Differences between the NOAA & UAH global temp updates
WUWT has an interesting article (by Bob Tisdale) at the “fundamental differences” between the NOAA and UAH global temperature updates. The author describes the NOAA adjustments (which claim to show increased global surface warming) as unjustified and “overcooked.”
The author also notes that “we can’t say the changes to the UAH database (which showed a decreased warming rate in their lower troposphere dataset) are unjustified because they are so similar to those of RSS.”
As with many of these types of posts, you can learn almost as much from the numerous comments after the posts as you can from the initial article.
Update: It took me a bit of searching to relocate the Bloomberg article that I had read earlier that demonstrated why this WUWT post is important. It is important because the media response to climate change often publicizes absolute worst case scenarios as the expected norm, foregone conclusions, and unassailable scientific fact.
On that theme, the Bloomberg article unhesitatingly regurgitates the worst case scenario findings of NOAA’s State of the Climate report. Without even the most basic effort to seek out a skeptical thought on the report, the Bloomberg article gushes out its apocalyptic update.
The annual State of the Climate report is out, and it’s ugly. Record heat, record sea levels, more hot days and fewer cool nights, surging cyclones, unprecedented pollution, and rapidly diminishing glaciers.
With “reporting” like this going on, it is absolutely essential to make it clear that there are resources out there offering critiques of the NOAA report.