Den stora tråden om global uppvärmning/växthuseffekten

– Copernicus, europeiska vädersatelliter (0,18°C/årtionde):
https://climate.copernicus.eu/surface-air-temperature-march-2021

– RSS, baserat på SSMIS, AMSR2, WindSat och ASCAT (0,209°C/årtionde):
http://images.remss.com/msu/msu_time_series.html

– HadCRUT4 (Met Office, ca 0,18°C/årtionde 1970-2019):
https://crudata.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/temperature/

– GHCN v4, (NOAA, ca 0,18°C/årtionde 1972-2019, baserat på 10-års medelvärden):
https://www.noaa.gov
https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ghcn-monthly

in the 25+ years that John Christy and I have pioneered the methods that others now use, we made only one “error” (found by RSS, and which we promptly fixed, having to do with an early diurnal drift adjustment). The additional finding by RSS of the orbit decay effect was not an “error” on our part any more than our finding of the “instrument body temperature effect” was an error on their part. All satellite datasets now include adjustments for both of these effects.

Despite the most obvious explanation that the NOAA-14 MSU was no longer usable, RSS, NOAA, and UW continue to use all of the NOAA-14 data through its entire lifetime and treat it as just as accurate as NOAA-15 AMSU data. Since NOAA-14 was warming significantly relative to NOAA-15, this puts a stronger warming trend into their satellite datasets, raising the temperature of all subsequent satellites’ measurements after about 2000.

– Copernicus, europeiska vädersatelliter (0,18°C/årtionde):
https://climate.copernicus.eu/surface-air-temperature-march-2021

– RSS, baserat på SSMIS, AMSR2, WindSat och ASCAT (0,216°C/årtionde):
http://images.remss.com/msu/msu_time_series.html

– HadCRUT4 (Met Office, ca 0,18°C/årtionde 1975-2020):
https://crudata.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/temperature/

– NASA/GISS (ca 0,18”C/årtionde)
https://data.giss.nasa.gov

– GHCN v4, (NOAA, ca 0,18°C/årtionde 1972-2019, baserat på 10-års medelvärden):
https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/202102

/.../
Given the circumstances, Scientific American has agreed with major news outlets worldwide to start using the term “climate emergency” in its coverage of climate change. An official statement about this decision, and the impact we hope it can have throughout the media landscape, is below.


April 12, 2021

From Covering Climate Now, Scientific American, Columbia Journalism Review, the Nation, the Guardian, Noticias Telemundo, Al Jazeera, Asahi Shimbun and La Repubblica:

The planet is heating up way too fast. It’s time for journalism to recognize that the climate emergency is here.

This is a statement of science, not politics. Thousands of scientists—including James Hansen, the NASA scientist who put the problem on the public agenda in 1988, and David King and Hans Schellnhuber, former science advisers to the British and German governments, respectively—have said humanity faces a “climate emergency.”

Why “emergency”? Because words matter. To preserve a livable planet, humanity must take action immediately. Failure to slash the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere will make the extraordinary heat, storms, wildfires and ice melt of 2020 routine and could “render a significant portion of the Earth uninhabitable,” warned the January Scientific American article.

The media’s response to COVID-19 provides a useful model. Guided by science, journalists have described the pandemic as an emergency, chronicled its devasting impacts, called out disinformation and told audiences how to protect themselves (with masks and social distancing, for example).

We need the same commitment to the climate story. As partners in Covering Climate Now, a global consortium of hundreds of news outlets, we will present coverage in the lead-up to Earth Day, April 22, 2021, around the theme “Living Through the Climate Emergency.” We invite journalists everywhere to join us.

/.../Climate change is the next “pandemic-like story that we’ll beat to death, but that one’s got longevity. You know what I mean? Like there’s a definitive ending to the pandemic. It’ll taper off to a point that it’s not a problem anymore. Climate change can take years, so they’ll [CNN will] probably be able to milk that quite a bit.”