/sci/ - Science & Math

1. Most of the industrial production that used to take place in the UK has been outsourced to third world countries.
2. The UK actually became greener in the 20th century, after so many people had abandoned the countryside and let the fields turn to woodland.

>>15574544
Western countries are simply better at solving pollution than 3rd world countries....for socio-economic reasons of course.

>>15574567
>Most of the industrial production that used to take place in the UK has been outsourced to third world countries.
Nice try.
But this same graphic can be obtained in most places.
Even in my shithole which didn't have an industry until the 60s.

>>15574582
> pollution
Nobody mentioned pollution. Temp only.

The elephant in the room is that most max temp records to date happened in the 1920-1930s. Even with fake sensors from the 70s onwards, recent temps are actually lower.

How much were you paid for finding this one weather station?

>>15574628
>Particular station
Wrong.
This maximum during the 1920-30s is observable in any country of your choice.
Pic sauce is reddit, and that alone proves it is not hard to find this data.

>>15574659
Demonstrably false

>>15574544
climate experts are just good at finding what other climate experts are publishing
in reality, you can get a good feeling of the weather by looking out the window

>>15574694
>source: USA government propaganda agency

>>15574544
1853 june: peak 110F lasted for two hours
2023 june: peak 110F lasted for two weeks

there's a good reason why averages are used

>>15574544
this image looks like when i test my pens to see if they still work

>>15574694
>LOOK! A SQUIGGLY LINE ON PAPER! YOU CAN'T FAKE THAT, GOYIM!!!

>>15574941
t. OP

>>15574852
fr doe

Any idea where the data and graph from 37:40 are taken from?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9lm-sZTfQ1k

>>15574694
What you are seeing there is the effect of a controversial sensor reading policy in airports and sea buoys.
Also NOAA has no credibility, it is the govt, might as well inflate temps to suit their agenda.

>>15574544
climate experts will tell you that global warming is a big lie, leftist political activists are the only ones who say it isn't

>>15574544
The mistake was letting the corporations hijack the conversation.

1970-80's it was POLLUTION
Activists started protesting and latched on to the villains -- corporations.

1990's it suddenly became GLOBAL WARMING and peasants were to blame for just existing. Pollution was no longer in the vernacular.

Global Warming was not flexible enough to feed the monster since it gets cold in the winter and data didn't match so..

2000's it became CLIMATE CHANGE. Who can argue climate changing.. it changes.

If POLLUTION was brought back into trend for activists you'd see gov and corps lose their shit.

>>15574731
>you can get a good feeling of the weather by looking out the window
Thats a lot more reliable than paying attention to what the replication crisis gang is publishing

>>15574544
Same way they explain everything else: lying

>>15576095
between pollution and global warming there was a big period of SAVE THE RAINFORESTS. i think that was the late 80s, sting was a big part of it

heres sting singing his surprise 1980 hit single JEW, JEW, JEW, DIE, DIE, DIE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7v2GDbEmjGE

>>15579378
>late 80s
Were about saving the ozone layer from evil hairspray users (of which there were a bunch).

>>15574741
Isn't OP's pic also from a government propaganda agency?

>>15580144
yet you choose to believe in one and not the other, because you have no interest in learning the true nature of the climate, you're only here to shill for your global warming political agenda

>>15574544
I can
Global warming is fake news

>>15582484
Why are schizo boomers so tech incapable? Why is this so low-res and jpegy?

>>15581127
NTA but I wouldn't assume that the content is false. Only a single station isn't very significant on the topic of global warming. It's about global warming, not Oxford warming. Oxford could be warming while the rest of the globe isn't, for example. Also, peak temperature seems like such a weird variable to use. Why not mean temperature?

>>15582520
why sage if you genuinely are interested in discussing this scientific topic?

>>15579635
peak women right here

>>15574544
>climate experts
KEK!
They cannot even get a weather forcast right half the time.

>>15579635
Imagine their bush between their legs was as large back then also. So gross.
Picrel shows women are herd animals and stupid.

>>15574544
with lies

>>15574544
They just lie about it and claim it's "a local effect" even though you can find this "local effect" in every country with long-term temperature records.

>>15585089
This.

>>15585320
Please explain how a graph from one single town is supposed to convince anyone that it's a global effect.

>>15586478
Because you can find similar graphs from "single towns" across the entire world. It isn't an isolated phenomenon.

>>15586481
Oh, can I? Then why do I get a hockeystick if I look at combined graphs for everywhere on earth?

>>15586504
>Then why do I get a hockeystick if I look at combined graphs for everywhere on earth?
Anyone selling you the lie that they have "everywhere on earth" represented in a temperature trend map is a scam artist. Scam artists selling hockey sticks to the public is nothing new in climatology.

>>15574544
Remember, climate change is about AVERAGES, the average temperature. This graph is meaningless.

>>15574544
>>15586506
Also, you're a bunch of idiots who dont even understand what scientists are actually saying. Also I dont know how they're getting this or if it's cherry picked or something, since much of Arizona, new Mexico and Texas had their temperature records broken this summer. Arizona had like 97 degree nights, which is absurd.

>>15586505
But how can a bunch of constant locals yield a rise in a global average?

>>15586520
You're almost there.

>>15586521
I get it now. The fact that the global average is rising means that not all stations can't be constant. So it's a lie if someone says that every town on earth looks like this. It's just a cherry-picked single measurement.

>>15586525
Oof. You almost broke through your ignorance but just bounced off.

>>15586525
>>15586526
Dont listen to this disingenuous idiot. To him everything anybody says will always come to the conclusion hes built his religion off of: that global warming is fake, it's a scam, etc. You should stop trying to talk to a brick wall.

>>15574544
So I checked the data for myself:
https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/pub/data/weather/uk/climate/stationdata/oxforddata.txt
Temperatures were indeed unusually hot, at 26.1°C in july of 1911 and july of 1921.
However, they approached or surpassed those values on several occasions, including:
25.9 in july 1976, 26.8 in july 1983, 26.4 in august 1995, 25.5 in august 2003, 27.1 in july 2006, 25.5 in july 2013, 27.4 in july 2018, 25.9 in july 2022 and 26.4. in august 2022 (making 2022 the only year on record in which temperatures went above 25°C two months in a row for this station).
2023 data for july and august is of course not yet available but at 23.8, June was already remarkably hot (in june 1911 it was 20.1.)
In other words, unless I missed a spot, temperatures only barely reached 26°C for two months between 1853 to 1975, then reached (often far above) 26°C for five months since then. And I'm excluding two months that ended just a rounding error short at 25.9, otherwise it'd be 7 months.
The peaks I listed do not seem to be adequately represented in the chart, so I'm rather curious how it was cooked to camouflage them.

>>15574544
>Oxford, England Weather Station monthly maximum and minimum temperatures, 1853-2021
Very odd why did Oxford only have 18 summers since 1853? Just count the peaks.
The data shown here cannot be what the title says. Such an obvious lie!

>>15586557
I did the same. Looks very different from OP's file. Do your own research fellas. Don't believe grifters like OP.

import pandas as pd
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt

# Load the data from local file into a DataFrame, skipping the initial rows of text
data = pd.read_csv('oxforddata.txt', delim_whitespace=True, skiprows=7, header=None)

# Assign column names
data.columns = ['Year', 'Month', 'Tmax', 'Tmin', 'Af', 'Rain', 'Sun']

# Replace '---' with NaN
data = data.replace('---', float('NaN'))

# Remove '*' from Tmax and Tmin and convert to float
data['Tmax'] = data['Tmax'].str.replace('*', '').astype(float)
data['Tmin'] = data['Tmin'].str.replace('*', '').astype(float)

# Create a date column
data['Date'] = pd.to_datetime(data[['Year', 'Month']].assign(DAY=1))

# Create a new figure and axis
fig, ax = plt.subplots(figsize=(12,6))

# Plot the Tmax and Tmin columns
ax.plot(data['Date'], data['Tmax'], label='Max Temperature')
ax.plot(data['Date'], data['Tmin'], label='Min Temperature')
ax.set_xlabel('Date')
ax.set_ylabel('Temperature (°C)')
ax.set_title('Monthly Temperature in Oxford')
ax.legend()

# Save the figure
fig.savefig('oxford_temperature.png')

>>15586564
>trend line is almost completely flat
Wow it really is a nothingburger after all. Thanks for proving that once and for all anon.

>>15586568
>op's lies are exposed
>gotta save the narrative somehow
Are you the guy who is angry that 25° is red in the weather forecast? Why are you not angry that OP lies about what data he's showing?

>>15586564
Yes, I didn't even mention it but the slowly increasing trend in min temperature is somewhat visible even from OP's chart.

>>15586573
>everyone who disagrees with me is the same person
You should seek help.

>>15586568
>trend line is almost completely flat
Nope. The trend line shows >1°C of warming. It's funny how OP's data contains the hockeystick after all.

import pandas as pd
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt

# Load the data from local file into a DataFrame, skipping the initial rows of text
data = pd.read_csv('oxforddata.txt', delim_whitespace=True, skiprows=7, header=None)

# Assign column names
data.columns = ['Year', 'Month', 'Tmax', 'Tmin', 'Af', 'Rain', 'Sun']

# Replace '---' with NaN
data = data.replace('---', float('NaN'))

# Remove '*' from Tmax and Tmin and convert to float
data['Tmax'] = data['Tmax'].str.replace('*', '').astype(float)
data['Tmin'] = data['Tmin'].str.replace('*', '').astype(float)

# Create a date column
data['Date'] = pd.to_datetime(data[['Year', 'Month']].assign(DAY=1))

# Compute 12-month rolling average
data['Tmax_rolling'] = data['Tmax'].rolling(window=12).mean()
data['Tmin_rolling'] = data['Tmin'].rolling(window=12).mean()

# Create a new figure and axis
fig, ax = plt.subplots(figsize=(12,6))

# Plot the Tmax and Tmin rolling averages
ax.plot(data['Date'], data['Tmax_rolling'], label='Max Temperature (12-month rolling avg)')
ax.plot(data['Date'], data['Tmin_rolling'], label='Min Temperature (12-month rolling avg)')
ax.set_xlabel('Date')
ax.set_ylabel('Temperature (°C)')
ax.set_title('Monthly Temperature in Oxford (12-month rolling average)')
ax.legend()

# Save the figure
fig.savefig('oxford_temperature_rolling_avg.png')

>>15586568
Really? The fact that theres any positive trendline at all is extremely concerning

>>15586585
Why should it be? The little ice age only started ending around the 19th century.

>>15586587
>it's not happening
The minute this narrative crumbles
>it's not bad

>>15586594
I don't think anyone denies climatic cycles happen, anon. That's retarded. It's just that the majority of people think that your doomsday prophecy shilling is tedious and belongs in the dark ages.

>>15586587
>the global warming cabal is faking all the data to make it seem like the globe is warming
>also of course the globe is warming we're coming out of a ice age duh

>>15586594
It's habbening

>>15586596
>climatic cycles
Is it cyclic though? When was the last time it was this warm? When was the last time the temperature rose this fast?

>>15586583
>>15586564
Looking at the actual data and providing means to reproduce plots should become the new norm. Not stuff like >>15574544 which is obviously not reproducible. This board spent days discussing this plot without knowing what exactly is shown here and how it has been doctored.

>>15586606
>Is it cyclic though?
Yes.
>When was the last time it was this warm?
The Medieval Warm Period.
>When was the last time the temperature rose this fast?
I'm not sure I would call 200 years for (maybe) half a degree fast. The rise into the MWP might have been faster, if climate proxies map accurately. The resolution is a little low to say for sure.

>>15586614
>When was the last time it was this warm?
>The Medieval Warm Period.
>a local effect
It's warm everywhere now. When was the last time the entire globe was this warm?

>>15586614
>The rise into the MWP might have been faster
Where? Greenland?

>>15586614
Except it's 200 years for 1.3 degrees and we're going to blow past 1.5 degrees really soon.

>>15586620
It's always Greenland with them.

>>15586617
It's warm everywhere now. When was the last time the entire globe was this warm?
1980s, 1990s, 2000s, 2010s
according to the climatic record the 1930s was warmer than it currently is

>>15586623
Why does your phone label pictures like that?

>>15586629
According to our knowledge the last time it was this hot was millions of years ago

>>15586632
Whose knowledge?

>>15586631
Why do you keep asking that?

>>15586629
Show us the data. This is /sci/, not /schi/.

>>15586637
It's supposed to distract you from the lack of an argument

>>15586642
Yes, it's almost funny how quickly the grifters ignored the whole "OP lied" thing.

>>15574544
the important thing is that you should feel guilty
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=mptNDINqYnQ

>>15586583
OP lied, people died.

>>15587567
Stop bumping every fossil fuel thread to page 1. Especially, why bump this one where OP was exposed as a liar?

>>15586557
>>15586564
>>15586583
Can OpenAI trooners please fuck off?
That is not the graph being discussed.

>>15586612
>not reproducible
>>15586645
>>15586781
>>15587579
It is max temp per month.
Read the fucking pic.
Sauce is reddit. Go blame them, but the graph is correct.
And it is showing what many other records show: that the hottest temps were recorded in the pre WW2 period, and they hold despite faked sensors and methodology after the 1970s.