[torstenvl]

I've looked a few times, but I have been unable to find a table of global average temperatures by month for the past few decades. The only "true facts" that newspapers publish are those that are cherry-picked.

I, personally, accept climate change on faith because I defer to the experts. However, it's shocking to me how inaccessible unbiased facts are. It is conceivable that record cold temps are being set just as often. It's conceivable that nearly everything is a record if global averages are just now being recorded by month (or if they have been rebaselined after a methodology change).

Articles like this raise more questions than they answer. They aren't going to convince someone who isn't already convinced, and they only demoralize those who already are convinced.

[pwinnski]

I believe that being exposed to the same piece of information repeatedly causes us humans to believe it is true, whether it's true or not. So the evidence suggests that articles like this actually are helpful, since there are only so many times you can read that this is the warmest [month] on record before you start to believe that things probably are getting warmer overall.

But as to what you were seeking, here were my first DDG results:

https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/...

https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/global-temperature/

I think newspapers publish things that are news, which means it's something that happens at a given point in time. A monthly number is news, while "the past few decades" is not. An organization putting out a press release is news, so if that mentions a long-term trend, that can become news, but if it hasn't changed in any detail since the last report, then it's not really news either.

Newspapers, and news sources in generally, are really bad at communicating long-term trends like global climate change, unfortunately.