always be trafficking in things that just aren’t so. Since their beliefs are based on lies, you’d think they would change their beliefs when they learn the facts just aren’t so. Instead they double down and defend the lies.
I’ll say this for the climate change doomsayers — they know that getting the lies out first means the skeptics are playing defense.
re “the temperature anomaly baseline period of 1951-1980”:
That is a cherry-pick. 1951-1980 was a relatively cool period, and the so-called ‘climate normal’ 30-year period has moved on to 1991-2020. https://www.noaa.gov/explainers/understanding-climate-normals
Incidentally, the idea that there is such a thing as a ‘climate normal’ 30-year period is pure BS. It’s about as stupid as defining a date number as ‘before present’ (the year 0BP was 74 years ago!). With the real climate having cycles like the ocean oscillations, Gleissberg cycles etc, each ‘climate normal’ is out of date long before it is 30 years old. There is no such thing as a normal climate – well, not the way they try to use it.
The reason for defining 0BP as 1950 relates to the use of radiocarbon dating. The standard calibration is done using material dating from 1950 prior to contamination due to nuclear testing.
“Both graphs show the same global absolute average temperature outcomes in degrees F, but the top graph format is used to grossly exaggerate the global average temperature anomaly results as hyped by climate alarmists.”
A better graph would show the temperature in Kelvins rooted at absolute zero. That is the scientifically correct way of expressing temperature in the SI system. The fluctuations are very small when shown that way. 59°F = 288.15. The so called 1.5° limit is about 0.5% of the base and looks like pure noise on a correct graph.