Because it Gets Amplified

While I am playing with some other stuff I thought I would take a break to illustrate the main thing wrong with a "global" average surface temperature.  The chart above is the Herbert et al. Tropical Eastern Atlantic and Eastern Pacific SST which I have detrended  the section from 20k year to 110k years.  The is the downward slope into the last glacial maximum.  The planet was cooling, big time right?

You can see how the smaller Atlantic ocean amplifies changes in the large pacific ocean temperature changes.  Since the Atlantic provides most of the moist energy for Europe and Africa, land surface temperatures would respond to a fraction of the total heat capacity of the "globe".  The average temperature of the "global" oceans only changed about 2 degrees in this period and Atlantic had a frightening "Global" warming event right dead in the middle of the decline into a major glacial maximum.

The reason I am making this quick post is there are idiots that don't realize that data also will lie to you.  You have to be smarter than what you are messing with or it gets really embarrassing.  Start at the beginning, don't assume anything you can avoid and use frames of reference to verify your work.

  

 Since I have it, here is the same chart with the estimated solar.  By detrending I am just hoping to make it a little easier to figure out the how much solar impact where and when.  The thermal inertia of the oceans matter, both with respect to each other and with respect to "normal" for that state.  As you can see there appears to be a large response to solar around 85K then a smaller response with greater lag around 60K.  The ultimate would be to find a "reference" which has more uniform response to solar and a stronger impact on "global" conditions.  Then use a similar "network" analysis on the available data in the Tsonis manner.  It is not rocket science.