I will post the Skeptical Science 2C Tracker image through Dec 2015, when it becomes available, but if my
1.106C value (let alone DO's 1.15 value) is correct referenced to the 1880-1909 preindustrial baseline, then the attached Met Office plot indicating about a
1C value referenced to the preindustrial baseline average between 1850-1900, may be an intentional effort on the part of mainstream climate scientists (like Gavin Schmidt who should be reporting data baselined to 1880-1909) to reduce the drama associated with their announcement. I think that the different scales used by scientists confuses the public and reduces pressure on policymakers to take adequate action:
http://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-how-2015-became-the-hottest-year-on-recordExtract: "Global temperature in 2015 was 0.75C above the 1961-1990 long-term average and a full 1C above preindustrial times, according to official figures from the UK’s Met Office.
Rising greenhouse gases and a “small contribution” from the El Niño in the Pacific combined to cause the record temperatures in 2015, the Met Office’s Prof Adam Scaife tells Carbon Brief.
There is unlikely to be any respite – scientists expect 2016 to be even warmer than 2015, says Scaife.
Overall, we expect El Niño to contribute around 25% to what will most likely be a new record global temperature in 2016.
…
(Note: The Met Office traditionally uses a 1961-1990 baseline, rather than the less well-defined “preindustrial” level. Where it uses term ‘preindustrial’, this refers to the average between 1850-1900, which is taken to be representative of a time before industrialisation took effect.)"
