If you know ANYTHING about science you know that 0.11 degrees change would be trivial and insignificant, espectially when compared to the margin of error necessary when trying to determine temperature from tree rings and ice layers.
You can say a fat tree ring means warmer temp, but you cannot say with ANY accuracy closed than +/- 5 degrees what the temperate was.
It is like having a yardstick, and trying to accurately measure to thousandths of an inch. It is impossible.
The size of tree rings is more a function of the WATER available that year than the temperature. Do we have trees that have been around for hundreds of thousands of years?
What I was taught in science was that your findings were not to be listed as more accurate than your instrument could read. I think I’m going to blame calculaters that read to significantly long decimals for part of the problem.
Ship’s (deck) officers are trained weather observers. My highly accurate weather bureau provided thermometer was marked in whole degrees but could be interpreted to fractions. I never listed anything but a whole or within half degree. Mind you that different ships took those temperatures at different heights above the water. Also water temperatures were taken at different depths.
Most air temperatures taken at sea were not taken on the highly accurate thermometers either, but on a cheaper model hung on the side of the bridge. Those temperatures were read to the whole degree.
What you have are readings in whole degrees “accurized” to two decimal points.