After another check I must say it is very difficult for an AGW sceptic to get data which is not potentially manipulated. They measure with one station for 20 years, then close it and use another station in a different area, altitude etc. or they use relative data and combine it with absolute data and then create “homogenized” data. In other words clean East Anglia science. It looks like there is a lot of contradicting data, measured at close to or on surface and in the lower atmosphere. There is already a flood of articles on the Net.
I trust the latest temperature data from satellites in the lower atmosphere published by Dr. Roy Spencer:
Temperature Anomalies ( they declare a period as “normal” and then compare new data to this average temp):
CRU School of Environmental Sciences Faculty of Science
University of East Anglia :
Until the 1970s, seasurface temp. observations were made entirely from ships. Different ships used different measurement methods over the years, each of which potentially had different biases. More here
Ocean Surface Temperatures of both hemispheres :
and an interesting article in Nature :
…. Here we show that the hemispheric differences in temperature trends in the middle of the twentieth century stem largely from a rapid drop in Northern Hemisphere sea surface temperatures of about 0.3 °C between about 1968 and 1972. The timescale of the drop is shorter than that associated with either tropospheric aerosol loadings or previous characterizations of oscillatory multidecadal variability. The drop is evident in all available historical sea surface temperature data sets, is not traceable to changes in the attendant metadata, and is not linked to any known biases in surface temperature measurements. The drop is not concentrated in any discrete region of the Northern Hemisphere oceans, but its amplitude is largest over the northern North Atlantic.