numberwang said:
Improvement to our abilities to handle raw data... I love that expression. :D Just use original data without tempering. Heatwaves were much more severe in the 1930s with the "Dust Bowl" killing ten thousand. Steinbeck's The Grapes of Wrath is the story of this mega drought. https://news.google.com/newspapers?id=ueUsAAAAIBAJ&sjid=RCEEAAAAIBAJ&pg=4558,3173079 |
There are numerous reasons you can't just use the raw data. The primary reason is that stations have moved several times. I hope you would agree that comparing data from one place to another place without any adjustment for temperature variations between locations, just wouldn't make sense. Further, there have been changes in the types of thermometers used, the time of day temperature readings are taken and the surroundings of the temperature stations. All of this can further bias the temperature readings if they are not accounted for. Again, I hope you would agree that it would not be wise to simply not account for all of these important variables.
Further, no one disagrees that the US in the 1930s had heat waves, so your clippings are fairly meaningless (and death tolls are even more meaningless, given the massive changes in our ability to prepare for them such as air conditioning and better medical facilities). Again, you have to look at the temperature throughout the year (and not just its hottest points) and across the world (and not just in the place which is experiencing the most severe temperature anomaly). That is cherry picking data.
