Data is currently at
https://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata_v4/GLB.Ts+dSST.csv
or
https://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata_v4/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt
(or such updated location for this Gistemp v4 LOTI data)
January 2024 might show as 124 in hundredths of a degree C, this is +1.24C above the 1951-1980 base period. If it shows as 1.22 then it is in degrees i.e. 1.22C. Same logic/interpretation as this will be applied.
If the version or base period changes then I will consult with traders over what is best way for any such change to have least effect on betting positions or consider N/A if it is unclear what the sensible least effect resolution should be.
Numbers expected to be displayed to hundredth of a degree. The extra digit used here is to ensure understanding that +1.20C resolves to an exceed 1.195C option.
Resolves per first update seen by me or posted as long, as there is no reason to think data shown is in error. If there is reason to think there may be an error then resolution will be delayed at least 24 hours. Minor later update should not cause a need to re-resolve.
🏅 Top traders
| # | Name | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ṁ1,176 | |
| 2 | Ṁ157 | |
| 3 | Ṁ101 | |
| 4 | Ṁ24 |
@ChristopherRandles data is out 1.03 C.
Appears they used ghcnm.tavg.v4.0.1.20250707 from their pub directory which means they ran it just yesterday.
ersstv5 data (NCEI) came out a couple hours ago. The aggregated PSL version that gistemp uses should come out soon as well; for now i've written a program to aggregate the NCEI version myself. (Expecting it to go up to 1.05 or 1.06 by the time more updated ghcnm comes out.)
ghcnm.v4.0.1.20250702:
101.858
ghcnm.v4.0.1.20250703:
102.673
I made a mistake and should have checked earlier... the release date is relatively kind of early (Aug. 8)? I still am guessing it to go up to 105 or even 106 eventually (by Monday night's ghcnm) but it may not happen by Sunday night's ghcnm (for a Monday day run), and I doubt they will do a run using Monday night's ghcnm, so I am hedging now.
Edit: oops looked at wrong date, the June release is July 9, not the 8th, unhedging...
@gonnarekt yeah there usually is a jump by the 6 or 7th but still uncertainty on which ghcnm run they will use
@parhizj looks like it’s impossible to get there in 1 day at least
@gonnarekt It just makes it more unlikely that even by Monday Night's data if they run it Tuesday it will jump up .02C -- its possible though...
@gonnarekt Thanks for sharing your prediction. I think it was a fairly good one (timely).
My estimates have been trending downwards until today where it looks like it has reached the bottom now that we firmly in the medium range model range (GEFS predictions were just horrible a month ago, but as of the last week the error has been comparable to the ECM and GEPS error).
Unbiased right now my guess is 1.040... adjusting upwards using own past errors gives 1.053.
(95% std. dev is in range from 0.3 to 0.7; I am being aggressive this month though.)
Was a hiccup in GEPS in the last couple days (may/may not reoccur), but the ECM/GEPS/GEFS all agree on a decent sized drop for the end of the month, but how big a of a drop? Statistically this drop itself is abnormal, so just splitting between the three models equally puts an (unadjusted) monthly value right on the edge of the two bins; but adjusting upwards based on own errors and considering the other statistical model still gives slightly more likelihood to the 1.045-1.095 bin.
