{"id":296653,"date":"2024-01-18T11:46:07","date_gmt":"2024-01-18T10:46:07","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=296653"},"modified":"2024-01-18T11:46:11","modified_gmt":"2024-01-18T10:46:11","slug":"2023-earths-hottest-year-on-record-claims-fail","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=296653","title":{"rendered":"2023 \u201cEarth\u2019s Hottest Year on Record\u201d Claims Fail"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

From Watts Up With That?<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Guest easy by Larry Hamlin<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The year-end 2023 global average temperature anomaly measurement data outcomes have climate alarmist media falsely claiming these results \u00a0established that\u00a0\u201c2023 Was the Hottest Year on Record\u201d since records began in the mid-1800s<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

These \u201chottest year on record\u201d claims are based on misrepresenting the year 2023 obscure \u201cglobal average temperature anomaly\u201d outcome that is not applicable to any specific location or region on earth.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

NOAA\u2019s\u00a0Global Times Series temperature anomaly data<\/a>\u00a0are available for 16 global regional areas listed below.<\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

Table 1 information provided below shows all 16 NOAA Global Time Series regional average temperature anomaly data for year 2023<\/strong> and identifies whether the 2023 measurement was a record high anomaly value. <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

For global regions that had a record high year 2023 average temperature anomaly<\/strong>\u00a0their\u00a0prior highest region temperature anomaly value and year<\/strong>\u00a0are shown. For global regions that\u00a0did not have a record high average temperature anomaly in 2023<\/strong>\u00a0(with these global regions noted in all capital letters in Table 1) their\u00a0highest regional average temperature anomaly<\/strong>\u00a0value and year are provided.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Table 1 shows 7 of NOAA\u2019s 16 global regions did not have a year 2023 highest average temperature anomaly outcome including Asia, Europe, U.S. (addressed later), Oceania, East N. Pacific Region, Hawaiian Region, Arctic, and the Antarctic<\/strong>. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

NOAA\u2019s year 2023 global regional average temperature anomaly result across its 16 selected regions demonstrates the significant average temperature anomaly variation differences around the globe that are driven by the disparate climate behaviors associated with each of these regions. These disparate global regional average temperature anomaly varying outcomes are concisely displayed in Table 1<\/strong>.   <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The global wide average temperature anomaly outcome conceals the significantly varying global climate regional differences with the alarmist claim of \u201chighest ever measured global average temperature anomaly\u201d masking the more complex and complete picture of the global average temperature anomaly outcomes that are displayed by NOAA\u2019s data in Table 1.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Most significantly, NOAA\u2019s global regional temperature anomaly data establishes that the assertion of year 2023 being the \u201chighest ever measured average temperature anomaly\u201d claim did not occur across the globally dominant regional land areas that include Asia, Europe, U.S. (addressed later), Oceania, Hawaiian Region, Arctic and the Antarctic<\/strong>.

The Table 1 average temperature anomaly data establishes that the highest global regional anomaly values vary across many different years including 2007 (Antarctica Region), 2015 (East N. Pacific & Hawaiian Region), 2016 (Arctic Region), 2019 (Oceania Region) and 2020 (Asia & Europe Regions).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Note the large range of average temperature anomaly values<\/strong> (a factor of more than 17 difference) that exists between the Arctic (2.55 degrees C) versus the Antarctic region (0.15 degrees C) for the year 2023 average anomaly measurements between these global polar regions. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

As shown in Table 1, NOAA\u2019s year\u00a02023 Global average temperature anomaly of 1.18 degrees C<\/a>\u00a0(corresponding to an absolute average temperature 15.08 degrees C relative to the NOAA year 1901 to 2000 global average temperature measurement baseline period average value of 13.9 degrees C from which each years global average temperature anomaly is determined) is only 0.15 degrees C (0.27 degrees F) higher than the prior highest 2016 year average temperature anomaly value of 1.03 degrees C as shown below (corresponding to an absolute average temperature of 14.93 degrees C).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Yet this small global average temperature anomaly<\/strong> difference of 3\/20ths of a degree C from the prior highest year anomaly value of 2016 (which is an El Ni\u00f1o year just as is year 2023) is hyped by climate alarmist media as representing dangerous increased \u201crecord heat\u201d and the \u201cEarth\u2019s hottest year on record\u201d<\/strong> (instead of \u201chighest<\/strong> average<\/strong> temperature anomaly on record\u201d which represents an \u201caverage temperature \u201coutcome instead of a \u201cmaximum temperature\u201d outcome that is required to make a valid claim of \u201chottest year on record\u201d<\/strong>).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Alarmists further exaggerate global \u201caverage temperature anomaly\u201d outcomes by claiming they represent a \u201cglobal climate emergency\u201d <\/strong>where \u201ctemperatures during 2023 likely exceed those of any period in the last 100,000 years\u201d with all this ridiculous climate alarmist propaganda based on an increased 2023 global \u201caverage temperature anomaly\u201d difference of 0.15 degrees C from year 2016 levels.  <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The year 2023 flawed climate\u00a0alarmist claims of \u201chottest year on record\u201d are in the same vein as the flawed claims made by climate alarmists about the summer of 2023 being \u201cthe U.S. hottest summer ever\u201d that was addressed\u00a0here<\/a>\u00a0and shown below.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

The article notes the failure of climate\u00a0alarmist to evaluate maximum summer temperatures (Tmax) instead of average summer temperatures (Tavg) with these latter temperatures influenced more by increased average minimum temperatures (Tmin) increases (as shown below for U.S. June through August summer 2023 temperatures) driven by Urban Heat Island impacts from U.S. population growth since 1895 as addressed in the article.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

These huge growths in U.S. population are also reflected even more so in the world population growth over this period. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The huge increasing global population density growth outcomes that have occurred over NOAA\u2019s temperature anomaly measurement period from the mid-1800s to 2023 and the impact of this population density growth on global surface temperatures is unaddressed in NOAA\u2019s year 2023 report. <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

This important climate science area is addressed by climate scientists including Dr. Roy Spencer who has performed analysis evaluating increased urban population density growth impacts on surface air temperature warming defined as Urban Heat Island (UHI) impacts.     <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Dr. Spencer notes the following regarding the impacts of UHI on warming in U.S. population centers: <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cAs I previously <\/strong>announced<\/a>, our paper submitted<\/strong> for publication on the method showed that UHI warming in the U.S. since 1895 is 57% of the GHCN warming trend averaged over all suburban and urban stations<\/strong>.\u201d  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

This\u00a0<\/strong>analysis shows<\/a>\u00a0that<\/strong>\u00a0summer warming in U.S. cities is exaggerated by 100%<\/strong>\u00a0over the period from 1895 to 2023<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Long term global increasing population density UHI effects on surface air temperatures exist at all locations across the world resulting in warmer urban areas versus suburb locations as presented Dr. Roy Spencer\u2019s analysis here<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThe quantitative relationships between temperature and population are almost the same whether I use GHCN raw or adjusted (homogenized) data, with the homogenized data producing a somewhat stronger UHI signal. They are also roughly the same whether I used data from 1880-1920, or 1960-1980; for this global dataset, all years (1880 through 2023) are used together to derive the quantitative relationships.<\/strong>\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cHere are some examples of the UHI dataset for several regions, showing the estimated total UHI effect on air temperature in the years 1850 and 2023 (I have files every 10 years from 1800 to 1950, then yearly thereafter). By \u201ctotal UHI effect\u201d I mean how much warmer the locations are compared to wilderness (zero population density) conditions. I emphasize the warm season months, which is when the UHI effect is strongest<\/strong>.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

The UHI effect of population density growth is reflected in color coded world map global regions which display increasing UHI temperature impacts from 0.01 degrees C to 2.7 degrees C as noted in the legend. As years progress and population density increases occur around the world, regional color patterns change from yellows, to greens, to reds, to purples, etc. denoting ever increasing UHI temperature increases over time.   <\/p>\n\n\n\n

These increasing temperature UHI impact temperatures are clearly of significant relevance compared to NOAA\u2019s range of modest global average temperature anomaly measurement changes over time which are typically measured in tenths of a degree C varying over multiyear periods.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Furthermore, Dr. Spencer notes that the world\u2019s population is increasingly moving to urban centers with that reality bringing higher UHI temperature impacts that are erroneously hyped by climate alarmists and their media advocates as being driven by \u201cglobal warming\u201d when he concludes:    <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cOver 50% of the population now lives in urban areas, and that fraction is supposed to approach 70% by 2045. This summer we have seen how the media reports on temperature records being broken for various cities and they usually conflate urban warmth with global warming even through such record-breaking warmth would increasingly occur even with no global warming.<\/strong>\u201d    <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Asia\u2019s highest average temperature\u00a0anomaly was 2.21 degrees C that occurred in year 2020 as\u00a0shown below<\/a>\u00a0from NOAA\u2019s Global Time Series data with a\u00a0year 2023 average temperature anomaly value of 2.09 degrees C as shown below.<\/strong>\u00a0Asia has by far the largest land area and dominates global population growth across the world as addressed in Table 2.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Asia\u2019s year 2023\u00a0average temperate anomaly was 0.12 degrees C below<\/strong>\u00a0its prior highest year 2020 average temperature anomaly value despite the UHI increasing temperature impacts that are present in the Asia global region as shown in Dr. Spencer\u2019s UHI diagram below for India and China which portrays the UHI effect on increasing air temperatures between 1850 and 2023 (large areas with between 0.2 and 1.6 degrees C of UHI temperature increases) in this huge global region.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Europe\u2019s highest average temperature anomaly was 2.16 degrees C that occurred in year 2020 as\u00a0shown below<\/a>\u00a0from NOAA\u2019s Global Time Series data with\u00a0a year 2023 average temperature anomaly of 2.15 degrees C<\/strong>.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Europe\u2019s year 2023\u00a0average temperature anomaly was 0.01 degrees C below<\/strong>\u00a0its prior highest average temperature anomaly year in 2020 again despite the UHI temperature impacts that are present in the Europe global region as shown in Dr. Spencer\u2019s UHI diagram below (large areas with between 0.1 and 0.8 degrees C UHI temperature increases) between 1850 and 2023.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

North America\u2019s highest average temperature anomaly was 2.01 degrees C that occurred in year 2023 as\u00a0shown below<\/a>\u00a0from NOAA\u2019s Global Time Series data with the prior high average temperature anomaly in 2016 at 1.99 C.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

North America\u2019s year 2023\u00a0average temperature anomaly was 0.02 degrees C above<\/strong>\u00a0its prior highest average temperature anomaly year of 2016 again despite the UHI temperature impacts that are present in the United States global region that are shown in Dr. Spencer\u2019s UHI diagram below (large areas with between 0.1 and 0.8 degrees C UHI temperature increases) between 1850 and 2023.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Oceania\u2019s highest average temperature anomaly was 1.34 degrees C that occurred in year 2019 as\u00a0shown below<\/a>\u00a0from NOAA\u2019s Global Time Series data with a\u00a0with a year 2023 average temperature anomaly of 1.29 degrees C.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Oceania\u2019s year 2023\u00a0average temperature anomaly was 0.05 degrees C below<\/strong>\u00a0its prior highest average temperature anomaly year of 2019 again despite the UHI temperature impacts as shown in Dr. Spencer\u2019s UHI diagram below (developed areas with between 0.1 and 0.8 degrees C UHI temperature increases) between 1850 and 2023 for Australia.<\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

The Hawaiian Region highest average temperature anomaly was 1.16 degrees C that occurred in year 2015 as\u00a0shown below<\/a>\u00a0from NOAA\u2019s Global Time Series data with a\u00a0clear downward temperature anomaly trend since 2015 (ignored and concealed by alarmists)<\/strong>. The Hawaiian Region year 2023 average temperature anomaly was\u00a00.66 degrees C below its prior highest average temperature anomaly year of 2015<\/strong>.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

The Arctic Region highest average temperature anomaly was 3.00 degrees C that occurred in year 2016 as\u00a0shown below<\/a>\u00a0from NOAA\u2019s Global Time Series data with a\u00a0clear downward temperature anomaly trend since 2016 to 2.55 degrees C in 2023 (ignored and concealed by alarmists)<\/strong>. The Arctic\u2019s year 2023 average temperature anomaly was\u00a00.45 degrees C below its prior highest average temperature anomaly year of 2016<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

The Antarctic Region highest average temperature\u00a0anomaly was 0.65 degrees C that occurred in 2007 as\u00a0shown below<\/a>\u00a0from NOAA\u2019s Global Times Series data which\u00a0clearly shows a 16 yearlong downward temperature anomaly trend since year 2007 (ignored and concealed by alarmists)<\/strong>. The\u00a0Antarctic\u2019s year 2023 average temperature anomaly was\u00a00.50 degrees C below its prior highest average temperature anomaly year of 2007 at 0.15 degrees C.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Table 2 below provides data for NOAA\u2019s global climate regions that have the largest\u00a0land area<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0populations<\/a>\u00a0with this data\u00a0establishing that at least\u00a058%\u00a0of the earths land surface<\/strong>\u00a0(Asia, Europe, U.S., Oceania and Antarctic with a total land area of 33.69 million square miles out of the global total of 57.80 million square miles)\u00a0did not experience the hyped \u201chighest ever recorded\u201d average temperature anomaly outcome in 2023<\/strong>\u00a0and that the\u00a0population of these huge global regions (nearly 5.86 billion people)\u00a0represents over 73% of the 8 billion people now living on earth<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

NOAA\u00a0average temperature anomaly data for the Contiguous U.S.<\/a>\u00a0(shown below) clearly indicates there is\u00a0no\u00a0increasing average temperature anomaly trend in the U.S. with the January to December 2023 average temperature anomaly outcome exceeded by numerous years including year 2016. \u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Furthermore,\u00a0NOAA\u2019s Contiguous U.S. Maximum temperature data<\/a>\u00a0for year-end 2023 (provided below)\u00a0shows no \u201chighest ever recorded\u201d maximum temperature for the U.S<\/strong>. (8th highest in rank)\u00a0in 2023<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Additionally, temperature data for NOAA\u2019s 9 U.S. Climate Regions shown below establishes\u00a0that none of these 9 climate regions experienced a \u201chighest ever recorded maximum temperature\u201d during 2023<\/strong>\u00a0(NOAA data link same as above with \u201cRegion\u201d selection option).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Furthermore, NOAA\u2019s year 2023 temperature data for U.S. states (with California shown\u00a0below which experienced a 2023 maximum temperature that was only the 71st highest out of 129 highest maximum temperatures)\u00a0establishes that 50 of the 52 states did not experience record high maximum temperatures in year 2023<\/strong>\u00a0(only Maryland & Louisiana are exceptions).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

NOAA\u2019s data for the average temperature anomaly temperatures for the Contiguous U.S shows no increasing average temperature anomaly trend and no maximum absolute temperature in year 2023 with the highest ever maximum Contiguous U.S. temperature occurring in year 2012 more than a decade ago with these outcomes concealed and ignored by climate alarmist media.<\/strong>       <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The NOAA characterization that the year 2023 global average temperature anomaly was the \u201chighest ever recorded global average temperature anomaly\u201d <\/strong>misrepresents the global reality of widely varying average temperature anomaly results across the many disparate global climate regions (as detailed in Tables 1 & 2 above using NOAA\u2019s extensive and readily available Global Time Series region average temperature anomaly data) which establish that 7 of NOAA\u2019s Global climate regions did not experience a \u201chighest ever average temperature anomaly\u201d outcome in year 2023.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

This data refutes the climate alarmist media\u2019s grossly distorted and erroneous claims that the world experienced \u201cEarth\u2019s hottest year on record\u201d<\/strong> (with the alarmist media\u2019s continued flawed and erroneous deception where \u201chighest ever<\/strong> average<\/strong> temperature anomaly<\/strong>\u201d is cast as being the \u201chottest<\/strong> year on record<\/strong>\u201d without evaluating any maximum<\/strong> temperature anomaly or absolute temperature data that is required to make a \u201chottest year on record\u201d claim<\/strong>) with NOAA\u2019s climate data showing over 58% of all global land regions with populations representing over 73% of the earth\u2019s total 8 billion people did not experience the erroneously claimed \u201chighest ever recorded average temperature anomaly\u201d or \u201chottest year on record\u201d in year 2023.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Additionally, these global climate data assessments fail completely to address known impacts of increasing population density growth over time that cause UHI increasing global regional temperature impacts that are not related to exaggerated CO2 claimed \u201cglobal warming\u201d with these CO2 claims built upon decades of flawed computer model hype.   <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Alarmists further exaggerate global \u201caverage temperature anomaly\u201d outcomes by claiming they represent a \u201cglobal climate emergency\u201d where \u201ctemperatures during 2023 likely exceed those of any period in the last 100,000 years\u201d with all this ridiculous climate alarmist propaganda based on an increased 2023 global \u201caverage temperature anomaly\u201d difference of 0.15 degrees C from year 2016 levels. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":121246920,"featured_media":296697,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_coblocks_attr":"","_coblocks_dimensions":"","_coblocks_responsive_height":"","_coblocks_accordion_ie_support":"","_crdt_document":"","advanced_seo_description":"","jetpack_seo_html_title":"","jetpack_seo_noindex":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"Alarmists further exaggerate global \u201caverage temperature anomaly\u201d outcomes by claiming they represent a \u201cglobal climate emergency\u201d where \u201ctemperatures during 2023 likely exceed those of any period in the last 100,000 years\u201d with all this ridiculous climat","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":false,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2},"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[1],"tags":[691818233,691818056,691818076,691818087,691820451,691826355],"class_list":{"0":"post-296653","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","6":"hentry","7":"category-uncategorized","8":"tag-691818233","9":"tag-climate-change","10":"tag-co2","11":"tag-global-warming","12":"tag-hottest-year","13":"tag-noaas-data","15":"fallback-thumbnail"},"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/01\/OIG.xIbeO_.jpeg?fit=1024%2C1024&ssl=1","jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/paxLW1-1faJ","jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":321771,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=321771","url_meta":{"origin":296653,"position":0},"title":"L A Times Cherry Picks & Misrepresents NOAA Climate Data to Exaggerate March 2024 U.S. and Global Temperature Outcomes","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"04\/24\/2024","format":false,"excerpt":"The L A Times\u00a0article\u00a0and headline shown below exaggerate the March 2024 U.S. and global temperature outcomes by cherry picking and misrepresenting data that mischaracterizes what the data actually shows.","rel":"","context":"In \"climate propaganda\"","block_context":{"text":"climate propaganda","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=climate-propaganda"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/1984-orwell-big-brother-xl-hd.jpg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/1984-orwell-big-brother-xl-hd.jpg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/1984-orwell-big-brother-xl-hd.jpg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/1984-orwell-big-brother-xl-hd.jpg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/1984-orwell-big-brother-xl-hd.jpg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":332759,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=332759","url_meta":{"origin":296653,"position":1},"title":"Climate Alarmist Hype that May 2024 is the \u201cHottest\u201d Global Average Temperature Anomaly is Meaningless in the U.S. and at other global locations around the World","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"06\/13\/2024","format":false,"excerpt":"The usual climate alarmists\u2019 suspects are at it again trying to use the scientifically flawed claim that a single May 2024 global average temperature anomaly data point can characterize that the \u201cworld\u201d must be the \u201chottest\u201d it\u2019s ever been as hyped below. Alarmists also grossly misrepresent that the earth has\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"climate alarmist\"","block_context":{"text":"climate alarmist","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=climate-alarmist"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/01355266.jpg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/01355266.jpg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/01355266.jpg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/01355266.jpg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/01355266.jpg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":283619,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=283619","url_meta":{"origin":296653,"position":2},"title":"Major Climate Alarmist Fail: \u201cThe Hottest Summer Ever\u201d that Never Was","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"10\/17\/2023","format":false,"excerpt":"The \u201chottest summer ever\u201d is a failure by climate alarmist and the climate boogeyman media. Use your mind and don\u00b4t follow the climate propaganda. From Watts Up With That? Guest essay by Larry Hamlin A recent WUWT\u00a0article\u00a0addresses the failure by climate alarmist media and scientists to utilize NOAA\u2019s July through\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"climate alarmist\"","block_context":{"text":"climate alarmist","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=climate-alarmist"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/image-433.png?fit=1024%2C1024&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/image-433.png?fit=1024%2C1024&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/image-433.png?fit=1024%2C1024&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/image-433.png?fit=1024%2C1024&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":291766,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=291766","url_meta":{"origin":296653,"position":3},"title":"NASA GISS Data Shows 2023 EL Nino Driving Global Temperature Anomaly Increases; NOAA Data Shows U.S. Nov. 2023 Temperature Anomaly Declining","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"12\/18\/2023","format":false,"excerpt":"The NASA GISS global average temperature anomaly for November 2023 was released (provided below) which shows an El Ni\u00f1o driven value of 1.44 degrees C (2.592 degrees F) with the November outcome hyped in an\u00a0L A Times article\u00a0as being \u201ca new monthly record for heat\u201d and the \u201chottest November\u201d.","rel":"","context":"In \"Climate Alarmists\"","block_context":{"text":"Climate Alarmists","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=climate-alarmists"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/12\/OIG-2023-07-29T140641.234.jpeg?fit=1024%2C1024&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/12\/OIG-2023-07-29T140641.234.jpeg?fit=1024%2C1024&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/12\/OIG-2023-07-29T140641.234.jpeg?fit=1024%2C1024&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/12\/OIG-2023-07-29T140641.234.jpeg?fit=1024%2C1024&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":287853,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=287853","url_meta":{"origin":296653,"position":4},"title":"L A Times Fails to Comprehend the Difference between \u201cAverage Temperature Anomaly\u201d & \u201cAbsolute Maximum Temperature\u201d Climate Data","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"11\/13\/2023","format":false,"excerpt":"From Watts Up With That? Essay by Larry Hamlin In the most recent L A Times\u00a0article\u00a0hyping \u201cthe hottest October on record\u201d the Times can\u2019t seem to get it right in understanding the critical differences between\u00a0\u201caverage temperature anomaly\u201d\u00a0and\u00a0\u201cmaximum absolute temperature\u201d\u00a0data. The Times article references the global\u00a0average temperature anomaly\u00a0graphic noted below which\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"average temperature anomaly\"","block_context":{"text":"average temperature anomaly","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=average-temperature-anomaly"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/11\/image-391.png?fit=1024%2C1024&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/11\/image-391.png?fit=1024%2C1024&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/11\/image-391.png?fit=1024%2C1024&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/11\/image-391.png?fit=1024%2C1024&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":324994,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=324994","url_meta":{"origin":296653,"position":5},"title":"L A Times Editorial Claim that \u201cThe planet is experiencing a horrifying streak of record-breaking heat\u201d is Unsupported by NOAA\u2019s Climate Data","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"04\/30\/2024","format":false,"excerpt":"The L A Times published an Editorial claiming that the \u201cThe planet is experiencing a horrifying streak of record breaking heat\u201d and mandates that a \u201cclimate emergency\u201d must be declared but then fails to present any data graph or tables in its editorial.","rel":"","context":"In \"California\"","block_context":{"text":"California","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=california"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/OIG-2023-07-29T140641.234.jpeg?fit=1024%2C1024&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/OIG-2023-07-29T140641.234.jpeg?fit=1024%2C1024&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/OIG-2023-07-29T140641.234.jpeg?fit=1024%2C1024&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/OIG-2023-07-29T140641.234.jpeg?fit=1024%2C1024&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x"},"classes":[]}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/296653","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/121246920"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=296653"}],"version-history":[{"count":19,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/296653\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":296699,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/296653\/revisions\/296699"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/296697"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=296653"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=296653"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=296653"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}