There is just so much wrong with the idea that you can average temperatures from different places. Yet it makes up the core of the Global Warming mindset, and argument. It doesn’t matter if you make temperatures into anomalies or not. They simply must be adjusted for things like enthalpy change to have meaning relative to heat flow, and they are not. It is NOT sufficient to simply assume the quantity of water, and the impact of enthalpy, does not change. That it can be assumed static. We know it isn’t. Total precipitation varies dramatically from year to year and decade to decade. Fog, snow, melt dates, dew and irrigation levels too. We know that assumption is wrong; yet rests at the heart of a “Global AVERAGE Temperature”.
A strange introduction to a post – yes? But I think it appropriate.
An internet friend E.M.Smith has a blog “Musings from the Chiefio”. He is a whizz with share trading ideas, life-in-general topics and a real specialist in the global temperature arena. (Well this GT arena is a bit of a circus). He offers an enormous amount of convincing data and reasoning which raises serious doubt as to the accuracies of the official published temperature figures used to “prove” the planet is warming, or at least the extent there-of..
Today he posts “Give Us This Day Our Daily Enthalpy”. (He is also a bit of a wit!)
I only needed to publish his conclusion to make the point meaningful to this blog.
However, the whole article is informative and instructive. His AGW/Temperature archives are extensive and educational.
How many years of global cooling are needed to disprove AGW? (ktwop.wordpress.com)
APS: AGW is controvertible (junksciencesidebar.com)