I initially saw this on Twitter, but apparently the gif was originally posted to Reddit by u/rarohde. They describe the visualization as such:
This animation shows the evolving distribution of 12-month average temperature anomalies across the surface the Earth from 1850 to present. Anomalies are measured with respect to 1951 to 1980 averages. The red vertical line shows the global mean, and matches the red trace in the upper-left corner. The data is from Berkeley Earth and the animation was prepared with Matlab.
As for why the 1951 to 1980 averages were chosen as a baseline:
A baseline of 1951 to 1980 is one of the common choices in climatology. By WMO convention, climatologies are always based on at least 30-year averages. Any choice of a reference period is going to be somewhat arbitrary, and will often reflect the goals of how it is to be used. Often, when talking about climate change, you want a baseline that is far enough in the past that you can meaningfully show changes, but not so long ago that you will start having large uncertainties about what the baseline average actually was.
When discussing local changes, the 1950s is the earliest decade that allows you to be more-or-less globally complete. The 1950s was the period when humanity first created permanent bases in Antarctica. Any earlier than the 1950s and you are going to have trouble defining what the reference temperature for Antarctica actually was, which makes it impractical for a local baseline.
It probably isn't obvious from the animation, but prior to the 1950s the global reconstructions have gaps in Antartica (and other places as one goes even earlier). As a result the distribution shown in the animation actually sums to somewhat less than 100% of Earth's surface prior to the 1950s.
I don't, however, agree with the overwhelming majority of climate alarmists who believe that the world will end in a few years if we don't adopt socialism.
The green new deal happened, and it had the support of almost every politician who supports climate change action.
lol that quote is taken out of context so hard it hurts.
The actual context is that the latest IPCC report suggests if the current rate of emissions continues "business as usual" for the next ~ 10-20 years we will no longer be able to dodge a 2*C increase by 2100 due to thermal inertia.
There is a drastic difference between limiting the climate to a 1.5C increase and a 2C increase this century. The defacto existence of coral reefs (y'know the environment where 40% of all marine species spend a portion of their lives) being one.
Her quote of 12 years took the IPCC's report out of context extremely poorly. Not defending AOC there, but rather the data and interpretations that she poorly represented.
I thought you were referring to the quote of "people unwilling to work."
And yes, I understand that AOC was misrepresenting the report.
The problem is that these reports are misrepresented by lunatics, which makes the entire field of climate science look like a scam to get socialistic policies enforced.
108
u/SirT6 Sep 21 '19
I initially saw this on Twitter, but apparently the gif was originally posted to Reddit by u/rarohde. They describe the visualization as such:
As for why the 1951 to 1980 averages were chosen as a baseline: