But what if global temperatures exceed the tipping point for one or two years and then drop away like they have in the past, just as they had during the thirty nine year cooling period that took place between 194o-1979, despite a rapid increase in GHG emissions due to car and arms production or the longest period of 20th century warming that happened between 1910 to 1939 when emissions remained stable.

Eiffel Tower  1.5 C  Rally   Click to enlarge

It was futile talking about a global temperature tipping point of 1.5 C, above the average temperature of the pre-industrial period, while they won’t provide the data. The more you inquired the more the IPCC scientists would waffle: “In principle, ‘pre-industrial levels’ could refer to any period of time before the start of the industrial revolution”. “But the number of direct temperature measurements decreases as we go back in time”. “Defining a ‘pre-industrial’ reference period is, therefore, a compromise between the reliability of  the temperature information and how representative it is of  pre-industrial conditions”.However, they did provide a clue when they wrote: “Human-induced warming has already reached about 1°C above the pre-industrial level

which is similar to NOAA who estimated 13.72 C for the period.

NOAA 2018 Report    Click to enlarge

NOAA and Met Office, two of the main players in global temperature measuring have just revealed, in a roundabout way, the average temperature for the periods 1850-1900 and 1880-1900, both arriving at similar levels, NOAA 13.72 C and Met Office 13.670 C. By adding 1.5 C to either and we have their approximate tipping points…. 15.220 C and 15.170 C respectively.

NOAA in their 2018 report, as they usually do, have shown the annual global temperature by adding the anomaly (0.79 C) to the 20th century average of 13.90 C to indicate a temperature of 14.69 C  But in an earlier report they had identified a global temperature departure of more than 1.0°C (1.8°F) above the 1880–1900 average, which is a period that is commonly used to represent the pre-industrial conditions. However, 2018 was just shy of reaching the 1.0°C (1.8°F) mark at 0.97°C (1.75°F). A simple deduction o.97 C from 14.69 C is  equal to 13.72 C for the pre-industrial average. NOAA is yet to finalise their data for 2019 which could yet exceed the global temperature in their 2018 climate report.

Scientists at the Met Office Hadley Centre and at the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit produce the HadCRUT4 dataset, which is used to estimate global temperature. The HadCRUT4 global temperature series shows that the average of January to October 2019 was 1.04±0.1 °C above pre-industrial levels, taken as the average over the period 1850-1900, and/or by adding 0.43±0.1 C to the 1981-2010 average, which according to their temperature data is 14.28 C and you get 14.71 C as the likely 2019 temperature. So if you subtract 1.04 C from 14.71 C the estimated average for the pre-industrial period is 13.670 C.

Special thanks to Jennifer for attachment and her efforts in contributing to this item.


  1. Martin says:

    NOAA and Met Office appear closer than in previous years with a difference of only 0.08 C, bearing in mind NOAA have not announced their final data for 2019. Same applies with NASA. In past years Met Office has been up to 0.150 C cooler than both NASA and NOAA..

  2. David says:

    Climate change deniers are dangerous – they don’t deserve a place on our site! This is the magazine called The Conversation which the City of Melbourne rely upon for information in their climate emergency declaration. This silliness could result in the councillors being voted out at the next election. Check it out for yourself.

  3. Rankins Road says:

    What caused the record fires in 1896? Climate Change? In the late 19th century, Australia was struck by a heatwave so intense that 435 people were killed and hundreds more were sent fleeing for their lives. Key points: Bourke, NSW, is recorded as hitting 48.9C three times in 1896, with a maximum temperature of 38C for over three weeks straight But climate scientists say the methods used to record temperature in 1896 were flawed and heatwaves today are hotter! They say the high death toll in 1896 was due to the community being more vulnerable to heat events! The 1895-1896 heatwave during the Federation Drought holds the record as Australia’s deadliest heatwave, closely followed by 2009

    1. Florida Mansions says:

      It is no wonder the pre-industrial period temperatures have varied from one authority to another since a lot of it was guess work so it’s no wonder the IPCC won’t/can’t tell us what they were.

      1. Peter Webb says:

        The IPCC have warned that climate change represents an urgent and a potentially irreversible threat to human societies and the planet. In recognition of this, the central aim is to pursue efforts to limit global temperature rise to no more than 1.5°C above average pre-industrial levels (1880-1900). In their reports they are unable say what the temperatures were during this period. The ABC, who have done their research on the subject, quote climate scientists referring to heat records in 1896: “The methods used to record temperatures in 1896 were flawed and heat waves today are hotter”. Which pretty much explains why the IPCC have no reliable climate data before 1900. So much for the irreversible threat to mankind, the tipping point, if we don’t have a starting point!!

    2. Dave says:

      That is entirely possible. Up until 1963 Ocean temperatures were measured by thermometers dipped in a bucket of sea water drawn off the side of a ship. From 1963 to 2000 thermometers were placed in ships water intake pipe but this was abandoned due a 0.6 C warming bias caused by the heat of the engine room. We now have sea buoys in conjunction with satellites that are more accurate but the degree of accuracy is still problematic.

  4. Florida Mansions says:

    With new technology in regard to Video Conferencing it is now possible to participate in overseas meetings without having to be there, an enormous boon in reducing the world’s emissions particularly the amount generated by air travel. This is the obvious way to go, especially where there are major climate conferences, the likes of Paris where 40,000 attended or Madrid which drew more than 25,000 delegates, most of whom would have flown there. The difficulties with these 12 day events are the absenteeism, the love of a junket, more booze, sightseeing and dare I say….the odd romantic liaison. Supporters of the misguided Greta Thunberg, who sailed across the Atlantic to Spain, had suggested that those attending Madrid should have done the same.

  5. Ross says:

    Global Warming? .absolute BS
    The average global temperature in 1881 was 13.68 C. The average temperature between 1971-1980 was 13.95 C and increase of 0.27 C over nearly a century!!
    We did not get any warming until after IPCC was formed with a mandate to find out the extent of mankind’s impact on climate!!

  6. Campo says:

    The prime minister is being attacked for the his lack action in combating global warming. Climate change (drought) will make bush fires more intensive, especially if forest floor debris is not being cleared. But sadly, apart from a small percentage due to natural causes, all bush fires are lit by the hand of man, either accidentally or by a deliberate action..

  7. stanley says:

    The provisional estimate from HadCRUT4 for the 2019 temperature does not look right to me because it is rare that we have a temperature increase of 0.200 C warmer than the previous year. Mind you this was only an estimate made in October and announced early to rev up the Madrid delegates just as they did one month prior to the Paris conference in 2015.

  8. Tilley says:

    At the close of the Paris Conference delegates stood up, hugged each other and held hands, saying this is amazing!
    Has any of climate activists, who claim AUSTRALIA is not doing enough, ever bothered to read the PARIS ACCORD? According to its critics it was somewhere between a farce and a fraud. Countries didn’t have to mention GHG and wrote whatever they wanted to in their submissions.
    The media announced that CHINA and INDIA had made major substantial commitments which they had not.
    All that CHINA pledged was to reach peak emissions by about 2030. In other words, CHINA simply promised to do exactly what they were already going to do anyway, or even less..
    INDIA made no pledge to limit emissions at all. Only to become more efficient. But to become efficient “less quickly”. So their pledge was actually to slow down the rate of emissions reduction.
    PAKISTAN pledged to reach a peak at some point after which to begin reducing emissions.
    Now RUSSIA have caved in to the fossil fuel industry and have no plan..
    SAUDI ARABIA’s 2030 climate commitment is highly unclear, due to a lack of data availability, including the absence of any national emissions projections and the fact that Saudi Arabia has not published the baseline corresponding to its Paris Agreement. SAUDI ARABIA and CHINA seem more intent on ploughing billions of dollars into developing small islands/atolls, such as the MALDIVES, who are due be swamped by sea level rise.
    The UNITED STATES have pulled out altogether. TURKEY, who have not ratified, is seeking to achieve self-sufficiency through a massive expansion of COAL fired power.

  9. Tilley says:

    The Paris Agreement was negotiated with an idea of what “pre-industrial” meant. Even if people decide they’d rather “pre-industrial” mean something else, that desire does not change the terms of the agreement. Attempting to change the baselines used for an agreement after the agreement has been negotiated and ratified in order to force people to do things they didn’t agree to is not okay.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *