
Animation shows the temperature change by country from year 1880 to 2019 - Anchor
https://twitter.com/anttilip/status/1217529718938820610
======
hans1729
Very cool.

Also, see this:
[https://i.redd.it/h6annrws3qa41.png](https://i.redd.it/h6annrws3qa41.png)

~~~
aruggirello
Er, you meant, very warm?

~~~
hans1729
...duh.

------
ratboy666
Very nice animation! Data is suspect, though -- US 1937 should be bright red,
not pale yellow. 1937 had record heat wave in US.

~~~
phaemon
...which followed one of the coldest winters on record, which brings the
average down.

------
winrid
The visualization makes it look a little terrifying. Maybe that's an
understatement...

~~~
taneq
You can make anything look terrifying with an appropriate choice of palette.

(That's not to say the data aren't also terrifying, of course.)

------
badrabbit
Is it practical to have giant nuclear powered facilities that either pump
cooled air or artificially cool surface ocean water? Or just use the
electricity to break down water for O2 production and use the hydrogen to
power other things?

~~~
has2k1
> or artificially cool surface ocean water

Good curiosity, but they would have to put out atleast an equal amount of heat
into the atmosphere! (2nd law of thermodynamics).

~~~
hinkley
People are still trying to work out if we can make black bodies that are
biased to radiate more heat in frequencies that the atmosphere is permeable
to.

We have some materials that are much more thermally conductive in one
direction than the other. Pair the two, and it might just be possible to shed
some heat into space at night.

Entropy always wins. It’s the heat trapped in the atmosphere that’s killing
us. The universe is a mighty big heat sink though.

~~~
ElKrist
Interesting. Do you have resources/keywords I can use to know more about such
research?

~~~
hinkley
Search for radiating heat into space. There were some reports about 8-10 years
back. Occasionally you will see people working on materials that have narrow
emissions spectra, but I think they may have other things in mind, like
combining them with photovoltaics to make solid state heat engines. Which has
the potential to be much more efficient than thermocouples. Thermocouples are
so far from their theoretical limits that boosting the conversion rate by
single digit percentage points is more than doubling efficiency, which is how
we ended up with a new thromocouple material on the front page of HN a month
ago.

------
busymom0
In 28 August 1981, the mean surface temperature is 288K = 15 degree C:

[http://climate-dynamics.org/wp-
content/uploads/2016/06/hanse...](http://climate-dynamics.org/wp-
content/uploads/2016/06/hansen81a.pdf)

\----------

In 1988, it was claimed that the global avg temperature was 59 deg F = 15
degree C

Multiple sources:

[https://www.nytimes.com/1988/03/29/science/temperature-
for-w...](https://www.nytimes.com/1988/03/29/science/temperature-for-world-
rises-sharply-in-the-1980-s.html)

[https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1915&dat=19880705&id=...](https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1915&dat=19880705&id=kKMtAAAAIBAJ&sjid=9HEFAAAAIBAJ&pg=4970,774657&hl=en)

\----------

IPCC's First Assessment Report in 1990, table on page xxxvii of the report
listed the "Observed Surface Temperature" of Earth as 15 degrees Celsius:

[https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/03/ipcc_far_wg_...](https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/03/ipcc_far_wg_I_introduction-1.pdf)

\----------

In Jan 12 1992, it's 15 degree C:

[https://news.google.com/newspapers?id=S2xGAAAAIBAJ&sjid=7ugM...](https://news.google.com/newspapers?id=S2xGAAAAIBAJ&sjid=7ugMAAAAIBAJ&pg=4134,2440761&dq=helene+wilson+59+fahrenheit+hansen&hl=en)

\----------

############## SOMETHING CHANGED IN 1997:

"Global Temperature Down Slightly":

[https://books.google.ca/books?id=VyFpAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA62&lpg=PA...](https://books.google.ca/books?id=VyFpAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA62&lpg=PA62&dq=%22Global+Temperature+Down+Slightly%22&source=bl&ots=mLv2gwmG4l&sig=ACfU3U0qk-
nM4FnLgI7jNAGbl9c0xQyiCg&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjclpLCsbTlAhUJVN8KHV1sCsUQ6AEwBXoECAkQAQ#v=onepage&q=%22Global%20Temperature%20Down%20Slightly%22&f=false)

\----------

December 14, 2002: They magically started using 14C as the long term average
instead of 15C without any explanation:

[https://www.smh.com.au/world/global-warming-blamed-for-
heat-...](https://www.smh.com.au/world/global-warming-blamed-for-
heat-20021214-gdfyre.html)

> This year the Earth's average temperature was 14.64C, compared with the
> long-term average of 14C, said James Hansen, of NASA's Goddard Institute for
> Space Studies, who analyses the data collected from thousands of weather
> stations around the world. The meteorological year runs from December to
> November. During that period, 2001 temperatures were 14.51C. The record
> remains with 1998, when global temperature rose to 14.67C - the highest
> since records were first compiled in the late 1800s. The warm temperatures
> of 2001 and 2002 are especially significant when they are considered in the
> light of El Nino weather patterns that alter global climate, Mr Hansen said.
> "The fact that 2002 is almost as warm as the unusual warmth of 1998 is
> confirmation that the underlying global warming trend is continuing," Mr
> Hansen said.

\----------

August 25, 2011:

> But Hansen and colleagues have estimated that Earth's actual average surface
> air temperature between 1951 and 1980 was approximately 287 K (14 degrees
> Celsius) (Hansen et al. 2010). The difference in temperature is attributed
> to greenhouse gases that trap thermal radiation, warming Earth as depicted
> in figure 2.1.

[https://www.gao.gov/assets/330/322216.html](https://www.gao.gov/assets/330/322216.html)

##########

Sometime between 1997 and 1998, they magically started claiming the avg to be
14 degree C instead of 15.

18 January 1998's "Vital Signs 1998: The Environmental Trends that are Shaping
Our Future" magazine made this magical change with a small footnote:

[https://books.google.ca/books?id=EfZRAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA174&lpg=P...](https://books.google.ca/books?id=EfZRAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA174&lpg=PA174&dq=In+earlier+versions+of+Vital+Signs,+Worldwatch+added+the+temperature+change+reported+by+the+Goddard+Institute+to+an+estimated+global+temperature+of+15+degrees+Celsius,+but+the+institute+has+since+informed+Worldwatch+that+a+better+base+number+would+be+14+degrees+Celsius.+James+Hansen,+Goddard+Institute+for+Space+Studies,+New+York,+email+to+author,+18+January+1998.%E2%80%9D&source=bl&ots=2ZyDz-
pRJg&sig=ACfU3U0Dwas7rcxUuEt3Ef03BGVN6FN8Rw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwj-4KHKoYrnAhVMCc0KHRkFBtsQ6AEwAHoECAoQAQ#v=onepage&q=In%20earlier%20versions%20of%20Vital%20Signs%2C%20Worldwatch%20added%20the%20temperature%20change%20reported%20by%20the%20Goddard%20Institute%20to%20an%20estimated%20global%20temperature%20of%2015%20degrees%20Celsius%2C%20but%20the%20institute%20has%20since%20informed%20Worldwatch%20that%20a%20better%20base%20number%20would%20be%2014%20degrees%20Celsius.%20James%20Hansen%2C%20Goddard%20Institute%20for%20Space%20Studies%2C%20New%20York%2C%20email%20to%20author%2C%2018%20January%201998.%E2%80%9D&f=false)

> In earlier versions of Vital Signs, Worldwatch added the temperature change
> reported by the Goddard Institute to an estimated global temperature of 15
> degrees Celsius, but the institute has since informed Worldwatch that a
> better base number would be 14 degrees Celsius. James Hansen, Goddard
> Institute for Space Studies, New York, email to author, 18 January 1998.”

Can someone please explain this unexplained change on how avg surface
temperature between 1951 and 1980 went from claims that it was 15C to now
being claimed it was 14C?

Edited: changed magic to unexplained change

~~~
rrmm
The research is done in terms of a temperature anomaly from a reference that
is chosen. The absolute mean temperature is an estimate based on the specific
technique chosen using the data as input. The delta values are more important
because they are calculated with a consistent method for a given model,
whereas from model to model the value may change.

from
[https://www.pnas.org/content/94/16/8314](https://www.pnas.org/content/94/16/8314)

""" The two main marine data sets are those of Jones et al. (ref. 9; see also
ref. 11) and the U.K. Meteorological Office (UKMO) (12, 13). These two data
sets have overlapping primary source material but differ in the way that they
are corrected for instrumentation changes. """

[https://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/docs/2007/2007_Hansen_ha09210n.pd...](https://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/docs/2007/2007_Hansen_ha09210n.pdf)
(mentions the particular model in section 1, along with a discussion of the
data sources).

You basically want to be looking at the temperature anomaly not the absolute
temperature.

~~~
busymom0
That doesn't answer the sudden change from 15C claims to 14C for the 1950-1980
period.

For example, in the following data, for 2016, they say the average global
temperature as 14.8C:

[https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/201613](https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/201613)

If the average global temp used to be claimed to be 15C but since 2000, they
claim it was 14C, then somebody is making false claims about the avg temp.

~~~
rrmm
The larger point I'm trying to make is that average global temperature is
something that is calculated as a result of the specific method the people
doing the study use. It's not a simple average of a list of numbers. It tries
to account for missing and spotty data, instrument biases, location biases,
etc.

So if they find a better way to do it the calculated value will change.

~~~
busymom0
That's a fair point and others have mentioned that before. However, all the
sources I have used in my original comment are from the same person - Dr James
Hansen who served as the director of NASA Goddard institute for 35 years. He
used the 15C claim for many years until he suddenly decided to switch to 14C.
In any scientific claim, especially when such small changes could impact major
things, a scientist shouldn't simply be allowed to change their data claims
without any explanation, especially when it suddenly doesn't fit their claim.

Also in this source:

[https://books.google.ca/books?id=VyFpAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA62&lpg=PA...](https://books.google.ca/books?id=VyFpAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA62&lpg=PA62&dq=%22Global+Temperature+Down+Slightly%22&source=bl&ots=mLv2gwmG4l&sig=ACfU3U0qk-
nM4FnLgI7jNAGbl9c0xQyiCg&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjclpLCsbTlAhUJVN8KHV1sCsUQ6AEwBXoECAkQAQ#v=onepage&q=%22Global%20Temperature%20Down%20Slightly%22&f=false)

in 1997, the scientific community knew that the temperature was actually going
down and not up:

> "Global Temperature Down Slightly"

~~~
pjc50
Fortunately there are an awful lot of other proxy variables which can be used
to show a long-term change in climate. One example of thousands is the
Japanese cherry blossom season: [https://www.economist.com/graphic-
detail/2017/04/07/japans-c...](https://www.economist.com/graphic-
detail/2017/04/07/japans-cherry-blossoms-are-emerging-increasingly-early)

And yes, there have been reversals in some years. But overall you can see the
industrialisation "hockey stick" quite clearly in that calendar data.

~~~
busymom0
That graph seems to have opposing data for the global Medieval Warm Period and
Little Ice Age. Medieval Warm Period (MWP) from about 900 A.D. to 1300 A.D.
and the Little Ice Age (LIA) from about 1300 A.D. to 1915 A.D.

~~~
pjc50
The MWP was a local phenomenon; per wikipedia

> The Medieval Warm Period (MWP) also known as the Medieval Climate Optimum,
> or Medieval Climatic Anomaly was a time of warm climate in the North
> Atlantic region lasting from c. 950 to c. 1250.[1] It was likely[2] related
> to warming elsewhere[3][4][5] while some other regions were colder, such as
> the tropical Pacific

.. which implies that Japan may have been slightly colder at the time.

(Neatly illustrates that computing _global_ average temperature from a set of
local measurements is not as simple as it sounds, because there may also be
local climate phenomena)

~~~
busymom0
Wikipedia contradicts IPCC's reports from the past. Even the thing about Japan
contradicts the IPCC report.

Until 2000, it was claimed that the MWP was global.

IPCC's 1990s report Page 8 of 44 (PDF page number, not the one on the text)

[https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/03/ipcc_far_wg_...](https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/03/ipcc_far_wg_I_chapter_07-1.pdf)

Look at the bottom graph and the text.

> Schematic diagrams of global temperature variations since the Pleistocene on
> three time scales > There is giowing evidence that worldwide temperatures
> were higher than at present during the mid-Holocene (especially 5 000-6 000
> BP), at least in summer, though carbon dioxide levels appear to have been
> quite similar to those of the pre-mdustnal era at this time (Section 1 i
> Thus parts <si western Euiope China, Japan, the eastern USA were a few
> degrees warmer in July during the midHolocene than in recent decades
> (Yoshino and Urushibara, 1978, Webb ct al 1987, Huntley and Prentice, 1988,
> Zhang and Wang 1990) Parts of Australasia and Chile were also waimei The
> late tenth to early thirteenth centuries (about AD 950-1250) appear to have
> been exceptionally warm in western Europe, Iceland and Greenland (Alexandre
> 1987, Lamb, 1988) This period is known as the Medieval Climatic Optimum
> China was, however, cold at this time (mainly in winter) but South Japan was
> warm (Yoshino, 1978) This period of widespread warmth is notable in that
> there is no evidence that it was accompanied by an increase of greenhouse
> gases

Sorry about the spelling issues in the copied text, the PDF's OCR isn't the
best.

\-------

Also here in another report, graph b) on page 2/16 shows the same MWP and
little ice age as "Global temperature trend for millennium"

[https://web.archive.org/web/20070404001809/http://www.epa.go...](https://web.archive.org/web/20070404001809/http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/effects/downloads/Challenge_chapter2.pdf)

The graph c) also shows that in the past 25,000 years, it first used to be
much colder, then got much hotter and then cooler and then warmer. It is
pretty much impossible for it to be a local phenomenon if the variation was
that much in that many areas.

\-------

[https://www.epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/hearings?Id=BFE4...](https://www.epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/hearings?Id=BFE4D91D-802A-23AD-4306-B4121BF7ECED&Statement_id=361256C4-11DC-4E5D-8D1D-9FEDF082D081)

Dr. David Deming, geologist and geophysicist, College of Earth and Energy,
University of Oklahoma, senate testimony from December 6, 2006:

> I had another interesting experience around the time my paper in Science was
> published. I received an astonishing email from a major researcher in the
> area of climate change. He said, "We have to get rid of the Medieval Warm
> Period." The Medieval Warm Period (MWP) was a time of unusually warm weather
> that began around 1000 AD and persisted until a cold period known as the
> "Little Ice Age" took hold in the 14th century. Warmer climate brought a
> remarkable flowering of prosperity, knowledge, and art to Europe during the
> High Middle Ages. The existence of the MWP had been recognized in the
> scientific literature for decades. But now it was a major embarrassment to
> those maintaining that the 20th century warming was truly anomalous. It had
> to be "gotten rid of."

\--------

Edit:

I read the wikipedia citation:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval_Warm_Period#cite_note...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval_Warm_Period#cite_note-2)

The citation seems to contradict what's said in the wikipedia.

[http://ruby.fgcu.edu/courses/twimberley/EnviroPhilo/Glacial....](http://ruby.fgcu.edu/courses/twimberley/EnviroPhilo/Glacial.pdf)

> The first phase of the LIA began around the thirteenth century in all the
> regions for which there is evidence. The glacial phase preceding the MWP
> seems to have begun between the seventh and ninth centuries A.D. but is
> generally less securely dated and not dated at all in Canada. There are at
> least some indications of fluctuations in ice position in the course of the
> MWP in Norway, Alaska, and perhaps in extratropical South America and New
> Zealand, indicating that recession may have been interrupted by advances,
> perhaps of limited extent, as in the European Alps. The available evidence
> suggests that the MWP was global in extent and not uniform climatically. The
> glacial data needs to be considered in relation to that from other sources,
> but is of value in obtaining a more complete understanding of both the
> environment in the later medieval period and the possible causes of climatic
> change on the century time scale.

> The available evidence suggests that the MWP was global in extent and not
> uniform climatically.

~~~
busymom0
Reading the wikipedia, every single citation they used contradicts what the
wikipedia says:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval_Warm_Period#cite_note...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval_Warm_Period#cite_note-
Grove94-3)

[http://ruby.fgcu.edu/courses/twimberley/EnviroPhilo/Glacial....](http://ruby.fgcu.edu/courses/twimberley/EnviroPhilo/Glacial.pdf)

> The first phase of the LIA began around the thirteenth century in all the
> regions for which there is evidence. The glacial phase preceding the MWP
> seems to have begun between the seventh and ninth centuries A.D. but is
> generally less securely dated and not dated at all in Canada. There are at
> least some indications of fluctuations in ice position in the course of the
> MWP in Norway, Alaska, and perhaps in extratropical South America and New
> Zealand, indicating that recession may have been interrupted by advances,
> perhaps of limited extent, as in the European Alps. The available evidence
> suggests that the MWP was global in extent and not uniform climatically. The
> glacial data needs to be considered in relation to that from other sources,
> but is of value in obtaining a more complete understanding of both the
> environment in the later medieval period and the possible causes of climatic
> change on the century time scale.

> The available evidence suggests that the MWP was global in extent and not
> uniform climatically.

[https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF01092411](https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF01092411)

> Dating of organic material closely associated with moraines in many montane
> regions has reached the point where it is possible to survey available
> information concerning the timing of the medieval warm period. The results
> suggest that it was a global event occurring between about 900 and 1250
> A.D., possibly interrupted by a minor readvance of ice between about 1050
> and 1150 A.D.

The other citation they used is:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval_Warm_Period#cite_note...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval_Warm_Period#cite_note-2)

[https://science.sciencemag.org/content/342/6158/617](https://science.sciencemag.org/content/342/6158/617)

> The findings support the view that the Holocene Thermal Maximum, the
> Medieval Warm Period, and the Little Ice Age were global events, and they
> provide a long-term perspective for evaluating the role of ocean heat
> content in various warming scenarios for the future.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval_Warm_Period#cite_ref-...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval_Warm_Period#cite_ref-4)

[https://books.google.ca/books?id=z-BWE4iCrfYC&pg=PA134&redir...](https://books.google.ca/books?id=z-BWE4iCrfYC&pg=PA134&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false)

> "They conclude that the Medieval Warm Period was a global event"

------
anoplus
Is it fair to say the temperatures in tropical areas change slowly?

~~~
gmuslera
It is alarming to say that temperatures around polar areas increased a lot.
That is where a couple of positive reinforcement loops are located (less
reflective surface because ice melted, and the release of frozen greenhouse
gases).

In fact, animations that show the average global temperature increase, or
local, but by (alphabetically sorted) countries like this one don't let us see
that trend.

Another mostly hidden temperature trend (that may have regional component too)
is the sea temperature, as water is capturing most of the heat. And in part
that is what is fueling extreme weather events.

------
0x445442
So why are we to draw any conclusions one way or the other based off a data
set that's statistically insignificant compared to the age of the earth?

~~~
basch
Does the dataset before the dawn of agriculture and permanent settlements
matter that much?

The conversation largely revolves around flooding and food production.

The earth will be fine, itll bounce back. Billions of people however, could be
displaced from their homes as their land floods, or starve if food production
and distribution is destroyed. The Earth had maybe 1 billion people 200 years
ago. Now its at 7.5. Unprecedented doesnt begin to describe the migration that
would occur if the Earth lost its coastal cities.

What I dont like about this animation is that giant land masses like the USA
and Russia get the same treatment as tiny countries. The average temperature
of the USA is a lot less useful than if it were broken down by region.

