Stormy Weather

RNG

Forum Staff
Apr 2013
39,762
27,555
La La Land North
Again the chart is not showing a temperature of the earth per year but rather an anomaly based on an idea of a center point temperature. BS
It is the change from a reference temp. Even you should be able to figure that out.
 
Jul 2015
5,351
2,334
chicago
Call it whatever you like.

But mathematically it makes no difference in the outcome.

Indeed, in effect, it is no different from saying the high temperature today was ten degrees warmer than the high temperature yesterday, instead of saying the high temperature today was 70 degrees and the high temperature yesterday was 60 degrees.

It is just that it is far more useful to work in terms of temperature anomalies when doing calculations of the average global surface temperature than it is to work in terms of whole degrees.
In your analogy, what is the 0 degree point? 65 degrees?
 
Jul 2015
5,351
2,334
chicago
It is the change from a reference temp. Even you should be able to figure that out.
saying insults does not make you correct. I see this all the time. The Righties debate and the Lefties personally insult. You guys are lame.
 
Feb 2007
5,616
3,200
USA
In your analogy, what is the 0 degree point? 65 degrees?
If I were to consider, say, the average high temperature of just those two days as the base over that period of time, then yes...the zero degree point would be, in effect, 65 degrees. And in this scenario, yesterday would be a downward departure (or "temperature anomaly") of the high temperature of -5 degrees and today would be an upward departure (or "temperature anomaly") of the high temperature of +5 degrees...of course in reference to that base period and the average high temperature of that same base period.

It really is this simple...and nothing to get hung up on.
 
Last edited:

Panther

Forum Staff
Jul 2013
5,732
3,257
North Texas
Thanks for the clarification. And I'm happy for you that my original guess was incorrect.

However, I would add, I just don't know how you folks in tornado alley have any finger nails left. I mean, it's as if every day during the major tornado season you are all playing a sort of lottery of death and/or destruction, never knowing when a tornado will strike your home (or office). It's gotta be nerve-wracking at times.

:(
A couple of days, but not during the whole season.
 
Feb 2007
5,616
3,200
USA
A couple of days, but not during the whole season.
Just a couple days seems kinda oddly low to me.

Indeed, my wife and I tend to watch the Weather Channel quite often and it seems tornado warnings are more frequent than that, particularly during the whole season.

But I guess one has to consider what size of land area you are talking about regarding likely tornados, such as your neighborhood, town, county, region, or state.

And I guess it's something I'd have to experience myself in your neck of the woods in order to get a better understanding.

Still, best of luck to you and your friends/family out there when they are nearby.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Panther
Jul 2015
5,351
2,334
chicago
If I were to consider, say, the average high temperature of just those two days as the base over that period of time, then yes...the zero degree point would be, in effect, 65 degrees. And in this scenario, yesterday would be a downward departure (or "temperature anomaly") of the high temperature of 5 degrees and today would be an upward departure (or "temperature anomaly") of the high temperature of 5 degrees...of course in reference to that base period and the average high temperature of that same base period.

It really is this simple...and nothing to get hung up on.
So who decided in your original chart what was the start point to figure what the "zero"" point was? In other words what is the start date to figure the median point?
 
Feb 2007
5,616
3,200
USA
So who decide in your original chart what was the start point to figure what the "zero"" point was? In other words what is the start date to figure the median point?
In the Marcott et al study the zero point is the average global surface temperature during the periods 1961 thru 1990 I believe. And in the composite temperature reconstruction graph it is the same zero point for both studies, the modern surface temperature data, as well as the potential projected global surface temperature in 2100. Indeed, they do need to have the same zero point, so to speak, when combining four such study results. Otherwise, the chosen base period for a single study, as long as it has enough data points to work with, is rather arbitrary. And, climate scientists have settled on a few different base periods as standards so that they can readily and easily compare results between various different studies.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: imaginethat
Jul 2015
5,351
2,334
chicago
In the Marcott et al study the zero point is the average global surface temperature during the periods 1961 thru 1990 I believe. And in the composite temperature reconstruction graph it is the same zero point for both studies, the modern surface temperature data, as well as the potential projected global surface temperature in 2100. Indeed, they do need to have the same zero point, so to speak, when combining four such study results. Otherwise, the chosen base period for a single study, as long as it has enough data points to work with, is rather arbitrary. And, climate scientists have settled on a few different base periods as standards so that they can readily and easily compare results between various different studies.
1961 through 1990. Exactly my point. The zero degree point is utter bullshit. Why on earth are we focused in on this short time period as if there is some average temperature to gage anomalies from? It is date cherry picking. Then to have the gall to suppose 3 degrees increase after that point, is all telling.