By Christopher Monckton of Brenchley
Seventeen and a half years. Not a flicker of global warming. The RSS satellite record, the first of the five global-temperature datasets to report its February value, shows a zero trend for an impressive 210 months. Miss Brevis, send a postcard to Mr Gore:
Why did none of the vaunted models predict this long hiatus, stasis, pause, halt, rest, interval, intermission, break, time out, vacation, furlough, gap, plateau, or flat spot?
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
“Halt”. Describing it any [other] way is wrong
Thats a bit od a cherry pick. If you look at the RSS data like this: http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/rss/from:1983/to:2014 ist more like warming up till 12 years ago when it started cooling.
When I’ve asked pupils at the secondary school (that’s limey speak for “High School”) that I’ve taught at how much the earth’s average temperature has risen in their lifetimes I get all sorts of wacky answers. Whatever they say, the rise is always positive.
When I then tell them it hasn’t risen throughout their whole lifetimes they are gob-smacked. Some have even looked rather annoyed about how they have been fed a lie by other teachers in the school that, “the globe has got a fever!”
If you huff and puff you get warmer but the climate not so much.
In Sydney recently, in response to a question, the warmies admitted that there has been no warming for 17 years and they acknowledged that the models are increasingly diverging. The question pointed out the increased certainty that man-made CO2 causes global warming. The excuse as to the discrepancy was the ASSERTION that the heat has gone to the deep oceans-nearly impossible to prove or disprove. Now we hear IPCC chief Christiana Fugueres declaring that Democracy is not well suited to dealing with global warming. Chinese Communism is the best model. All this hinging on the ASSERTION of where the inconvenient heat has gone.By not criticizing her for this outrageous comment, the UN is revealing their true motivations.All so revealing-the UN condones the iron fist of totalitarianism justified on an unprovable assertion..
http://pistehors.com/european-glaciers-halt-retreat-23230588.htm
It appears we are seeing the affects of the solar minimum now.
Fewer hurricanes and now, glacier growth.
Paul
Remember Lord Monckton its a cherry pick unless it supports the idea that the Earth is on fire and it is all our fault :-). If you measure hot days in the vicinity of Timbuktu between January the 26th and January the 30th between 1980 and 1998, you will see that the world is overheating at a dangerous rate, and it is all our fault!
If you were to use a continuous function rather than a straight line
http://climatedatablog.files.wordpress.com/2014/02/rss-monthly-global-anomalies-with-full-kernel-gaussian-low-pass-filters-of-annual-with-s-g-annual-and-15-years.png
you could observe that RSS is now on a downward trend rather than just ‘flat lining’.
“Miss Brevis, send a postcard to Mr Gore”
I worked some years ago with a nurse called Vita, who (of course) I jokingly called “Vita Brevis”.
Before long, I heard the surgeons calling her “Nurse Brevis”
When I explained that I only called her that because her ars was longa, all I got was a blank look . . . . .
This is sure to upset Walter K.
Milord Monckton. Thank you. How stupid are the global warmists??
Climate ChangeClimate Same.For Sydney readers, the next warmie-fest is at Sydney University on April 1(how appropriate) on AR5. Hopefully we can get an evil question in again and turn their warmie-fest into a squirmy-fest.It will be on APAC channel(foxtel) a couple of days after the event.
Global means global. RSS and UAH provide that.
Flat out. The Models are “severely” in error. No global warming
for 18- years cannot(under any prevailing circumstance),
physically explain such a lack of warming. The data speak
for themselves.
School children don’t know what global warming feels like… 🙂
“Why did none of the vaunted models predict this”
Because climate “science” = pseudo-science and the models are crap!
“A perfect lull then”
H/T – Alan Reed @ur momisugly BH
matfromdevon says:
March 4, 2014 at 3:13 am
Thats a bit od a cherry pick. If you look at the RSS data like this: http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/rss/from:1983/to:2014 ist more like warming up till 12 years ago when it started cooling.
======================
Your chosen starting point could also be described as ‘ a bit odd cherry pick’ as well, as can the 1979 starting point chosen by IPCC and others.
Have the other 4 global temperature datasets yet to report also shown the same sort of thing? Also their names and where to find their data would be nice
And atmospheric CO2 is still increasing. What great confirmation of a theory. A theory that never stood up to the laws of physics.
Greenhouse radiative forcing conjectures would require a sensitivity for water vapour (WV) that is at least 10 degrees per 1% increase in WV.
There is absolutely no evidence that WV does in fact warm by anywhere near this amount. In fact it cools. If it did warm by 10 degrees per 1%, then a desert with 1% WV would be 30 degrees colder than a rain forest with 4% WV above it.
That indicates the phenomenal extent to which the greenhouse garbage is incorrect.
“””””…..matfromdevon says:
March 4, 2014 at 3:13 am
Thats a bit od a cherry pick. If you look at the RSS data like this: ……”””””
Well the only problem with your cherry pick matfromdevon, is that it includes data from years before 1997, when anomalies were lower.
You clearly have just arrived at the game, and looked at the score, and you want to include the scores from earlier games.
The rules for Lord Monckton’s “RSS Game” are even simpler than the axioms of Projective Geometry.
Rule #1…Obtain the MOST RECENT RSS anomaly data.
Rule #2…Determine the EARLIEST PREVIOUS MONTH for which a conventional statistical trend analysis yields precisely ZERO TREND of course with the properly calculated uncertainty.
Rule #3…Subtract that earliest date from the most recent date, to obtain the total months of zero trend.
QED Fine.
That is the RSS Game; it’s not rocket science. You are in violation of rule #2. You are Red carded.
Christopher has not monkeyed with the rules, since he invented the game. So why introduce all this legally irrelevant pseudo evidence.
If you believe Christopher has watered the pitch, then show us your proof, that he has.
You are of course free to invent your own game, and see if it is more popular than Lord Monckton’s RSS Game. Good luck on that
http://nas-sites.org/americasclimatechoices/files/2014/02/fig4.jpg
Here’s an exercise in extrapolation (which any schoolchild can perform) of the long-term temperature profile, just in case someone accuses you of cherry-picking again. The above graph was made using the HadCRUT4 dataset, as presented by the MetOffice (part of the Royal Society National Academy of Sciences joint report).
Let’s assume “Business as Usual” means a continuation of the long-term (60-y avg.) profile. Now print out a copy of this graph and extend the x-axis to what would correspond to the year 2100. Then take a straightedge and extend the 60-y avg. profile to the right. You’ll probably find yourself somewhere near the interface between the light blue and green-shaded portions of the image, which would correspond to approx. 1.5ºC above the 1970 level (assuming current long-term trends continue). Yet the RS/NAS report would have us believe that the temperature will rise to 3.7ºC (+/-1.1ºC) “in addition to that which has already occurred” under a business-as-usual scenario.
http://dels.nas.edu/resources/static-assets/exec-office-other/climate-change-basics.pdf
See Figure B5 (last page).
Now try to imagine a curve which would bring the 60-y avg. temperature up 3.5ºC between now and 2100 (which would correspond to the top of the orange-shaded portion). That would require a radical increase in pitch – an increase by a factor of four between now and then – something which would appear highly unlikely to happen, given the well-acknowledged pause for a decade and a half and the fact that CO2 IR absorption capacity is logarithmic in nature.
Equally silly is the premise that “aggressive emissions reductions” would result in a flat temperature profile between 2050-2100. This is pure conjecture, and has no place in science.
Kurt in Switzerland
Of course the RSS data set (known by Sir Chris as the “Received Data Set”) is looking by all accounts as a bit of an outlier when compared to other global temperature estimates.
This can easily be seen, for example, when comparing the temp trend around the years 2002-2006 for all 5 data sets. The simple running 37 month average highlights this nicely – only RSS showing a downward trend.
http://www.climate4you.com/
Ought he RSS crew to look again at their data processing and adjustments to see where the problem lies?
@Gordon Oehler Cheyne says:
I worked some years ago with a nurse called Vita, who (of course) I jokingly called “Vita Brevis”.
Before long, I heard the surgeons calling her “Nurse Brevis”
When I explained that I only called her that because her ars was longa, all I got was a blank look .
This is a succinct illustration of the lowering of educational standards. In my day everyone in the medical profession would have had a smattering of Latin at least, and usually Greek…