Agree to Disagree
Debate in a non-hostile environment
Did we Pass or Fail?
~~~ Warning ~~~
My sense of humour may be lame, but my mathematics is rock solid. The results presented in this article, will be shocking for some people. I encourage people who have mathematical ability, to repeat my calculations, and confirm my results. It took a considerable amount of work to generate these results, so please don’t dismiss them lightly.
I am a skeptic. Not just about global warming. I am skeptical about everything. It is a part of my personality. In this article, I provide strong evidence that global warming is happening, and that we will fail to limit global warming to the 1.5 or 2.0 degrees Celsius temperature limits. I have been called a “Denier”, for more than 9 years. Have I suddenly become an Alarmist? Yes, I have. But then I came to my senses, and became a skeptic again. I still expect to be called a “Denier”, after I present this evidence.
This analysis was done using the GISTEMP gridded temperature series (Land-Ocean Temperature Index, ERSSTv5, 1200km smoothing). I know that some people don’t trust GISTEMP. They feel that it has been incorrectly “adjusted”. I share this concern, and I believe that GISTEMP is not perfect. However, I also think that GISTEMP is not totally wrong. I suggest that people look at the results of the analysis, and then decide whether they are reasonable. You have nothing to lose, by looking at the results.
Please examine the evidence that I present, with an open mind. I am happy to discuss my results, or anything else about global warming, after you have read this article. I don’t care what your beliefs are, about global warming. If you are willing to talk to me in a civil manner, then I am willing to talk to you in a civil manner. You can contact me by using the Contact button in the menu bar of this website.
People may have seen the following graph (and legend), in my article called:
“If the earth was an apple pie…”.
It shows the “theoretical” temperature change, in degrees Celsius, since 1880, for every 2 x 2 latitude-longitude cell of the Earth (all 16,200 of them).
If you would like a bigger version of this graph, then click the link below, and hold on to your hat. It will open in a new tab.
I also calculated the percentage of the earth’s area, for each temperature increase category. This took into account the different sizes of the 2 x 2 latitude-longitude cells, so that it was an accurate “percentage of the earth’s area”.
The summary was:
• 2.2 % of the earth’s area, has had a temperature decrease, since 1880
• 78.0 % of the earth’s area, has had a temperature increase of greater than 0.0 and less than or equal to +1.5 degrees Celsius, since 1880
• 10.1 % of the earth’s area, has had a temperature increase of greater than +1.5 and less than or equal to +2.0 degrees Celsius, since 1880
• 9.6 % of the earth’s area, has had a temperature increase of greater than +2.0 degrees Celsius, since 1880
I then presented the results, in terms of the Paris Agreement’s goal:
The Paris Agreement’s long-term goal is to keep the increase in global average temperature to well below 2 °C above pre-industrial levels; and to limit the increase to 1.5 °C, since this would substantially reduce the risks and
effects of climate change.
I sadly reported that:
• 19.7% of the earth (nearly 1/5), has already increased by more than +1.5 degrees Celsius, since 1880. [Note that this percentage also includes the parts that have increased by more than +2.0 degrees Celsius, since 1880.]
• And that 9.6% of the earth (nearly 1/10), has already increased by more than +2.0 degrees Celsius, since 1880.
These results made me wonder what the results would be, if I did the same analysis, but for different regions of the Earth. I was very interested to find out what the percentage area was, for each temperature increase category, but looking only at the Land (since this is where most people live). I was also interested in finding out the results for the Ocean, and the Arctic, and the Antarctic. I believe that the more information that we have, the better our decisions will be.
So instead of “chilling out”, with a cold banana milk, and listening to my favourite music from the 60’s and 70’s, I set to work, to find out what global warming was doing in the different regions of the Earth.
I didn’t want my analysis to be too complicated, but I wanted to analyse a number of distinct regions. I decided to divide the Earth into the Arctic region, the Antarctic region, and the Middle region (the area between the Arctic and the Antarctic). I then divided the Middle region, into Land, and Ocean.
For those who want a formal definition:
• the Arctic region is anything north of the 66N line of latitude.
• the Antarctic region is anything south of the 66S line of latitude.
• the Middle region is anything between the 66N line of latitude, and the 66S line of latitude.
• Land, is anywhere that you can stand without getting your feet wet.
• Ocean, is the opposite of Land.
If you are wondering how an Excel spreadsheet can tell the difference between Land, and Ocean, it is quite simple. I just used the VBA (Visual Basic for Applications), Land( ) and Ocean( ) functions. These functions return True or False, when called using a cells latitude and longitude as parameters.
I am just joking you. I wish that it was that easy. I had to digitise a big black and white map of the world (this turned the image into 0’s and 1’s). Each 2 x 2 latitude-longitude cell corresponded to 20 binary digits by 20 binary digits (400 binary digits per cell, for 16,200 cells). I added up the number of 1’s in each 2 x 2 latitude-longitude cell, and if the number of 1’s was 200 or more, then I said that it was Land. If the number of 1’s was 199 or less, then I said that it was Ocean. It may not be perfect, but it looked good, and was much faster than doing it manually.
You can judge for yourself, how good my method was, for working out what was Land, and what was Ocean. The following map shows the areas that I used for each region.
The legend is:
- yellow = Arctic region
- green = Antarctic region
- blue = Ocean
- orange = Land
If you would like a bigger version of this graph, then click the link below, and hold on to your hat. It will open in a new tab. A word of warning, it is big.
The following graphs, summarise the results that I found.
There is a graph for each region:
- Arctic region
- Middle region – Land
- Middle region – Ocean
- Antarctic region
These are followed by a similar graph, for the entire Earth:
- the entire Earth (all regions combined)
The temperature increase category, is on the X-axis. All graphs use the same categories:
The “NoData” category, shows the percentage of the region which
has no temperature data.
The Y-axis of each graph, shows the percentage of the region, for the temperature increase categories. Each bar corresponds to a temperature increase category, and the percentage of the region, for each bar, is also printed just above the bar. This is rounded to the nearest integer. This means that you do not need to estimate the percentage of the region, from the Y-axis. Just read the percentage of the region, from just above the bar.
The X-axis of each graph is identical, and the Y-axis of each graph is identical. Because the scale of the Y-axis is identical on each graph, you can compare the sizes of bars from different graphs (e.g. a bar showing 40% , is the same size on every graph).
If you would like to see this graph in a new tab, then click the link below. It is not much bigger, but it gets rid of the menu bar, and makes the background black (this makes the graph stand out more, than with a white background).
Since this article is about a very serious subject, I have forced myself, to not make any jokes. Especially no Monty Python jokes.
All right then, I did make a small joke about using the Visual Basic functions Land( ) and Ocean( ), to work out which 2 x 2 Latitude-Longitude cells were Land, and which ones were Ocean. But that wasn’t really a joke. It was more of a trick. And it wasn’t a Monty Python trick.
Some readers may think that my definition of “Land”, was a joke. I said that Land, is anywhere that you can stand without getting your feet wet. But that wasn’t a joke. It was a palindrome.
Anyway, it is time for me to summarise the results, using written English. I would have preferred to use spoken English, but some of you have got the sound on your computer turned down. And some of you can’t speak English. Anyway, spoken English is much more expensive, than written English (and I am on a tight budget).
Remember my earlier warning. My sense of humour may be lame, but my mathematics is rock solid.
I will start off by saying, that the results are a mixture of good and bad news. Some regions have done better than others.
I will discuss the Land first, since that is where most of us live. The good news is that we have managed to get 42% of the land, above the +1.5 degrees Celsius target. As an added bonus, we have managed to get 16% of the land, above the +2.0 degrees Celsius target. However, some people have been slacking, and 58% of the land, still remains below the +1.5 degrees Celsius target. I am not going to mention names, but 1% of the land has slipped backwards, and has actually cooled a little. The people responsible for this, should feel ashamed of themselves.
Things have been going quite well, in the Arctic region. 96% of the region is now above the +1.5 degrees Celsius target, and 80% of the region is above the +2.0 degrees Celsius target. To be honest, I don’t know how they managed to do it. The over-time bill was horrendous, but when you get results like that, well, what can I say.
In contrast to the Arctic region, the Antarctic region has had mixed results. 38% of the region is now above the +1.5 degrees Celsius target, and 33% of the region is above the +2.0 degrees Celsius target. Hovever, 59% of the region is still below the +1.5 degrees Celsius target, and a massive 21% of the region has actually cooled. I think that some people have spent far too much time, looking at fluffy emperor penguin chicks. We may need to look at moving some hungry polar bears, from the Arctic, to the Antarctic, to provide an incentive for Antarctic workers.
Finally, we come to the Oceans. What can I say? There is a rotten apple in every barrel. 96% of the Oceans region is still below the +1.5 degrees Celsius target, and only 4% has managed to get above the +1.5 degrees Celsius target. This is the only region that has failed to get some percentage of the region, above the +3.0 temperature anomaly level. We have no choice, but to use workers from the Land, to try and help the Oceans catch up. There will be a compulsory 20 minutes of paddling in the sea, per day, for all healthy Land workers aged between 18 and 35. Home owners are urged to draw their curtains later in the evenings, to give the sun more of a chance to warm up the oceans. We thank you for your cooperation.
Sorry? What? We are meant to stay BELOW the temperature targets? No, that’s ridiculous! That’s not how targets work. Targets are something to aim for.
Look, mate, I have a bleedin’ university education. I did psychology stage 1. I even trained a hooded rat to push a lever for a tasty treat, to turn on a tiny heating element. So that we can train armies of rats, to help us warm up the world. I understand how the human mind works, and the rodent mind. You can’t fool me, mate. Pull the other one, it’s got bells on it.
The IPC who? Have they done psychology stage 1? Have they trained a hooded rat to push a lever for a tasty treat, to turn on a tiny heating element? Well, they should have explained it more clearly. The whole world has been working hard, trying to get the temperature ABOVE the temperature limits, and now you say that it was all a mistake.
Don’t forget, that I understand how the human mind works (and the rodent mind). The human brain has trouble understanding the word “NOT”. If I tell you NOT to think of an elephant, or NOT to think of the colour pink, what is the first thing that your brain thinks about? It thinks about an elephant, or the colour pink. Or if you have been drinking, it sometimes thinks about both.
So, if YOU go telling people NOT to go above a temperature limit, what is the first thing that their brain thinks about? It thinks about GOING above the temperature limit. It’s common sense. You can’t change how the human brain works.
This global warming thing, has been handled very badly. But let’s not worry about that, for now. We need to move forwards, and make the best of a bad situation. I am prepared to train armies of rats, to push levers for tasty treats, to turn on tiny refrigerators. And all that I want in return, are one and a half Nobel Prizes (I think that I have earned them), and a few statues of me, in the major cities of the world.