4 ms·
Since the graph plots "monthly mean global surface temperature" how do we know that it is not skewed by large temperature increase in a few urban cities, versus
by msravi 11y ago
Since the graph plots "monthly mean global surface temperature" how do we know that it is not skewed by large temperature increase in a few urban cities, versus a widespread increase across the globe? The reason I ask, is that higher urban temperatures can be explained by local effects rather than global effects, and we need to be sure where the problem is to tackle it effectively.
Is there per-city/region data that goes back a significant number of years to do this sort of study?
- anon1385 11y agoYes that data exists. No, urban effects don't account for much of the temperature rise. http://www.skepticalscience.com/urban-heat-island-effect.htm http://www.skepticalscience.com/urban-heat-island-effect.htm In the case of last month in particular a lot of the biggest anomalies were in the arctic where there are no urban cities (see the map in the Guardian article).
- mSparks 11y agoI wonder what that graph looks like if you scroll it back 10000 years... You know during the ice age. Wish these climate nutters would stop trying to send us back there. It wasn't very nice.
- th0waway 11y agoI'd have to disagree with the UHI paper because of personal experiences in my own life - I live outside a major metropolitan city. Over the past twenty years, I have noticed that the heat-island has expanded as the city has expanded. There is a noticeable difference. Any measurements made within the heat-island are affected.
- Arnt 11y agoSure, lighthouse logbooks for example.
- hackuser 11y agoIt seems very unlikely that all those local anomolies coincidentally aligned and were so extreme that they resulted in this extreme, first-in-history, global event.