I don’t think that headline means what they think it means:
Separating Science From Spin on the Global-Warming ‘Pause’
What’s causing a temporary slowdown in planetary warming, and why should anyone worry that more warming is coming?
Blame the volcanoes
While greenhouse gases are trapping heat, volcanoes are doing their best to block it out.
(Reuters) – Three months ago, the Obama administration made a little-noticed but potentially pivotal move in the stepped-up fight against climate change: it boosted the U.S. government’s official estimate of the future economic damage caused by carbon pollution.
After its first review, a panel of technical experts from 11 government agencies raised the so-called “social cost of carbon,” known as SCC. The measure is used by many arms of the U.S. government to determine the financial benefits of new regulations since 2010.
The new 2020 forecast of $43 a ton was a 58 percent jump from the previous estimate, made in 2010. The issue is to be reviewed biannually.
The New York Times’ Global Warming Hysteria Ignores 17 Years Of Flat Global Temperatures
The New York Times feverishly reported on August 10 that the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is about to issue another scary climate report. Dismissing the recent 17 years or so of flat global temperatures, the IPCC will assert that: “It is extremely likely that human influence on climate caused more than half of the observed increase in global average surface temperature from 1951 to 2010.”
Ten Year Anniversary of the Climate Change Paradigm Shift
Science advances by paradigm shifts. My one-time co-researcher, Nobel Prize winning economist Herb Simon, once explained it to me. The new paradigm begins with a new overall curve. Further research builds upon that curve by mapping the phenomena responsible for fluctuations from the curve. That’s the normal scientific process. But establishing a new big curve requires a paradigm shift.
Such a paradigm shift started a decade ago, when Israeli astrophysicist Nir Shaviv and Canadian geologist Jan Veizer published the ground-breaking study that laid out the chief long-term cause of climate change — cosmic rays. The graph below shows the curve that they discovered. The original is found and explained on Nir Shaviv’s blog at http://www.sciencebits.com/ice-ages:
Shaviv had mapped the travels of the solar system through the spiral arms of our galaxy (shown in the top half of the above graph). Veizer had mapped the ice ages of the last 500 billion years (shown, along with the fit to the cosmic ray inflow, in the temperature record in the bottom half of the above graph). What they found is that ice ages occurred when the Earth traveled through the spiral arms of our galaxy, periods when the Earth must have been experiencing high levels of cosmic ray inflow.
Brian H writes:
Mann, Jones et al, in a nutshell. From Judith Curry:
Once the UNFCCC treaty was a done deal, the IPCC and its scientific conclusions were set on a track to become a self fulfilling prophecy. The entire framing of the IPCC was designed around identifying sufficient evidence so that the human-induced greenhouse warming could be declared unequivocal, and so providing the rationale for developing the political will to implement and enforce carbon stabilization targets. National and international science programs were funded to support the IPCC objectives.
Were [these] just hardworking scientists doing their best to address the impossible expectations of the policy makers? Well, many of them were. However, at the heart of the IPCC is a cadre of scientists whose careers have been made by the IPCC. These scientists have used the IPCC to jump the normal meritocracy process by which scientists achieve influence over the politics of science and policy. Not only has this brought some relatively unknown, inexperienced and possibly dubious people into positions of influence, but these people become vested in protecting the IPCC, which has become central to their own career and legitimizes playing power politics with their expertise.
Temperatures too cold in the south for Cotton….
Maybe this is why:
2899 Record cold temps vs 667 record warm temps From July 24 to August 19