Post

If only people valued peer reviewed scientific papers and regional data more than tweets and blogs and global averages... This is barely ever addressed. Helge Goessling gave a great presentation at the EGU yesterday. More soon.

Excluding most of Eurasia makes it even worse. Regional Absorbed Solar Radiation increased by 4 W/m² (4-year average) and the Outgoing Longwave Radiation increase from regional warming only compensates about half of that, implying there's much more regional warming in the pipeline.

"What accelerated warming?"

Why a 1951-200ß baseline?!? What happened to 1850-1900?

Not available regionally.

This is:

Would a simplistic way of interpreting this graph be that the industrial scale geoengineering done to our atmosphere between 1850-1980 broadly kept a rough balance between positive forcings (greenhouse gases) and negative forcings (aerosols)? It seems temperatures stayed broadly flat.

Hi, where is that graph from? There is a large CO2 uncertainty, which I do not recall seeing

I don't know source of that particular graph, but the uncertainties look similar to IPCC AR6. Radiative forcing (left) is relatively certain, but temperature response including cloud feedback, and how much aerosols have masked, is related to climate sensitivity.

Indeed, which also means that the aerosol forcing uncertainty translates into the CO₂ contribution to warming uncertainty

Looking at NASA CERES observations, the recent aerosol forcing changes are likely stronger, especially over regions with strong emissions reductions from shipping: