TheClimateChanger

On June 1, 1837, the St. Clair River between Lake Huron and Lake Saint Clair closed up with ice. The schooner New York became caught in the ice at Recors Point and was carried downstream. In the same year, ice was harvested from the river until July 4th.

First of all, the digits are Tony's rankings, not percentages. In fact, it looks like 82-83 percent of stations have reached 80F. But more importantly, this is a meaningless statistic for a number of reasons. It's affected by the average elevation, latitude, urban character, etc. of the station mix. If there's a higher percentage of stations in high latitudes and/or higher elevations, you would expect a lower percentage to have recorded an 80F day before the end of May [also, I doubt all of May 2024 has been included in the data -- the month is just now ending]. Further, it's affected by equipment changes. It's well established that a lot of the automated stations report somewhat lower maxima than traditional LiG thermometers housed in a shelter. Even ignoring all this, it's not really meaningful. It looks like pretty much every year at least 80 percent of stations have reached 80F by May 31. There's only about 15 percent or so of stations that vary in a given year - many of which are probably in the same general area [somewhere in the northern US]. Many of these places probably don't see 80+ until late in the spring, so all it would take is a cool spell in May to keep them from reaching that temperature. Meanwhile, the rest of the country could be baking... and even the places that fail to reach 80F might have been way above normal for the majority of the year.

Oh we’re you saying “too long, didn’t read” - I thought it was some sort of city or county abbreviation but couldn’t figure out what it could possibly be.

What? I don’t know what TL or DR means, but those monthly anomalies would result in one of the hottest summers on record surely.

I must have missed all the nukes flying when the NordStream 2 blew itself up.

Overall, an interesting post. Had to truncate the end due to lack of upload space. Must say I'm not sure what all the relevance to Trump is, some of these people just can't post anything without blabbing out Trump. Apparently, a Mormon Mitt, Nimrata Randhawa Haley, Dick-less Cheney, "Dubya" or Ronnie Reagan Republican party would have been so much better.

Umm, no. Retaining the tree rings for that era makes the warming more pronounced. But even the very selection of start date was carefully crafted to minimize the warming. Take a look at this interesting Reddit post from user u/TuneGlum7903:

It's more about projecting strength than anything. Sometimes the carrot on the stick doesn't work, and you have to be a little more aggressive.

Hi @AdMC, this was my advice to President Trump several years ago:

I mean we are almost 2 1/2 years from that eruption. How many more years are these people going to attempt to attribute the global heat wave to that volcano?

More tired recycling of the same nonsense. When La Nina begins later this year, can we finally put this nonsense to bed?

Interesting link I found on reddit [r/minnesota]. It's a report from the Minnesota DNR about the state of the climate, which was just released a few days. This is a Google Drive link to a powerpoint presentation made by the DNR, which is not available elsewhere. Link: State of Climate_MN_May24.pdf - Google Drive

Looks like you were right @ChescoWx, they are lying about the temperature increase. Just in the opposite direction that you claim.

Perhaps somewhat surprisingly, based on the chart you shared, his data seems legit. But if it starts to deviate substantially from NOAA, I'm not going to believe him that there is a conspiracy to produce warming, I'm going to assume he is manipulating his readings.

To be honest, I don't really trust Chesco's weather data. With all the outlandish things he posts, it would be very easy for someone of his predilections to manipulate the data to show less warming. Holding a block of ice under the sensor on a couple of mornings each month to produce spuriously cool data, and gradually increasing the frequency of such manipulations, could largely erase the warming trend. I know, in the past, he has admitted these temperatures were measured from different devices over time. Now he claims the same equipment has been in place for two decades.

Just for the record, this is the actual raw, unadjusted data. Nice of Tony to stop his analysis in 2021, but 2023 was warmest of record even with no adjustment for the recent site change. 2024 is shaping up to be the same. The reality is the adjustment looks substantial with two cherrypicked dates over a short timeframe but would almost certainly be negligible over the whole period of record. That's why he doesn't show the whole period of record.

Regardless, we can make a big hullabaloo over some adjustments to the recent record due to a site change. Or we can look at the bigger picture, and see an alarming warming trend of 2.4 degrees Celsius per century dating back to the 19th century.

Just what I suspected! There was a change in site location in 2015, where the inflection point occurs.

Why aren't we allowed to see the actual raw observations which make up this "raw" data? Where are the Tokyo observations? That should be the easiest to manually reproduce.

You didn't post any raw data above. You posted charts purporting to depict raw data generated from third parties.