zlacker

They are correct:

Daily Sea Surface Temperature (notice the new paradigm started in 2023 and extending into 2024):

https://climatereanalyzer.org/clim/sst_daily/

Daily Surface Air Temperature:

https://climatereanalyzer.org/clim/t2_daily/?dm_id=world

Daily Sea Ice Extent (click on "Show Southern Hemisphere", also showing concerns of being low in 2023):

https://climatereanalyzer.org/clim/seaice/

The most shocking is the sea surface temperature, but we see rising temperature in all layers of the troposphere. A factor that has dampened global warming for very long, since the last ice age, is the ocean's capacity for absorbing heat. If this gets saturated, and since surface waters don't mix much with deep waters.. If the same surplus heat equivalent to 15 hiroshima bombs per second today hits the surface, and rising. All that goes into heating air and surface, it's going to accellerate warming going forward. Early projections are in fact showing accelleration already.

That most people are incapable of emotionally processing this, is part of the problem.

>>_y5hn+(OP)
There's a good chance that the sudden bump in sea surface temperature is a consequence of us cleaning up marine diesel. Which is at least interesting, because it suggests we were doing geoengineering without even knowing it.

(Random thought: what's the sulphur content of automotive diesel? I know it's cleaner, but there are so many more cars than boats. Could we see another sea surface temperature bump as we phase out diesel cars?)

>>flir+g3
It could be that (removing sulphur from shipping fuel):

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/jan/01/shipping...

It could be the underwater Tonga volcano erruption, which put alot of water into the atmosphere. Water is also a GHG.

https://www.nasa.gov/centers-and-facilities/goddard/tonga-er...

It could be El Nino part of the ENSO-cycle in addition.

https://www.npr.org/2023/06/08/1181086972/el-nino-has-offici...

All these are temporary masking conditions. They also add to feedback effects, for increased warming. So could be partly accellerating heating as well.

I think some researchers are seeing accelleration in the overall trend. You can eyeball this with a ruler as well. Even though it might be too early to tell, it's hard to find any negative feedback loops to counter all these positive ones.

For cars, I think we'd probably see increase in surface temperature on land. People might care a bit more then. It could be removed from both gas and diesel. That would bring pollution down, but also remove aerosols currently masking effects from GHG.

https://www.futurity.org/potassium-fuel-sulfur-1369772-2/

UPDATE: As noted in another comment here. Car fuel is quite a bit different category than bunker fuel (heavy fuel oil). We might still observe "unmasking"-impacts if implemented generally though. We'd notice it more too, as the impact would be right where we use our cars.

>>flir+g3
I don't think ships are burning "diesel", but basically crude oil. It's not even in the same category as car fuel.

>>_y5hn+(OP)
Is 1+ enough of a trend to disregard most of the models? Is there no other explanation for the "new paradigm" of accelerating warming? You're saying that extreme warming scenario is now the correct science. I don't think there is a consensus about this.

>>goatlo+n8
It's not enough to call it a change of trend. I have another comment here where there are other, more temporary factors that also came into play. There's not consensus until after we see the new trend. Likely there are some temporary factors that will make the lines go down again when they wear out. But the overall trend might still be accellerating, just that it's going slower than normal human reference of time.

The increasing sea surface temperature is concerning because it directly is starting to harm millions of sea creatures that cannot adapt fast enough. There are multiple die-offs happening already that might be due to this.

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/article/ocean...

What's concerning is that all the arrows are pointing just one way. The discussion is now wether it's accellerating or not..

>>_y5hn+M6
No useful comment, except to say I thought that was a great response. Thoughtful and detailed despite being an extended "it's complicated". My ignorance feels much better informed ;)