Note the IPCC nominal trend of 0.2C/decades (purple) lies well outside and above those uncertainty intervals. This means that if 2001 is a “fair” year to begin comparisons between models and projections, then the nominal projection in the IPCC AR4 is inconsistent with the earth’s trend which it was intended to project.

I am old enough to remember working through the coldest NW Europe winter for 250 yrs in 62/3. A open atmosphere test ban treaty was signed I think in 61 to end all atmospheric test by the end of 62. In consequence, there was an enormous amount of testing that went on in 62 that may/could have contributed to that winter.

Dr. Easterbrook wrote: “In 1999, the PDO changed back to its cool mode and global cooling began.”

Yes – this bothered me somewhat. If we’re now a full decade into the current cool PDO phase then I’m not sure global temperatures are responding in the way we would expect. I accept that one cool phase might be different to another, but it only took about 6 years for most of the cooling in the 1945-77 phase to be realised.

I’m also a bit puzzled by Don’s Fig 4. He says “The black curve is temperature variation from 1900 to 2009″ , but the curve suggests post-2000 temperatures have been consistently below (or certainly no higher) those in the 1990s . Whichever dataset is used, we know this is not the case.

But the UAH lower troposphere global temperature record shows a .11 deg C/decade warming trend since January 1999. How does this square with the quoted statement?

Dr. Easterbrook wrote: “The PDO changed from its warm to cool mode in 1999 and since then we have had global cooling, quite moderate to flat (interrupted by two warm El Ninos) and intensifying since 2007.”

January 2007, with it’s very warm reading of a .594 anomaly, was far warmer than any temperature recorded in 1999: that is some global cooling! From that point there was a cooling reaching a minimum in May 2008, coinciding with La Nina and the solar minimum. Since that time temperatures have trended up strongly, with September 2009 recorded as the warmest September in the satellite temperature record, and this occurred more than two years into the longest and deepest solar minimum in 100 years.

Methinks that a 1 and a half year warming trend from the last low with a record high September temperature is hardly ‘intensifying’ cooling.

Screen shot from Gores fairytail.

http://i446.photobucket.com/albums/qq187/bobclive/goresfilm.jpg

Now the reality
http://i446.photobucket.com/albums/qq187/bobclive/Illecillewaetglacier.jpg
http://i446.photobucket.com/albums/qq187/bobclive/glacierretreatSINCE1850.jpg

Now the reality
http://i446.photobucket.com/albums/qq187/bobclive/Illecillewaetglacier.jpg
http://i446.photobucket.com/albums/qq187/bobclive/Illecillewaetglacier.jpg

Wall Street Journal Online

I don’t want Landscheidt and barycentric discussions here. You are free to discuss this topic anywhere else, but don’t do it on WUWT. Owners prerogative.

All future comments on this topic will be deleted.

- Anthony

The pro-AGW climate scientists can’t see variability in the historical record. They (almost) accept that there were indeed ice ages but everything seems to be explainable through greenhouse forcing to them. CO2 hardly changed at all from 9,000 BC to 1750 AD, yet there is considerable variability in the climate over the period.

CO2 fell to 280 ppm (for perhaps the very first time in Earth history) 24 million years ago and has stayed at or lower than that level ever since (give or take some ups and downs in the ice ages and the recent increase we have added.) Yet the climate has varied by +/- 4.0C to 5.0C over that period.

Seriously, very interesting paper Dr. Easterbrook. Thank you.