“Global Temperature” is a theoretical construct, not a fact in reality. However, it is used by “Climate Scientists” to predict it well into the future using computer models and past data.
I agree the science is far from settled. It is rarely settled. And I would point out that scientists have used temperature estimates that do not depend on thermometers; Ice cores and tree rings can provide average temperatures for a season or a year.
And you are correct about computer simulations,, especially ones that try to predict the future based on data from the past.
I would be more inclined to blame the MSM and Government for the claims about Global Warming (AKA "climate change"}. It's a way for the government to get more voters to accept more regulations and government spending. I haven't read the IPCC report, but some who have claim isn't as scary as the MSM makes it out to be.
Dividing the earth into 1 sq Km has a precedent. When I worked on a project at Air
Canada had an application called High Level Winds which they used to find the best route (fastest, fuel efficient). They used data from flights in the air to update the application, so it changed as the high and low pressure areas moved across the planet. I don't know how much of the earth they monitored, but it had to be at least Canada and the North Atlantic. .
There has been much discussion about the "heat island" effect in urban centres, and how heat absorbing materials (asphalt, concrete, brick, etc) have the potential to distort temperature measurement.
Another effect is humidity. As more land area is drained or water, paved over, and built up, natural evaporative cooling from vegetation and standing water is drastically reduced. On a local level, it is indeed "man made" climate change. Furthermore, the more hard surface material is put down, the less water from precipitation gets absorbed into the ground. Instead, more precipitation becomes run-off that is carried by storm sewers into waterways, increasing the potential for flooding.....another phenomenon that can be perceived as "man made" climate change. Since about 90% of Canada's population lives in urban areas, I wonder how much these effects influence our perception of "climate"?
As you correctly mention, the majority of the planet's surface area is covered in water. This water is a massive reservoir of heat (as well as CO2) and a big driver of weather and climate. Water has a much higher thermal index than air, and below the surface, does not change temperature rapidly. I would argue that a good network of sensors in the oceans (away from strong currents) would provide a better index, or proxy, for global temperature.
As for thermometers, I suspect they were all manufactured according to the same specifications. It would not be good for their reputation if too many customers complained that their thermometers did not show the same temperature as other thermometers. I would be surprised if you lined up a bunch of different thermometers and they varied by more than 1 Celsius degree,
Those pictured are very old thermometers and manufacturing standards of the past were not very good. I worked in two manufacturing plants as a teenagers and specifications were not always met.
I agree the science is far from settled. It is rarely settled. And I would point out that scientists have used temperature estimates that do not depend on thermometers; Ice cores and tree rings can provide average temperatures for a season or a year.
And you are correct about computer simulations,, especially ones that try to predict the future based on data from the past.
I would be more inclined to blame the MSM and Government for the claims about Global Warming (AKA "climate change"}. It's a way for the government to get more voters to accept more regulations and government spending. I haven't read the IPCC report, but some who have claim isn't as scary as the MSM makes it out to be.
Dividing the earth into 1 sq Km has a precedent. When I worked on a project at Air
Canada had an application called High Level Winds which they used to find the best route (fastest, fuel efficient). They used data from flights in the air to update the application, so it changed as the high and low pressure areas moved across the planet. I don't know how much of the earth they monitored, but it had to be at least Canada and the North Atlantic. .
There has been much discussion about the "heat island" effect in urban centres, and how heat absorbing materials (asphalt, concrete, brick, etc) have the potential to distort temperature measurement.
Another effect is humidity. As more land area is drained or water, paved over, and built up, natural evaporative cooling from vegetation and standing water is drastically reduced. On a local level, it is indeed "man made" climate change. Furthermore, the more hard surface material is put down, the less water from precipitation gets absorbed into the ground. Instead, more precipitation becomes run-off that is carried by storm sewers into waterways, increasing the potential for flooding.....another phenomenon that can be perceived as "man made" climate change. Since about 90% of Canada's population lives in urban areas, I wonder how much these effects influence our perception of "climate"?
As you correctly mention, the majority of the planet's surface area is covered in water. This water is a massive reservoir of heat (as well as CO2) and a big driver of weather and climate. Water has a much higher thermal index than air, and below the surface, does not change temperature rapidly. I would argue that a good network of sensors in the oceans (away from strong currents) would provide a better index, or proxy, for global temperature.
As for thermometers, I suspect they were all manufactured according to the same specifications. It would not be good for their reputation if too many customers complained that their thermometers did not show the same temperature as other thermometers. I would be surprised if you lined up a bunch of different thermometers and they varied by more than 1 Celsius degree,
Those pictured are very old thermometers and manufacturing standards of the past were not very good. I worked in two manufacturing plants as a teenagers and specifications were not always met.