2015 is likely to be the warmest year on record. This has been on the cards for a long time and everyone has probably noticed by now. Recently, the WMO issued another press release explaining this once again. It also mentioned that 2011-2015 was the warmest five-year period on record.The wording was as follows:
"The years 2011-2015 have been the warmest five-year period on record, with many extreme weather events - especially heatwaves - influenced by climate change, according to a WMO five-year analysis.
...
According to preliminary figures as of the end of September 2015, 2011-15 was the world's warmest five-year period on record, at about 0.57°C (1.01°F) above the average for the standard 1961-90 reference period. It was the warmest five-year period on record for Asia, Europe, South America and Oceania, and for North America. WMO compiled the five-year analysis because it provides a longer-term climate signal than the annual report."When a time series is averaged over several data points, the curve is smoothed and the noise of short-term fluctuations is reduced. This often makes longer-term changes more visible. On the same day (25 November), the Süddeutsche Zeitung reported on the report and put it like this: "The period from 2011 to 2015 was also the hottest five-year phase since measurements began, it said.The FAZ, Abendblatt, tagesschau.de, Stern and Bild newspapers also reported as follows:FAZ:
"This would make 2015 the fifth record year in a row. "This is all bad news for the planet," said WMO Secretary-General Michel Jarraud a few days before the start of the World Climate Summit in Paris.Abendblatt:
"Reliable data goes back to around 1850. This would make 2015 the fifth record year in a row."tagesschau.de:
"If the UN's forecast proves correct, it would be the fifth record year in a row."While The Star wrote on November 25:"The period from 2011 to 2015 was also the hottest five-year period since measurements began..."Followed on November 30:
"The year 2015 was the warmest year since weather records began. Again. This makes 2015 the fifth record year in a row"And the Bild newspaper even looked for a picture to go with it:
Has anyone noticed anything?
"Record year" implies that a record was achieved. In this case, that would be years that were hotter than any before (always referring to the years you have measurements of!). 2015 will most likely be the second record year in a row, not the fifth. 2010 also set a global temperature record, but 2011, 2012 and 2013 did not. You can now argue that several record years in a five-year period are also totally blatant and 2011, 12 and 13 were also pretty warm anyway, but basically one has nothing to do with the other. "Fifth record year in a row" in relation to the global temperature is simply wrong.
As an average paranoid conspiracy theorist who took a statistics course at some point in high school, when I look at the graphic in the Bild newspaper, I think to myself: "Hah! The lying press! There weren't that many record years! It's not that hot! They're taking the piss!" And then I google a bit and learn that climate change is an invention by Obama, violates the laws of thermodynamics, and so on. When I look at this as a basically interested, informed reader, I might think to myself: "athat's why I don't read media reports on climate change!...is tragic, of course, because you have to conclude that it's no better with other topics (where I don't notice because I know less about it)" (quote from the WZ Forum) The tragedy, in my opinion, is that the already rather unpleasant public debate about climate change is gradually becoming even more unpleasant because people who might have something useful to contribute no longer feel like participating. Now the example here is perhaps not directly earth-shattering, but someone will have thought to themselves: "What kind of strange wording is that, the warmest five-year phase? We can do it better than that!" and the others then copied it. But it's a bit unfortunate that something like this doesn't seem to be noticed, at least according to the WeatherBlog. It may be a small thing (again, it's debatable), but it's simply wrong and really not a terribly complicated issue. Of course, you have to be allowed to make mistakes now and then, or to change your mind when you gain new insights. If it were otherwise, the earth would still be a disk and the natural sciences would not work. In the same way, you are allowed to copy something incorrectly or make typos from time to time. But at the latest when you use an image that doesn't match the text, you could think about whether you have at least roughly understood what you are writing. Or?
And the weather?
Well, we find that similarly irritating, so we'll keep it short. There's no snow in sight in the Alps for the time being, it will remain very warm and, apart from a little fog in the valleys, mostly sunny.
