No, Bloomberg, One Chart Does Not Prove the World Is Getting Hot Fast

In a recent column titled “A Chart Climate Denialists Can’t Ignore,” Bloomberg writer Mark Gongloff presents a graph from Berkeley Earth’s Zeke Hausfather as proof that “the world is getting hotter, and fast.” While the chart may accurately display data, it is highly misleading because it doesn’t take the root causes of such temperature records into account, such as the Urban Heat Island (UHI) effect and the warm-biased placement of weather stations that record temperatures, factors that have nothing to do with climate change.

The chart, Gongloff claims, shows that nearly 80 percent of global land areas have experienced record monthly high temperatures in this century alone. From this, readers are told that the evidence is overwhelming and that skepticism about catastrophic climate change is “denial.” It’s a tidy narrative—but like many tidy narratives, it unravels when context and historical data are brought to bear.

The idea that today’s heat is “unprecedented” is simply false. In fact, most all-time state high temperature records in the United States were set long before the 21st century began. As detailed in Climate at a Glance: The Facts on Climate Change (2nd Edition, 2025), “the all-time high temperature records set in most states occurred in the first half of the twentieth century, decades before anyone was talking about human-caused climate change.” This is not a small technicality. It is a direct contradiction of the claim that modern warming is without historical parallel.

The 1930s remain the standout decade for heat in the American record. Data, drawn from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) U.S. Historical Climatology Network, show that both the number and intensity of heatwaves peaked during that period. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Heat Wave Index, cited in Climate at a Glance, confirms that the 1930s still dominate in frequency and duration of heatwaves nationwide. A chart from Our World in Data, shown below, verifies the EPA heatwave data:

Figure 1: U.S. Heat Wave Index, 1895–2021, from NOAA via EPA (2024) – processed by Our World in Data

More recently, the U.S. Climate Reference Network (USCRN)—a pristine system of modern sensors launched in 2005 to avoid problems like urban heat contamination—shows no sustained increase in high-temperature extremes since its inception, seen in Figure 2 below:

Figure 2: USCRN high-temperature data from January 2005 to August 2005.

This data matters because the United States has the longest, most carefully maintained temperature record in the world. If there were truly a runaway increase in record heat, it would be evident here first. Instead, as The Heartland Institute notes, “there has been no significant warming across the United States since 2005” and “recent warming rates are no higher than in the early 20th century.” The NOAA record confirms this trend: when adjustments and urban heat biases are stripped away, the upward slope of U.S. maximum temperatures largely disappears.

Finally, a chart of high temperature records for the past century, seen below in Figure 3, easily disproves the Bloomberg claim.

Figure 3: The annual mean number of days with a daily maximum temperature ≥95°, ≥100° and ≥105° each at 828 NOAA USHCN stations with at least 100 years of daily temperature readings between 1895 and 2023. Graph by Chris Martz from NOAA data at https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/pub/data/ushcn/v2.5/

What is too often ignored in mainstream reporting is the extent to which temperature datasets have been massaged over the years. Historical temperatures in the far past are routinely adjusted downward, and station siting biases in the present exacerbate the problem, exaggerating the appearance of a steep warming trend. An independent audit of the U.S. surface station network done by Heartland in 2022 found that well over 90 percent of stations fail NOAA’s own siting standards, with many positioned near heat sources such as buildings, parking lots, or air-conditioning exhausts. When only well-sited, rural stations are considered, the long-term warming trend falls dramatically.

This important context is missing entirely from Gongloff’s piece. Instead, readers are presented with an appealing graphic and a few cherry-picked statistics that appear to seal the case. Yet, as the new Climate at a Glance book points out, climate models and global averages often obscure more than they reveal. “Models run too hot,” the book notes, “and they consistently project more warming than is observed in the real world.” The gap between modeled projections and measured outcomes has persisted for decades, which raises questions not about “denial,” but about scientific humility.

In the United States, there has been no statistically significant increase in either the number or intensity of heatwaves since the early 20th century. That is not a matter of ideology—it is a matter of record.

Gongloff closes his piece by warning that the 1930s Dust Bowl may soon “seem like a cool interlude.” That is preposterous – the data tells a completely different story. America’s hottest decade remains the 1930s, and despite rising carbon dioxide emissions, modern heat extremes have not surpassed those early records. Before accepting graphics designed to shock, it’s worth remembering that charts can be constructed to emphasize whatever conclusion the author prefers. History, on the other hand, does not bend so easily.

Ultimately, long-term unbiased data and a proper accounting of the UHI effect destroy Bloomberg’s intentionally alarming claims about a rapidly warming world.

Get notified when a new post is published.
Subscribe today!
5 18 votes
Article Rating
44 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
October 13, 2025 6:29 pm

Come on Nick, tell us all why we’re wrong and they’re right. We miss you!

Reply to  Zig Zag Wanderer
October 13, 2025 6:58 pm

Who ??

SxyxS
Reply to  bnice2000
October 14, 2025 2:35 am

Nick Stokes and the Bad Deeds.

Former singer( during the ice age scare).
Now he is walking from door to door and telling people that all of us will burn in a runaway hellfire if we do not pay indulgencies and pray to the UNO building 6 times a day.

He has all the religious ingredients.
1) The original sin = everything bad climate is man made

2)The Devil = Carbon(6 protons,6 neutrons,6 electrons) = number of the beast

3)The Prophet and Messiah – Obama, a genocidal warmongerer(just like the other prophet).He can even walk on water(when standing on his chef)- that’s why he has front beach properties worth 30 millions.

4) Religion in its literal sense= Re Ligare = Binding Back (Better)

5) Green everything = Green is the color of the prophet

6)The 10 commandments = written on the Georgia Guidestones

7)The new Testament AGW that followed the old Testament(global cooling)

8)Excommunication of Heretics – starting with Tim Ball who got sacked by Prophet Al Gore(known for his “Convinient Lie” prophecies whose 100% prediction failure was so impressive that he got the Oscar and Nobel Prize from the high-priests + a net worth increase from 0 to 200+ million + the obligatory front beach property(Montecito) climate prophets own when they can not afford a private jet)

9)Saul to Paul transformation with the former Ice Age worshippers turned AGW believers and Ecoscience-Prophets Saul Ehrlich and John Holdren(warming tzar of the Messiah)

10) 97% of priests who believe that warming is the center of the universe

11) a biblical flood(of invaders and rising sea levels)

12) Exodus – from blue states.

13) USA as new Sodom&Gomorrah.

14)Moses in a Basket – little Greta in a Sailboat

15) Pilgrimage – every real climate zealot has to attend at least one COP event in their lifetime.

The only thing the new religion is still missing is the burning Bush –
because they never let me anywhere close to George W.
Maybe Nick Stokes will have more success.

Reply to  SxyxS
October 14, 2025 5:02 am

5) Green everything = Green is the color of the prophet profit. !!

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  SxyxS
October 14, 2025 10:38 am

Burning bush? The LA fires. Just ask a climate liar. (Ignore it was arson).

October 13, 2025 6:40 pm

There is plenty of evidence showing it was just as warm in the recent past as it is today, which debunks this, and all, “hotter and hotter and hotter” Hockey Stick charts. And not just the U.S. chart, either.

The U.S. regional chart (Hansen 1999):

comment image

And here are 600 original, historic, regional charts that show it was just as warm in the Early Twentieth Century as it is today:

https://notrickszone.com/600-non-warming-graphs-1/

October 13, 2025 6:42 pm

More evidence that it was just as warm in the recent past as it is today, and that this warmth was global:

USA

comment image?resize=640%2C542

China

comment image?resize=640%2C542

India

comment image?resize=640%2C542

October 13, 2025 6:43 pm

More evidence:

Pakistan

comment image?resize=640%2C542

Bangladesh

comment image?resize=640%2C542

Australia

comment image?resize=640%2C542

October 13, 2025 6:44 pm

And one more:

Norway

comment image?resize=640%2C542

Reply to  Tom Abbott
October 13, 2025 7:01 pm

Tom, You know I can play that game ;-)….. but how do you do 3 graphs per post ?

Let’s go a bit wider.

Here’s South Africa, 4 cities..

1940s-South-African-temps
Reply to  bnice2000
October 13, 2025 11:52 pm

Oh look , someone doesn’t like actual data.. so sad 😉

Reply to  bnice2000
October 14, 2025 3:46 am

“how do you do 3 graphs per post ?”

I just put them in there.

I stopped at three because I think if you put more than three links in your post, the post automatically goes to moderation.

Reply to  Tom Abbott
October 14, 2025 4:53 am

So you do it via links to graphs stored elsewhere. I see.. 🙂

I’ve been posting single graphs from a folder on my computer.

Reply to  Tom Abbott
October 13, 2025 7:02 pm

And Greenland

Greenland-Dec-temps
Reply to  Tom Abbott
October 13, 2025 7:07 pm

And Ireland (graphed with AMO) (notice the cooling from 1900-1920.;-) )

Ireland-AMO_article
Reply to  bnice2000
October 14, 2025 3:58 am

Yes, the same temperature pattern (just as warm in the recent past as today) is found everywhere you look.

So, the question is: Where did the Climate Alarmists get a “hotter and hotter and hotter” trendline (the Hockey Stick charts) out of historical temperature data that has no such trendline? All the Hockey Stick creators had was the historical, regional data to work with, yet they come up with a trendline that looks nothing like the historical data, which shows there is no unprecedented warmth today because it was just as warm in the recent past as it is today.

All the versions of the Hockey Stick Chart are basically Big Lies created to sell the Human-caused Climate Change narrative. That’s what Bloomberg is doing here: Trying to sell the Big Lie as reason to believe in Human-caused Climate Change.

The Hockey Stick charts are Climate Alarmist propaganda. There is no basis in fact for their existence.

The fact that so many people believe the Hockey Stick chart represents reality just goes to show that propaganda works.

There is no Hockey Stick chart trendline in the Historical Records. The whole world has been lied to over and over and over again by these Climate Change Charlatans. What they are selling doesn’t exist.

Reply to  Tom Abbott
October 14, 2025 4:58 am

Even Briffa’s tree rings have the same pattern since 1900,

(anything much before than that is going to be compromised by CO2 deficit)

And as you say.. no individual records look remotely like GISS et al.

Nearly everywhere has the 1930,40s temperatures similar or above the 2000-2020 period

Briffa-Tree-data-1900
Reply to  Tom Abbott
October 14, 2025 11:37 am

But…but…but… All those charts are just LOCAL, not Global!!! 😎

Reply to  Gunga Din
October 15, 2025 5:02 am

Yes, that is usually the argument the Climate Alarmists give, but if you have the same pattern everywhere you look on the globe, then that makes it global. How can it be otherwise?

If the Climate Alarmists didn’t have a bogus Hockey Stick chart to point to, they wouldn’t have anything to use as an argument.

Michael Flynn
October 13, 2025 7:02 pm

Mark Gongloff presents a graph from Berkeley Earth’s Zeke Hausfather

A consensus of the ignorant and gullible. Adding CO2 to air does not make it hotter.

Mark and Zeke are delusional if they believe otherwise. Of course, neither will admit publicly to such a preposterous idea, but both believe it deep inside.

The March of the Morons continues.

Reply to  Michael Flynn
October 13, 2025 9:24 pm

Zeke’s one “thing”….. is data misinformation. !!

Kieran O'Driscoll
Reply to  Michael Flynn
October 13, 2025 10:57 pm

Gongloff has a career writing for lefty fake news periodicals so he is just true to form…

Grumpy Git UK
Reply to  Michael Flynn
October 14, 2025 1:08 am

We all knoe anything Zeke presents has had the data tortured until it shows exactly what they want it to show.

October 13, 2025 7:11 pm

the United States has the longest, most carefully maintained temperature record in the world” HADCET shrugs in disbelief.

Reply to  Greg Locock
October 13, 2025 7:25 pm

“the United States has the longest, most carefully maintained temperature record in the world””

Our esteemed host’s “surface station” report has shown that “carefully maintained” is a relative term only.

ANYTHING would be better than the Met Office, which seems intentionally horrendous…

…and Ken from Ken’s Kingdom has shown that many Australian sites used by BoM are not much chop, either.

MarkW
Reply to  bnice2000
October 14, 2025 6:20 am

Are they still trying to justify using fabricated data?

October 13, 2025 9:23 pm

people send me silly stuff 🙂

Climate
Nick Stokes
October 13, 2025 9:33 pm

“An independent audit of the U.S. surface station network done by Heartland in 2022 found that well over 90 percent of stations fail NOAA’s own siting standards, with many positioned near heat sources such as buildings, parking lots, or air-conditioning exhausts.”

The US plot of temperatures shown here for USCRN, has the ClimDiv comparison blotted out. If you show it, it says that despite these supposed faults, the ClimDiv average, from those stations, is in close agreement with the USCRN average. In fact the USCRN average does have a substantial warming trend, faster than ClimDiv, and faster than global.

comment image

Nick Stokes
Reply to  Nick Stokes
October 13, 2025 9:46 pm

In fact, the trend of USCRN over that period is 0.47°C/decade. The trend of ClimDiv is 0.32°C/decade. , These are rapid warming trends.

Reply to  Nick Stokes
October 13, 2025 11:08 pm

And relies totally on the El Nino bulge around 2016.

Remove that step change.. There is no warming

Reply to  Nick Stokes
October 13, 2025 11:17 pm

Did this chart a while ago, just before the 2023/24 El Nino

(El Ninos are what the climate fakers rely on to show warming trends)

It shows that over the period of USCRN, USCRN has almost exactly the same trend as UAH Global, but, of course, a much wider range of values.

And as shown above, USCRN has no warming apart from the 2016 El Nino….

…. just like UAH Global has no warming over that period except from the 2016 El Nino.

trends-uscrn-etc
Leon de Boer
Reply to  Nick Stokes
October 14, 2025 4:55 am

Actually there is a fun graphic to look at I saw the other day that makes you go WTF ….. lucky we did all those subsidies

comment image?

MarkW
Reply to  Leon de Boer
October 14, 2025 6:24 am

I don’t see a legend for your chart. Could you please explain what the arrows represent.
Cost, volume, spending?

Reply to  Nick Stokes
October 13, 2025 11:07 pm

There is a slight step around the 2016 El Nino.

Apart from that, there is no warming at all in either USCRN or UAH USA 48, even with the 2023 El Nino included.

ClimDiv is “adjusted” to match USCRN at a regional level…
.. it is an irrelevant clone, dependant purely on their “adjustment” algorithm..

USCRNUAH.USA48
Reply to  Nick Stokes
October 14, 2025 9:40 am

In fact the USCRN average does have a substantial warming trend, faster than ClimDiv, and faster than global.

Look at this graph from NOAA’s Climate At A Glance that has monthly average Tmax from 1900 to 2023.

comment image

Notice that there is no hockey stick except winter temps since 1980. Also, monthly Tmax never reaches 20s to 30s.

Each graph has auto correlation and seasonality. You cannot make accurate forecasts when these are included. It is likely that standard deviations are not constant which generates spurious trends.

Reply to  Jim Gorman
October 15, 2025 4:28 am

Assuming the lower temperatures are reached during the colder six months of the year, the increase shown since 1980 implies *more* heat loss (the area under the temperature curve) during those months than earlier in the 20th century. Assuming anything else leads to the conclusion that the atmosphere *can* trap heat – which is belied by the Tmax temperatures showing little to no growth!

Explnation?

How do the climate models account for this?

Reply to  Tim Gorman
October 15, 2025 7:53 am

What is causing Tmax in winter to increase but not Tmax in summer?

Reply to  Jim Gorman
October 16, 2025 5:51 am

Maximum Tmax is bounded by radiative heat loss. At some point the heat gets radiated away faster than it is input. Tmax when it is cold never reaches that boundary condition but it does in warm weather (i.e. summer vs winter heat input). Which leads to the conclusion that the difference in cold weather Tmax over time is from seeing more heat input into the system over time. CO2 is not a heat source (it’s a reflector, not a source) so it can’t be generating more heat input to the system.

Reply to  Tim Gorman
October 16, 2025 7:37 am

Maybe. I think it the change from LIG to ASOS along with screen change. ASOS implementation started ~1980 in the U.S.

Bruce Cobb
October 13, 2025 10:29 pm

Zeke Horsefeathers; Truth in advertising.

TBeholder
October 14, 2025 2:24 am

Once again, we have a good benchmark: Medieval Climate Optimum/Medieval Warm Period. Is there, for example, an obvious risk of either Black Sea or Caspian basins (at all, never mind the Northern halves) being infested by wild crocodiles any time soon? Obviously, no. Then all that’s left is shadow puppetry and stories about ice free Arctic by the end of 5-year plan! year 2000.

October 14, 2025 3:40 am

I can’t find anywhere that shows how hardiness zones have changed, either in the US or around the globe.

Corn, rice, wheat, etc all seem to be growing where they have always been grown as food and cash crops.

One would think that Catastrophic AGW would have had some kind of significant change in hardiness zones over the past 100 years. It seems that most of the grain harvest changes over the past 100 years has been economic driven, e.g. sorghum acreage in Kansas has been reduced significantly over the past 100 years because of the change to more profitable corn and soybeans.

Climate is not temperature, temperature is not climate. CAGW is not holistic enough to tell what is happening with global climate let alone local or regional climate.

October 14, 2025 11:24 am

For my little spot on the globe and my bigger spot on the globe. (Ohio)

“There’s a tie for the hottest day in Columbus history at 106 degrees on July 21, 1934, and July 14, 1936.”

“July 21, 1934, saw the highest temperature recorded in Ohio ever, with a temperature of 113 degrees recorded near Gallipolis in southern Ohio.”

From here: https://www.dispatch.com/story/news/local/2024/07/31/hottest-days-columbus-history-heatwave-ohio-drought-weather-global-warming/74456872007/

October 14, 2025 6:41 pm

Anthony:
Nice post !

[ Typo alert: the caption to Figure 2. should read “August 2025” ]