![Royal_Society_350_logo_400x175[1]](https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2014/09/royal_society_350_logo_400x1751.jpg?quality=83){kind=logo}
Guest essay by Eric Worrall
The new British Energy and Climate Change Secretary Amber Rudd’s plan to win over prominent climate skeptics like Lord Lawson, by setting up a meeting between skeptics and the Royal Society, has dramatically backfired, after the Royal Society admitted that the pause would have to continue for another 50 years, before they admit they are wrong.
According to Breitbart;
“We pinned them down on this hiatus… they were arguing that yes, there might have been a hiatus, but warming might be going into the ocean, or it could be due to volcanic activity. So we asked at what point would you begin to accept there had been no warming. If there is no warming for five years, or ten years?
“Finally they conceded they would wait fifty years.
“We asked would that be fifty years from now, or fifty years from 1997, when the hiatus started? They said they wouldn’t change their mind for fifty years from now.
The bitterly cold ocean depths have the thermal capacity to absorb hundreds, maybe thousands of years of global warming, even at levels of global warming predicted by alarmist models. If the predicted heat is missing, because it is readily absorbed by the ocean depths, I would suggest claims by the Royal Society that global warming is an urgent problem are already untenable.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Another Ice Age would not stop these lunatics.
Bingo. The ice could be half a mile deep over London and they’d still be claiming it’s warmer than ever.
~20 years of adjusted, rising temps = certainty, 18+ years of flat temps = no big deal. Post Normal science at it’s worst.
They would also say that the ice age was precisely what their global warming models predicted.
And further, that a mile thick ice sheet is good for agriculture!
I’m picturing Charlie Brown, standing on the pitcher’s mound in the middle of a downpour:
“Where did everyone go? This is just a little sprinkle! It’ll stop any second now!” 🙂
There is a mistake in your comment it’s “EVER!!!!” not in lower case, please!
If there was half a mile of ice over London, they would claim that man-made CO2 was responsible for such extremes in climate and in the weather.
Quite frankly I’ve been a global warming proponent for over thirty years. It is so cold where I live about a five degree increase would be welcome. Unfortunately, it has never come to pass and I’m left cold. Please do not wish another ice-age upon us. It’s not worth it just to say “I told you so!”.
They are saying, in effect, that they are not going to honorably stand down. These are people with neither dignity nor grace. Barring a dramatic upturn in temperature trend, these people are rapidly becoming a laughingstock.
I love the “don’t wish another ice age [glacial period] on us” line. Wile E. Coyote never wished to run over the edge of a cliff, but guess what, it happened anyways. Sometimes it’s better to prepare for the inevitable rather then to try to wish it away.
Sturgis;
No, they would say it was “consistent with” their predictions, models, and theory. As would be alien invasion.
Was that 50 minus the current “pause” – or is it better described as (peak) PAGW?
At what point do they start to get nervous? 45 -46 -47? Do i hear any advance on 45?
They will tread on without worry or complaint so long as the funding flows.
No, they will continue to demand “urgent action” and payment of “climate damages” to all under-performing countries. And then clima-technocratic control of the globe.
Yes, what they are saying is that on top of the 18 year hiatus, 49 years of cooling is not sufficient for them (or their successors) to admit that they were wrong and that AGW is false.
In other words, they’ll wait until I’m dead, you’re dead they’re dead and the whole shouting match has long since been forgotten by future generations battling REAL problems, then and only then, will they pop out of their graves to say that, on the weight of new evidence, and with hindsight, their earlier position may have somewhat over-estimated the rate and cause of the warming.
As the saying goes: science advances one funeral at a time.
That would also be caused by global warming.
50 yrs or until the grant/treat money runs out!
You mean a global warming induced ice age!
Yes, It will occur the day after tomorrow….in a theater near you!
The flip side is that they need at least 50 years to show waming.
Yes, but you are assuming rationality.
Rationality doesn’t matter. If they’re saying they cannot state they were wrong until 50 years more non-warming then they are admitting that they cannot rule out the null hypothesis without… what would it be then? 68 years of non-warming?
Hold their feet to the fire on it. Not as ‘falsifies’ or ‘disproves’ but as ‘cannot reject the null hypothesis.’ Force them to proclaim that they are not stuck in a state of pure ignorance on the matter. Force them to cough up the math that shows the odds of natural variability that leads to the 68 year statement. Hound them and all their sycophants until they relent or start putting forward metrics with error bars to show the validity of the duration they’re demanding they be given.
“they are admitting that they cannot rule out the null hypothesis without…”.
=============================
But like Kevin Trenberth dangerous human-caused global warming is their null hypothesis
They will just claim they ran an ensemble of models out 50 years proving today that it is warming in the future.
As long as governments fund these folk, they will never admit they were wrong.
Stop ALL funding and hidden skepticism in their dark heart’s will manifest.
+10,000!
They had 200 years from 1805 to 1998 pretty much. Just that most of that time humans weren’t belching out that much carbon dioxide…….
Oh, no, one hot day is warming for them. If we have another glacial period, they will claim it is so hot it feels cold ir that unknown mechanisms from warming triggered this extremely cold climate for 85,000 years. Like God, climate works in mysterious ways, so we have to sacrifice our future and the welfare of our children on the UN’s Alter of Climate Change.
Remember, they would like the world population to be between 500 million and a billion, which means at least 6 out of 7 of us has to go away.
Let’s not forget what NASA reported on Oct. 6, 2014: “The cold waters of Earth’s deep ocean have not warmed measurably since 2005, according to a new NASA study, leaving unsolved the mystery of why global warming appears to have slowed in recent years.”
http://www.nasa.gov/press/2014/october/nasa-study-finds-earth-s-ocean-abyss-has-not-warmed/#.VYBzdmB3tBx
This is only because Karl et al haven’t adjusted (TWERKED) the data to align with ships buckets and engine room measurements of ocean temperatures.
“Nothing to see here, move along please” It is neither “mystery” or “miracle” it is simply dud science…
BTW my 69 yo greenie mate Kevin said it was 100 years…so there..
the Messiah Heat will return
what will you non-believers have to say for yourselves then?
you should listen to those who read and divine the sacred science
at least we have a date. Lets sit and wait.
But which of us or them will still be alive in 50 years. June 15 2064 …I’ll be 102.5
oops make that June 15 2065 and I’ll still be 102 and a half
“…I’ll still be 102 and a half”
Me too, hope we make it. I can’t wait to say I told ya so
you young kids will never know ______________ !
I’ll be 134. Meet you at 9AM for coffee and sweet rolls. Any site in Manhattan, your choice. To prove that the water level hasn’t inundated the place. ; }
By 2064, I will have laughed my way to the pearly gates as the warmists get what they wish.
In 50 yrs I’ll be 98.9 ………. oh well ……….. just gives me a reason to live that long. ; )
TR
I’ll be 119 and still calling them to account.
I have longevity in both sides of my family going back 4 generations that I know of, mother 90, fathers brother 96, great aunt 106, 20 -30 more in late 90’s, a few distant cousins still alive in late 90’s. Doctor asked silly question, in my case, about how long my parents had lived, I rattled off list of about 10 people without even thinking about it, he then said take no notice of what I say, you’ll outlive me and my children. I’ll be 114, in 50 years, its possible.
Because SCIENCE is all about never questioning your own hypothesis. Everybody knows that.
Well, we always knew that they would never admit they were wrong. AGW proponents will be standing hip deep in snow in the middle of June and still proclaim they are right. This is and has always been a political battle.
But that’s the ultimate catastrophic scenario: the cold summer caused by all the Arctic ice melting! It’s even worse than we feared!
Did they wait 50 years before deciding to believe in man-made global warming?
Absolutely perfect comeback!
They didn’t have to wait past the first pay day.
They must protect their phony baloney jobs. Can I get an harrump?
Harrumph, Harrumph, Harrumph!
You do not need 50 years to ‘know the word of god is unquestionable’
..in this case is the word of GAIA!! EVER Just and Correct!!
Great response. Now that you mention it, I would ask, did they wait 68 years before deciding to believe in man-made global warming?
@ur momisugly Sean Peake: + 10,001!!
Let me get this straight: a slight waming trend that ran for ~23 years (1975-1998) was enough to proclaim a state of climate crisis and a looming global catastrophe, but we’ll need 67 years of flat or declining temperatures (1998-2065) to be able to conclude that it was actually a false alarm?
What on earth kind of “science” is that?
Accepted science. Duh.
Consensus science
Same as communist negotiator’s rules. “What’s mine is mine. What’s yours is negotiable.”
Con-science
Original: “What’s mine is mine, what’s yours is also mine, unless it’s nailed down, and if I can pry it up, it’s not nailed down.”
Consensus, post-modern, settled climate science.
IMO the slight warming cycle dates from 1977 to 1996, ie just 20 years. The trend is flat to down even including the super El Niño year of 1997-98. Other data sets and statistical analyses shorten the warming interval even more.
Political science.
Marlene
Politics.
So, a need for power, domination, telling the hoi polloi what they are graciously permitted to do.
Auto
+10
I think we need two or three, well-measured natural cycles before our great great grandkids can make a valid assessment of human influences within natural climate variability. Esp., given that the sensitivity numbers we are seeing are so small.
Which natural cycle? The 11, 60, 400 or 1000 year cycle?
MarkW
Three sixty year cycles [at least] – to judge by the RS’s apparent need to see another fifty (> 3 x 11) years before concluding they may have fouled their own nest.
Comfortably beyond the likely lifetimes of any of the ranking honchos of the RS – or their grandchildren.
Auto
except that Hansen and his ilk were proclaiming the end of life as we know it due to global warming, in the mid-80’s. and that was with less than 10 years of slight warming
I think it’s very, very sad. How did ‘science’ come to this? How did the Royal Society come to this? Did we really push religious and supernatural beliefs back for hundreds of years for this?!? I find this statement by the Royal Society extraordinarily crass. To be honest, it has left me rather depressed.
Many years ago, before the so-called pause, when the annual anomaly kept showing 0.4c on HadCRUt3, I posted a thread on a major forum frequented by some experts. I asked them when would they finally admit that something was up, for how long would the anomaly have to stay around 0.4c. They all agreed on five years! I wish I had kept those thread links.
Ghost: I think that it is in human nature to have a need to believe in something. Many will deny any need to believe in something but under our skin, we all seem to need to believe in something.
As the communists / socialists gained momentum years ago, they were anti-god and anti-religion. So it has come to pass, that all of our claims of being non-believers in a god or in religion, the human psyche has floundered and below the conscious level, there was a need to believe in something – result: global warming / climate change/ gaia and so forth.
Once this crapola of cc / gw comes to an end, humans will find something else to fill the void for the need to believe in something, anything or whatever is the flavour of the year, be it one year from now, five years from now, twenty or even a hundred years from now.
It will never end. We humans need or are looking for something and no one knows what it is.
The Royal Society’s statement suggests that indeed the world has gone nuts and lost its bearings.
Peter, you are absolutely correct. +10
I often find myself looking for my keys. I can never find them!
Yes, you are right : it is saddening. Their motto ever since Newton was “nullius in verba” which, I think, means that they would never give any opinion just because it is backed by some authority. That motto is now no longer followed. It is indeed sad.
It has become its own meme. They repeat it often enough, that they believe it. Like many such memes, it spreads without regard to logic or data, and the adjustment of past data to fit the narrative helps reinforce it to the faithful.
All the carbon indulgences (credits) and feel-good revivals really accomplish is lining the pockets of those in the hierarchy of the faith whilst pickpocketing others, and establishing a lovely ‘us versus them’ tribal mentality.
Ultimately, the truth will out. Pushing back the goalposts repeatedly simply reinforces the memeplex. It’s very similar to the Xhosa near extinction, and the various ‘raptures’, and all the various and sundry cults of personality and personal power.
If you want to see where reason is NOT, look for the side that demands anyone who questions to be punished, via civil forfeiture, or criminal penalty. Truth has always been, and remains self-supporting. Only memes require intentional coercion by law to punish detractors and preserve the status quo.
Logic and science have always required review and skepticism. Science thrives on challenge, grows stronger as it weathers assaults via logic and mathematics. Dogma, on the other hand, never allows challenge, as it goes contrary to the meme, weakening the position of the belief system. Those behind the meme will forever claim to be using it to the advantage of their ‘more blind’ brethren, whom if they’d only embrace the truth, they’d not be forced to push the unbelievers to convert or perish.
Papal science?
No, papal BULL.
I like his idea of waiting another years to evaluate the CAGW situation..
I think it will take another 50 years for me to believe in CAGW and I’d need to see a lot of catastrophes, migrations and habitat loss etc.
So, 50 years sounds about right.
I say we give him the 50 years, eh?
Actually, it was only 10 years between the late 1970’s (“the ice age is coming” scare) to James Hansen’s AGW (Apocalyptic Global Warming) testimony to Congress. I think it was around 1988.
Perhaps a life long income stream to replace their grant money would do the trick.
Come to think about it, they will all be dead in 50 years so what’s the point. Maye they expect to come back from the grave to haunt the d*niers.
Well, they’re being consistent with Thomas Kuhn’s well-known principle that scientific paradigms are not so much overthrown as that they are replaced when the generation upholding them die out. But they don’t need a budget for that.
Keep in mind, he is reporting the position stated by just two members of the Royal Society:
This should be revisited with a larger body of members. I can think of lots of things that should cause genuine scientists to change their current positions on global warming. And I can’t imagine the membership of any reputable scientific body would let such a statement stand as the position of the membership as a whole.
What I don’t see here (so far) or on Breitbart is the names of the two RSA members who were at the meeting. Nor on what basis they spoke on behalf of their fellow members.
Even if warming were to resume, it does not mean that either the resumed warming or the warming that may have occurred during the 20th Century is or was caused by any human activity.
Unless we (science) comes up with a way to observe and measure the suspected warming from human CO2 emissions, no matter what the climate does over the next 50 years, The Royal Society will not be able to prove they were right while they refuse to admit that they were wrong.
It is a good thing The Royal Society is a political group and not a science based organization.
/cynic
“Finally they conceded they would wait fifty years.” I think they pulled fifty years out of their *** but OK, key word is wait. Blow the whistle, call a time out, all players leave the field and go home. Shut down the IPCC, no more climate panic conferences, put a hold on punitive taxation schemes on carbon and let alternate energy evolve at a natural pace that doesn’t rely on government subsidies. I can wait as long as everyone waits. I may have to pass the baton to my children but I’ve done a solid job of instilling a healthy skepticism of expert opinion so I’m comfortable the fight will be carried forward by strong hands.
A few $ Trillion skimmed from the suckers in the biggest scam of the century. They still win.
But i can sleep at night – with a blanket. My kids will not be hoodwinked either.
Marlene – Well said. A big YES from me. This is exactly what we should all pull for. Let’s throw this nonsense back in their faces.
Well if the oceans are by some act of magic all of a sudden absorbing heat, then why not conclude that past warming was due to the oceans changing their mind and releasing heat?
Really, if the issue was “all of a sudden” the oceans are for some unknown and strange reason absorbing heat, then one must conclude in the past that warming was due to the oceans all of a sudden releasing heat – either way, this is not due to our output of CO2!
Albert D. Kallal
Edmonton, Alberta Canada
The oceans will release co2 as they warm and absorb it as they cool…
….which confirms what we all know: CO2 is a by-product of increased temperatures…. not the cause of it! Who is the d*nier???
It’s just an observation , but from what I understand , deep ocean temperature appears to be quite close to the gray body temperature in our orbit of about 278.6 .
Might not be about science or global warming but a cover for their supported UN agenda to take over Western economies……
+ 1k
A lie can never become truth… ‘they’ were wrong from the beginning.
Legally, we only have to wait 7 years to have a missing person declared to be dead? if that applied to C-AGW, it would have been dead 10 years ago. The missing heat is a real who dunit? heat trapped by the greenhouse effect, goes missing into the deep ocean, by some unknown means of heat transport, as in no temperature delta is evident to effect this mystery transfer.
So the current members will either go senile or to their grave before admitting they were wrong
What go senile? If they believe this they already are senile.
Might as well. Vatican needed over 200 years to admit geocentric model erroneous.
Ill go further, it could get so cold that the Thames was freezing over in the winter again and they wouldnt admit it and stop their gravy train, why would they?
Scott M
Admire the rhetoric, but – on a brief practical note – if the Thames ever does freeze over, it will be deuced cold.
Since the frost Fairs of the Little Ice Age, London has built the two great embankments – the Victoria and the Albert, after our then Queen Empress and her Consort – which have narrowed the river considerably.
Absent any change in rain on the river’s watershed, it means higher river current speeds, on average.
At some point, do look at a map of Central London. The thoroughfare ‘The Strand’ was literally that – the beach – before the great embankments. King’s College, the Savoy, Somerset House, and London Charing Cross Station are all built on reclaimed land.
Auto
50 years without warming
or
50 rabbits without warming or 50 partridges in a pear tree, or 50 golden rings…
PS:
Dr. Phil Jones – CRU emails – 5th July, 2005
“The scientific community would come down on me in no uncertain terms if I said the world had cooled from 1998. OK it has but it is only 7 years of data and it isn’t statistically significant….”
Dr. Phil Jones – CRU emails – 7th May, 2009
“Bottom line: the ‘no upward trend’ has to continue for a total of 15 years before we get worried.”
‘they’ are ‘worried’ by the absence of their catastrophe…instead of rejoicing.
What kind of unadulterated insanity is that?
I would say that the CAGW fanatics have something far worse than a religion. Every religion I am familiar with would rejoice if everyone in the world were saved. In contrast the CAGW crowd becomes angry at any suggestion that we will not all end up in eco-hell.
That’s because CAGW fanatics are members of the worst kind of religion – they are Puritans. Incidentally, this might be almost literally true, since the 18th century Puritan sect had such a strong tendency to see God in nature that their world view had elements of pantheism. The protectionist version of the 19th and early 20th century American environmental movement (the origins of modern environmentalism) is rooted in the Puritanism of earlier American settlers.
That is a mark of religion and not science.
Yep.
Lets look at the past climate records for how long the past pauses have lasted . The latest was 1940-1980 or about 40 years . The one before that ran from about 1880 -1920 . During these periods there was no net additional temperature increase in LAND + OCEAN temperature . According to BerkeleyEarth The North America temperatures did not increases between 1820 -1870 and again 1870-1920 and again 1940 to the end of 1980 . So 40 – 50 hiatus have happened before and quite frequently. These are likely to continue unless NOAA continues to corrupt the figures. I have lost faith in any of their data any more .
Prior to the satellite era, we didn’t know what the temperature of the earth was to within 5 to 10C.
And that’s being optimistic.
From retreating glaciers we can presume that over all temperatures have been increasing, but trying to pin that down to what year and how much, is a fool’s errand. There may have been previous hiatus’s, or there many not have been. The data is just not good enough to tell.
Fifty years from NOW will mean that the pause will have to last 68+ years. From what you assert above, that has not happened recently. Two possibilities: the religious outfit called “Royal soc.” knows this and they purposely put a figure of 50Yrs on it…… or they will find the missing heat somewhere….EVER!!