I really dislike this site you've linked. The whole middle of the chart is completely overwhelmed with data points unless you zoom way in, until you can only see a decade or so. There's the extreme data points of each year that stick out, but what's actually happening most of the time is utterly occluded & unclear. The data masks rather than informs.
Here's something similar, created from the same dataset (ERA5):
https://climate-explorer.oikolab.com - I created this to show how temperature has changed for any arbitrary location of interest. Working on adding CMIP6 projection too.
Which version of the temperature record are these tools using, the original raw data, or the adjusted data? Do you have confidence in the rationale and methodology for the adjustments?
Yikes - that reference is some dentists-having-opinions-on-brain-surgery conspiracy stuff. I've seen these before and really not sure why people who study rocks have strong opinions on climate science. A few points:
- Reanalysis data is generated from all available data source - land station, satellite, weather balloon, airplanes, etc. They are corrected from observational biases, using the similar approach as Kalman filter, combining data with known laws of physics.
- I do have confidence and use these data for analyzing weather-driven utility load data with excellent result.
They have long time series: https://climatereanalyzer.org/reanalysis/monthly_tseries/
They have wonderful daily difference-from-average "anomoly" maps: https://climatereanalyzer.org/wx/DailySummary/#t2anom
I really dislike this site you've linked. The whole middle of the chart is completely overwhelmed with data points unless you zoom way in, until you can only see a decade or so. There's the extreme data points of each year that stick out, but what's actually happening most of the time is utterly occluded & unclear. The data masks rather than informs.