So Why Is It Significant That 1934 was the hottest year on record and not 1998?

Question

I think there are a number of reasons

Recording the temperature data is by far the easiest and least complext thing about studying climate and yet scientist managed to screw it up.

The fact that 1934 was the hottest on record shows that temperatures have spiked this high before the rapid industrialization following WWII

Shows how foolish the MSM was to trumpet an insignificant data set to push the Global Warming agenda, and then have it thrown right back in their faces.

http://www.dailytech.com/Blogger+finds+Y2K+bug+in+NASA+Climate+Data/article8383.htm

Travolta, I dont care what you're citing.

Its really more that it's late and I don't feel explaining to you why this particular blogger would be credible.

Answer 1

Again. A blog.

Come back when you have some facts.

You don't see me citing blogs do you?

I know you don't care. Facts don't matter to cons.You prefer opinions.

Answer 2

Dana, you suggested "It became into the maximum well liked 3 hundred and sixty 5 days in the decrease 40 8 in assessment to the 30 3 hundred and sixty 5 days common, which became into decrease in the '30s than it somewhat is in the '90s or '00s." Huh? this would not make any sense. the advice is a temperature anomaly from a 30 3 hundred and sixty 5 days propose temperature from 1951 to 1980. This 30 3 hundred and sixty 5 days propose from 1951 to 1980 is the baseline for all the each year records. there is not any longer a working 30 3 hundred and sixty 5 days common as you propose. The 1934 anomaly of +a million.25*C is from the comparable baseline with the aid of fact the 1998 anomaly of +a million.23*C. this implies that the 1934 became into +0.02*C warmer in the decrease 40 8 states than 1998. In different words, the 1934 fee of +a million.25 isn't while in comparison with a decrease temperature fee than the +a million.23 of 1998. in case you seem on the graph on the NASA website you will see that it is real.

Answer 3

I really wish it were that simple.
This is just another volley and talking point for the opponents of global warming. I even heard that some of the equipment used to monitor the temperatures in different regions were located near air conditioning condensers - I suspect the condensers were installed after the sensing units.
Personally, I think if a global climate change is taking place, it will be over a much greater span of geologic time than the mere argument about which year was or wasn't the hottest in a single century. In my opinion, that's just pretty much the ups and down swings of normally occurring changes in the weather pattern from year to year. The great "dust bowl" certainly wasn't due to man's influence.
Perhaps our industry and modern transportation is effecting our overall climate - it doesn't seem reasonable that we can spew millions of tons of CO, CO2 and other man made gasses into the atmosphere and not have some type of effect - but you'll never convince me of global warming with the arguments and data presented so far.

Answer 4

Get your facts straight, blogger:

This year has been the warmest on record in the northern hemisphere, say scientists in Britain.

It is the second warmest globally since the 1860s, when reliable records began, they say.

Ocean temperatures recorded in the northern hemisphere Atlantic Ocean have also been the hottest on record.

The researchers, from the UK Met Office and the University of East Anglia, say this is more evidence for the reality of human-induced global warming.

Their data show that the average temperature during 2005 in the northern hemisphere is 0.65 Celsius above the average for 1961-1990, a conventional baseline against which scientists compare temperatures.

The global increase is 0.48 Celsius, making 2005 the second warmest year on record behind 1998, though the 1998 figure was inflated by strong El Nino conditions.

The northern hemisphere is warming faster than the south, scientists believe, because a greater proportion of it is land, which responds faster to atmospheric conditions than ocean.

Northern hemisphere temperatures are now about 0.4 Celsius higher than a decade ago.

"The data also show that the sea surface temperature in the northern hemisphere Atlantic is the highest since 1880," said Dr David Viner from the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia (UEA).

No measurements of average temperature can be completely accurate, and David Viner believes the team's calculations are subject to an error of about plus or minus 0.1 Celsius.

However, he says, the long-term trend is clearly upwards — rapidly over the last decade — indicating the reality of human-induced global warming.

"We're right, the sceptics are wrong," he told the BBC News website.

"It's simple physics; more greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, emissions growing on a global basis, and consequently increasing temperatures."

However, Fred Singer from the Science & Environmental Policy Project in Washington DC, a centre of the "climate sceptics" community, disputed this interpretation.

"If indeed 2005 is the warmest northern hemisphere year since 1860, all this proves is that 2005 is the warmest northern hemisphere year since 1860," he told the BBC News website.

"It doesn't prove anything else, and certainly cannot be used by itself to prove that the cause of warming is the emission of greenhouse gases.

"It requires a more subtle examination to know how much of warming is due to man-made causes — there must be some — and how much is down to natural causes."

Eight of the 10 warmest years since 1860 have occurred within the last decade.

Answer 5

Your argument is flawed because America is not the only country in the world.
Australia (an island continent) recorded its hottest year on record in 2005 (at 1.9C above average) and the hottest year before that was just 7 years before in 1998.
You really need to look at the big picture of global climate change and not rely on local statistics, before discrediting scientific theory.
*

Answer 6

I figure that when they stated 1998 it was either a mistake or there was something else that made 1934 more significant. What makes the difference though. We all know some years were hotter than others, and hotter in different countries than in others. And we all know the climate is changing.

Answer 7

It's pretty darn hot here.

I don't know how accurate the 1934 count was, less population in Southern regions especially.

And that's not even counting the fact that Northern region countries have never been this hot since recorded history.

Answer 8

Because 1934 was pre WWII...before the industrial revolution...it brings the whole carbon footprint into question and makes the "man made" part of global warming less credible.

Answer 9

1934 the hottest year? That's BS

Answer 10

It wasn't. Not even close. 1934 was a very average year in terms of global temperatures. Please get your facts straight.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AgCxBALgHOtjhactMX_WFDjsy6IX?qid=20070810115452AAYt0LI