Another heat record means 2015 likely to be hottest ever (Update)

People enjoy the weather at the Assateague Island National Seashore near Berlin, Maryland on November 27, 2015
People enjoy the weather at the Assateague Island National Seashore near Berlin, Maryland on November 27, 2015
The globe shattered yet another heat record in November, continuing a warming trend that is all but certain to make 2015 the hottest in modern history, US government scientists said Thursday.

Last month was the warmest November in 136 years and marked seven months in a row of record-breaking temperatures, said the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) in its monthly climate report.

The November temperature across global land and ocean surfaces was 1.75 degrees Fahrenheit (0.97 degrees Celsius) above the 20th century average.

"This was the highest for November in the 1880-2015 record," said the report.

Nine months this year have broken heat records, including the last seven in a row.

The "first 11 months of 2015 were the warmest such period on record across the world's land and ocean surfaces," it said.

That means 2015 is poised to overtake 2014 as the most scorching year in contemporary times.

"Most of the globe is covered in record warmth," said Jake Crouch, climate scientist at NOAA's National Centers for Environmental Information.

"At this point we're virtually certain that 2015 will be the warmest year on record," he told reporters.

The only way for 2015 not to set new records would be if December were unusually cold—0.43 degrees Fahrenheit (.24 Celsius) colder than the coldest December on record, which came in 1916.

"That's not going to happen," Crouch said.

Warming trend

Scientists say the trend is likely a result of human-driven climate change, whereby the burning of fossil fuels spews greenhouses gases into the atmosphere and traps heat.

Crouch also said the El Nino weather phenomenon, which is particularly strong this season, may be playing a role in the unusually high temperatures.

"We do expect the trend of upward temperatures to continue in the short and medium term," he said.

"The El Nino is marked by a very large area of very warm sea surface temperatures in the equatorial Pacific, which tends to boost global temperatures, so El Nino years tend to be warmer than non El Nino years," he added.

The NOAA report said record warmth was notable across most of equatorial and northeastern South America and parts of southeastern Asia.

Japan was wetter than average last month, and Europe experienced its warmest November since 1910.

Meanwhile, Arctic sea ice was eight percent lower than average, marking the sixth smallest ice cover since satellite records there began in 1979.

Cooler than average temperatures were observed in November in parts of the western United States, southern Greenland, northern Asia, and southern South America.

However, no region of the world experienced record cold in November.


Explore further

New global heat records set for October and year-to-date

© 2015 AFP

Citation: Another heat record means 2015 likely to be hottest ever (Update) (2015, December 17) retrieved 21 July 2019 from https://phys.org/news/2015-12-november-warmest-year.html
This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.
7 shares

Feedback to editors

User comments

Dec 17, 2015
However, no region of the world was record cold in November.

I almost feel like this is even more noteworthy.

But really, the record this year is no joke. To say the record was "shattered" is an understatement. It's scary to think that we've pushed the planet so far out of equilibrium in such a short time.

Dec 17, 2015
Apparently no one told the Atlantic about GloBULL warming, since it had it's LOWEST hurricane season in decades.

Dec 17, 2015
Yep, take off the donkey blinders and look again.
http://wattsupwit...-decade/

Dec 17, 2015
Late December, temps in the 70's(F).
Nothing to see here.

Dec 18, 2015
And still no explanation why this supposed record warmth doesn't show in the global temperatures measured by satellite. See here:

http://nsstc.uah.edu/climate/

and here:

http://images.rem...ies.html

Dec 18, 2015
Almost every year between 1910 and 1940 was supposedly the hottest year ever according to measurements from weather stations. Climate scientists and the IPCC note that this period of warming was entirely natural. Apparently so was the cooling from about 1940 to 1970-ish. From 1910 to 1970 world population doubled from about 1.7 billion to about 3.5 billion, and CO2 emissions rapidly increased, yet supposedly humans had little effect on the roughly 0.5 C of warming that happened.

From about 1975 to 1998 global temperature went up another 0.6 C, about the same as 1910 to 1940, but alarmists claim this was mostly human-caused. They conveniently don't mention that there has been no warming since 1998. Only the weather station data, which comes largely from poorly-sited stations near artificial heat sources and is padded with all kinds of interpolations to make up for irregularities and is tweaked (always upward, by the way), shows warming after 1998. The global satellite data do not.

Dec 18, 2015
You're all dancing on head of pins. The storms are not up. The IPCC never said storms would be up. They aren't up. What are you arguing about?

Temperature records? They get set all the time. In any case land records are made up. 30 consecutive adjustments of land records all up for 20 years in a row is a one in 2 billion chance of being correct. Adjusted land records now twice the satellite records, twice the unadjusted land records and twice the ocean buoy records. Obviously anyone would question the adjustments. The adjustments consistently have tracked CO2 as if someone was being paid to modify them to match co2, not reality. Let me repeat. The land records are made up. They have zero legitimacy. It's so obvious they are being fudged it feels like someone is playing a trick. 30 times in a row. Seriously, get a life.

Dec 18, 2015
2015 on track to be warmest? Satellites say we are 19 years 4 months into a pause. Which is right? 14 satellite sensors that cross check each other scanning the entire globe (minus the poles which land records don't cover either) uniformly validate no warming for nearly 20 years yet you guys go on and on about made up "records" made from adjustments that are fudged and fudged over and over to show higher and higher temps. The arctic sea ice hasn't melted yet even though it was supposed to in 2000, then 2012, then 2015, now ... Islands aren't sinking you told us would. They are growing! Nothing you said is true and the land records are now ridiculous lies.

Dec 18, 2015
1940 and 1944 ships made passage through the arctic passage. During the now "depressed" temperatures of the 40s which were adjusted down these passages never happened. The dust bowl never happened. The records for temps set in the 40s must be corrected. We have no dust bowl today no ships passing the arctic northwest passage but temps are 1.2C hotter than 1940 right? Or is it 1.9C or 2.8C. Does it matter? You make it all up. For hundreds of years the vikings used the northwest passage and sailed through ice free arctic yet we are told it was in our imagination. The MWP was regional. Temps were hotter than today for hundreds of years there and only there. How that is possible I don't know but apparently that's more believable than temperatures were hotter for the whole globe. But how could that be? There were no Ford F150s in the 1000AD timeframe. How could it be hotter then than now if CO2 wasn't greater? The models say that's impossible, so it can't be true.

Dec 18, 2015
Let's be honest. The biggest threat from global warming is that the dutch will take up their midievel pastime and attack other countries. That's your real worry. I get it now. We must stop global warming or face the wrath of the dutch.

Dec 18, 2015
2015 on track to be warmest? Satellites say we are 19 years 4 months into a pause. Which is right? 14 satellite sensors that cross check each other scanning the entire globe (minus the poles which land records don't cover either) uniformly validate no warming for nearly 20 years


http://nsstc.uah....2015.pdf

Dr. John Christy
"Despite the cooling in the Northern Hemisphere, globally November 2015 was the warmest November in the 37-year satellite temperature dataset, with a temperature that was 0.05 C warmer than November 2009. It was also the warmest November in both the Northern Hemisphere and the tropics."

Dec 18, 2015
Despite the cooling in the Northern Hemisphere...

Let me save the Chicken Littles an ignorant response. The Northern Hemisphere is not the globe.

Dec 18, 2015
The Northern Hemisphere is not the globe.

It will be by 2100. The Southern Hemisphere will be known as The Waste Land.

Dec 18, 2015
The Northern Hemisphere is not the globe.

It will be by 2100. The Southern Hemisphere will be known as The Waste Land.

What a surprise. In saving you from an ignorant response, I provoked an absolutely dumb one.
But that's the spirit, you don't disappoint Chicken Little.

Dec 18, 2015
In saving you from an ignorant response, I provoked an absolutely dumb one.


If you ever want to save me from an ignorant response, don't reply to the things I say.

Dec 18, 2015
antigoracle
Apparently no one told the Atlantic about GloBULL warming, since it had it's LOWEST hurricane season in decades.


The Northern Hemisphere is not the globe.


So the Atlantic is the globe when it suits you - but the northern hemisphere is not. You could not get any more contradictory.

What a surprise. That one just went... whoosh... right over yer noggin...you know that bit with the empty space between the ears.

Dec 18, 2015
In saving you from an ignorant response, I provoked an absolutely dumb one.


If you ever want to save me from an ignorant response, don't reply to the things I say.

Ha..ha.. there yer go, confirming that with you, it's always too late.
The correct sentence should read ".....save me from ANOTHER...ignorant..."

Dec 18, 2015
Ha..ha.. there yer go, confirming that with you, it's always too late.

You should have parsed that I was saying you're ignorant when you respond to me, but ha ha, there you go, confirming that with you, it's always too late.

Back on topic, because howlers should be for entertainment purposes only, and not confused for professional help, medicine, or expert advice...

Here's some stuff about possible future uninhabitable parts of earth.
https://www.purdu...its.html
http://www.pnas.o...552.full

Dec 18, 2015
Uninhabitable eh. Take a look at what they are doing in the photo at the top of this story.

Dec 18, 2015
Despite the cooling in the Northern Hemisphere...

Let me save the Chicken Littles an ignorant response. The Northern Hemisphere is not the globe.


Regardless of what proportion of the globe it is, the northern hemisphere normally cools in the northern hemisphere winter.

Dec 19, 2015
Incidentally, antigoracle recently conceded that CO2 emissions and temperatures are related.

http://phys.org/n...int.html

So no wonder he's on a weird storm tangent. He knows the temperature increases are AGW.


Dec 19, 2015
Yes, totally over your empty head onions. Every time I point out that there has been cooling in some part of the globe, the response from you Chicken Littles is that it's not the globe. So, hence my new posts, giving your response.

As for leetenant, what I know is you're an asshole in your comments to cantdrive, and have long since confirmed how ignorant you are. leetenant, the Paris agreement is entirely about cutting use of fossil fuels and they are using temperature to scare the ignorant like you. Hence my comment for you to stop your use of fossil fuels is about your hypocrisy, which you are too stupid to see. How can you believe that burning fossil fuels is destroying the world and yet continue to do so?

Dec 19, 2015
Regardless of what proportion of the globe it is, the northern hemisphere normally cools in the northern hemisphere winter.

Wow, we may have a "genius" amongst the Chicken Littles. No..wait..perhaps Christy was referring to this little fact --- COOLER THAN AVERAGE temperatures were observed in November in parts of the western United States, southern Greenland, northern Asia, and southern South America.

Dec 19, 2015
Regardless of what proportion of the globe it is, the northern hemisphere normally cools in the northern hemisphere winter.

Wow, we may have a "genius" amongst the Chicken Littles. No..wait..perhaps Christy was referring to this little fact --- COOLER THAN AVERAGE temperatures were observed in November in parts of the western United States, southern Greenland, northern Asia, and southern South America.


Northern Hemisphere temperatures were 0.59c above average last month. Check the data before putting words in other peoples mouths.

http://vortex.nss..._5.6.txt

Dec 19, 2015
Wow, we may have a "genius" amongst the Chicken Littles. No..wait..perhaps Christy was referring to this little fact --- COOLER THAN AVERAGE temperatures were observed in November in parts of the western United States, southern Greenland, northern Asia, and southern South America.


Btw Dr Christy was talking about the northern hemisphere and I think you will find that southern South America is in the southern hemisphere.

Dec 19, 2015
Nice weather report. Now does this reflect data before or after the numbers are fudged?

Dec 19, 2015
I wonder how many heat records we'll need before the 'deniers' cave in. It's sort of weird that they have absolutely no problem with embracing the most bizarre and unfounded theories (electric universes, gods, aether, conspiracy theories and whatnot) but when the evidence is stacked sky-high they go into denial.

...and they don't even see a problem with this sort of attitude. *mind 'splodes*


Dec 19, 2015
So, the "science" is settled, now let's settle what the debate is about with 2 simple questions:
1] Do you believe manmade CO2 (is)will destroy(ing) the world?
2] Are you still burning fossil fuels?

Dec 19, 2015
Do you believe manmade CO2 (is)will destroy(ing) the world?

The planet will survive. A lot of humans won't.
Those that do will have to pay massive taxes:
- supporting (or fending off depending on how evil a country you live in) people that flee drought stricken regions.
- building dams and/or moving entire cities.

On top of that the prices for food will go up quite noticeably.

So if you think your paycheck is affording you an OK life it's quite likely that this will no longer hold in such a future (certainly the next generation will have a much harder time of it).

That's the optimal scenario if we do nothing.

The not-so-optimal scenario is that we reach a tipping point (like a runaway greenhouse scenario) and the planet will become uninhabitable for humans.

Are you still burning fossil fuels?

Yes - but a lot less than I used to. And I hope to reduce this to zero via my choices and political choices regarding the energy/transportation sectors.

Dec 19, 2015
So, the "science" is settled, now let's settle what the debate is about with 2 simple questions:


Yes, let's, and oh man, do they ever.

1] Do you believe manmade CO2 (is)will destroy(ing) the world?

No, the world will endure until the sun eats it. You and your kind, however, are destroying the human habitability of the planet for jingoistic/bigoted/religious/capitalistic (hah, a tautology!) reasons.

2] Are you still burning fossil fuels?

Yep, but less and less every day. Right now I'm at 25% the national average.

But you're right, this did settle what the debate was about. It's about you being so wrong you're not even wrong and possessing no capacity to parse reality. It has always been about that, and the entire effort of this comment section has been going towards your enlightenment for a very long time now. We put more energy into your failure of an education than we do the technical side of climate change, because deniers are the problem.

Dec 19, 2015
Check this out, Stanford's 50 state plan to switch to 100% renewables.

https://news.stan...414.html

Even if it isn't yet perfected and entropy and Murphy still have something to say about it, it's technology, and we humans are magnificent technical monsters. We just suck so hard socially that technological prowess is becoming almost useless to us in the face of dealing with each other.

Climate change wont kill us if it comes down to a question of nature versus our intelligence, we have the unfair advantage in that one. Unfortunately, right now it's a question of our stupidity vs our intelligence, and stupidity is far more overwhelmingly powerful than nature. A 55 billion sun mass black hole can't hold stupid down. This is our greatest threat existentially and if being dumb is why we go extinct, I offer as a final hypothesis that comedy is a component of nature, and has played a powerful role in causality.

Dec 19, 2015
So now antigoracle's argument is that
1. yes carbon emissions result in climate change and
2. yes, reducing those emissions will lead to temperature reductions and
3. yes, we all just met in Paris to come up with an agreement to reduce those fossil fuel emissions but
4. this is hypocrisy before we haven't stopped using fossil fuels before the agreement to reduce fossil fuels (which we've been advocating for) came into effect.

Thanks, anti. Keep going. This gets more hilarious by the day.

Dec 20, 2015
What I am saying is my last comment here.
http://phys.org/n...war.html


Dec 20, 2015
Wow - we discuss the facts regarding warming - and now look at the content of your comment. Lots of name calling (asshole, chicken shits) and absolutely no content.

Wow indeed. You are one of the Chicken shits who gave leetenant a 5 for his post that I was responding too. So, tell us, how was his post relevant to that story to deserve 5 from you?

Dec 20, 2015
goricle, can you either get educated and civilized or leave?

Dec 20, 2015
"Hottest ever!"

Oh, the horror...Except the numbers are fudged.

https://www.youtu...BH2dXuuw

Dec 20, 2015
Can't drive is right: The entire world is in a conspiracy to take his money. All of us, and he found us out.

I guess we will have to own up to it now.

Dec 20, 2015
Can't drive is right: The entire world is in a conspiracy to take his money. All of us, and he found us out.

I guess we will have to own up to it now.

I guarantee that you are no part of this control system. Nope, nothing but a useless eater patsy unknowingly witnessing a bid to centralize the world economic system by a small group of elitists. There's a study that was written about it. You like to hear about it? Here it goes...
https://www.newsc..._NvmL3nj

It's a tight knit community up there of super-national corporations, governments and international agencies (UN, IMF, WTO, etc...)

Dec 20, 2015
Who I vote up or down is none of your business. Why can't you stay on task? The point I was discussing was how your posts are void of any content. You have nothing substantive to say - so just call people names.

Yes, I don't care how you vote you brainless Chicken shit. You gave leetenant a 5 for that post. Now tell us, how was he on task? What was substantive about his post? How would a brainless ass like you know what has content?

Dec 20, 2015
@Cantdrive

The New Scientists article said nothing about "governments and international agencies (UN, IMF, WTO, etc...)"

The concentration of wealth is troubling but you must have missed this from the article:

"One thing won't chime with some of the protesters' claims: the super-entity is unlikely to be the intentional result of a conspiracy to rule the world. "Such structures are common in nature," says Sugihara."

"So, the super-entity may not result from conspiracy. The real question, says the Zurich team, is whether it can exert concerted political power. Driffill feels 147 is too many to sustain collusion. Braha suspects they will compete in the market but act together on common interests. Resisting changes to the network structure may be one such common interest."

Dec 20, 2015
Let's be honest. The biggest threat from global warming is that the dutch will take up their midievel pastime and attack other countries. That's your real worry. I get it now. We must stop global warming or face the wrath of the dutch.

The Dutch never did such thing.

Dec 20, 2015
"At this point we're virtually certain that 2015 will be the warmest year on record," he told reporters.

Yep, they need a bit more time cooking the data.

Dec 21, 2015
He is tired of being a loser.

Dec 21, 2015
He is tired of being a loser.
Are you?

"[the psychopath] Encourages co-workers to torment, alienate, harass and/or humiliate other peers..."

-Hes the little guy on the sidelines who eggs on combatants.

You do a lot of this dont you george?

Dec 21, 2015
"At this point we're virtually certain that 2015 will be the warmest year on record," he told reporters.

Yep, they need a bit more time cooking the data.


Conspiracy theory logical fallacies
http://warp.povus...ies.html

Dec 21, 2015
Antigoracle: I should probably leave this alone because it's getting stupid. And unnecessarily personal. But I have to ask - you do know cantdrive doesn't have cancer, right? At least, not as far as I know?

It was an analogy? You... do know what an analogy is, right? It was an analogy about the way in which people respond psychologically to information that challenges their ontology. And cantdrive's posts were demonstrating similarities to somebody who has rejected a science-based argument on something and then continued to do so even as the science became more and more stark.

I shouldn't have to explain that. It was pretty clear. But there seemed to be confusion so... *shrugs*

Dec 21, 2015

How do we know that the results of measuring global temperatures over a year is long enough to be statistically significant as compared with measurements from a previous year? Isn't a year (or a month) sort of an arbitrary yard stick?


Dec 21, 2015

How do we know that the results of measuring global temperatures over a year is long enough to be statistically significant as compared with measurements from a previous year? Isn't a year (or a month) sort of an arbitrary yard stick?



No, a year is not arbitrary. It is one revolution of the planet around our star. That means that our tilt and position with respect to the sun will repeat every year (within limits).

Dec 22, 2015
Hottest ever? It's really discouraging to see a "science" article which uses such blatantly untrue headline. What timeframe and in what way? If we had gotten the addtional 0.5C-1.0C the CAGW alarmists had projected by now this would have been moot. If temperatures really had gone up by tenths of a degree every decade for decades as they predicted we would all be believers. It didn't. It's gone nowhere for 20 years. If you want to say 0.02C in 20 years then fine let me grant you that. At that rate we will be at 2C in 2000 more years or so. If it goes up at the rate of the last 70 years according to the 24 satellite sounding units temperature record then it would take 350 years to get 2C and if we use the fabricated temperature record of reanalyzed reanalayzed reanalyzed adjusted adjusted adjusted land record it would still take 200 years to get there assuming we continued to pour out exponentially greater CO2 ever year for 200 years which is impossible.

Dec 22, 2015
I am sure glad we have the john mathons to tell us how our professional scientists are wrong, and he, an outsider, is correct.

Wow, them old science fellas had me going for a minute there, . . .

Dec 22, 2015
Hottest ever? It's really discouraging to see a "science" article which uses such blatantly untrue headline. What timeframe and in what way?


JM: Did you not read when it said: "to make 2015 the hottest in modern history"

That is a pretty clear time frame to me. It means records that were recorded with modern instruments (which comes into play about the turn of the 20th century). What is blatantly untrue is your claim that they were unclear.

Dec 22, 2015
More from JM:
If temperatures really had gone up by tenths of a degree every decade for decades as they predicted we would all be believers.


Please show us your source for the idea that temperatures should monotonically change upward?

Instead, global warming says that the enthalpy of the earth should be increasing (which includes the oceans).

Please show us where the pause in enthalpy increase is? You must have a link to heat in the oceans as well as heat in the air that shows there was no increase over your "pause."

Just show us your peer reviewed source and we will be awed by your expertise.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more