Those spots are tiny! Be interesting to see if any more rotate into view soon.....
Personally I'm not expecting this winter to see any changes but the one after that......
Maybe a study that uses data that is not 10 years old! We can all appreciate it takes time etc but this seems to be a study about how models perform on historical data, If the model can't get the past tense correct up to say a year ago I can't see it having much hope of getting anything in the future remotely correct either. It also makes one wonder what has happened in those 10 years that they can't(?! or won't?!) model? In your example, 2012 is still 3 years ago, however the point here is 2005 is 10 years ago. When this
is 1850-2015 & the model gets it correct I'll be interested.
Makes no sense to me, we know what the climate has done up until yesterday, that's historical. Also, why were the years 2005-2012 not part of the experiment? This forum is titled "new research" , what's new about this?
Why does the first graphic have a date range of 1880-2014 yet all the subsequent graphics the range is 1880-2005? It seems daft that a link that is dated 2015 omits 10 years worth of data.
At a guess nor are "silly assumptions" as you put about F1 teams either? It's pointless wasting time in these threads so I'll let you lot chase your tails for the rest of your lives.
Orbital forcings favouring cooling? Some seem to believe the current orbit is in a cooling phase while other sources claim not for another 30,000 years.
John A. Church and
Neil J. White seem to be the sources? That doesn't say where, when & how these measurements were taken? I'm struggling to believe instruments were accurate to less than 1mm back in 1870 so curious as to how these figures were obtained.
Presumably to make a statement like that they must have all of the various monitoring stations plotted into a graph somewhere to make a global average plot?