Thanks to Wolfram Alpha we have access to a great deal of historical temperature data. One would think that through Wolfram Alpha one would see a visual trend in temperature upwards as it has gradually moved with the increase in CO2 since 1980.
Here are some examples though where the average temperature do not appear to be changing:
I tried a few other places, but none showed any of the change in temperature that one would expect if changes in temperature were occurring.
This appears inconsistent with the theory of climate change, namely that temperatures are increasing. How might one explain this inconsistency?
This question is quite similar to
... but in this question the data is from a specific (well reputed source), Wolfram Alpha, and there is no link to the theory of urbanization–warming.
I am concerned about deferring answers to the urbanization question, good as it is, because I feel it does not address the crux of this issue, namely: why are some places not experiencing any global warming according to the data in Wolfram Alpha.
It is not fair to call the sample cherry picking because I chose to look at data from England and the "edges" of North America and the centre (Chicago), being reasonable "corners" of a familiar geography; I did not choose the data based on the result (i.e. cherry picking), though it is obviously biased to North America, but that is where Wolfram Alpha has data.
I would expect, given the huge amount of research on the topic, that the question may be (and likely already is) answered with a map that shows places affected by global warming (a "heat map" of sorts) – which should show that the above places are exactly as mentioned, a variant of the inadequate sample size problem or biased generalization (being only North America).