From the make up your freaking minds department comes this oopsy juxtaposition of alarmist messaging.
In an attempt to explain “the pause”, researchers are now grasping for explanations:
Human actions that were not intended to limit the greenhouse effect have had large effects on slowing climate change. The two world wars, the Great Depression and a 1987 international treaty on ozone-depleting chemicals put a surprising dent in the rate at which the planet warmed, says research published today in Nature Geoscience1.
Francisco Estrada, an ecological economist at the Free University in Amsterdam, and his colleagues analysed annual temperature data collected from 1850 to 2010, as well as trends in emissions of greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide, methane and chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) — ozone-depleting substances that also trap heat in the atmosphere — between 1880 and 2010.
http://www.nature.com/news/ozone-hole-treaty-slowed-global-warming-1.14134
Only one problem, two years ago, we were being told cutting back on CFC’s “…helped to shield… from carbon-induced warming over the past two decades” as the CFC driven ozone hole heals:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/01/100125192016.htm
The new paper:
Statistically derived contributions of diverse human influences to twentieth-century temperature changes
Abstract
The warming of the climate system is unequivocal as evidenced by an increase in global temperatures by 0.8 °C over the past century. However, the attribution of the observed warming to human activities remains less clear, particularly because of the apparent slow-down in warming since the late 1990s. Here we analyse radiative forcing and temperature time series with state-of-the-art statistical methods to address this question without climate model simulations. We show that long-term trends in total radiative forcing and temperatures have largely been determined by atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations, and modulated by other radiative factors. We identify a pronounced increase in the growth rates of both temperatures and radiative forcing around 1960, which marks the onset of sustained global warming. Our analyses also reveal a contribution of human interventions to two periods when global warming slowed down. Our statistical analysis suggests that the reduction in the emissions of ozone-depleting substances under the Montreal Protocol, as well as a reduction in methane emissions, contributed to the lower rate of warming since the 1990s. Furthermore, we identify a contribution from the two world wars and the Great Depression to the documented cooling in the mid-twentieth century, through lower carbon dioxide emissions. We conclude that reductions in greenhouse gas emissions are effective in slowing the rate of warming in the short term.
==========================================================
I don’t think anybody really knows which way it is going.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Heads, we win, tails, you lose…
There was this from late May, which claimed to show a link between CFC levels and warming:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/05/30/study-says-global-warming-caused-by-cfcs-not-carbon-dioxide/
So now there are at least two papers linking CFC’s with warming. That’s a consensus, right? 😉
Apropos: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443701/
“In an attempt to explain “the pause”, researchers are now grasping for explanations”
Actually, just trying to understand.
For years I have hears that the efforts to close the antarctic ozone hole was causing that area to cool as well. So this should be no surprise to those on the ball. I can’t wait to read the paper.
“I don’t think anybody really knows which way it is going.”
*
Yes they do – badly (for them). Hence their need for excuses.
The BBC on the same subject, shows a graph which states “The recent slowdown in global warming is highlighted by the grey shading”.
The three lines within the grey shading have trajectories which would closely follow that of a participant in the Red Bull Cliff Diving Championship.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-24874060
Frankly, until they can explain why the world goes into and out of ice ages AND then can show that what is going on now is unique, then, and only then, will I buy into man-made climate anything.
Oh look! Bright, shiny new climate control knobs to play with on their dial- o-climate contraption.
Pippen Kool says:
November 11, 2013 at 4:31 pm
What’s to understand? The science is settled, right? The 97% consensus is unassailable & incontrovertible that humans are causing dangerous global warming, er climate change, er extreme weather, right?
It is intuitively obvious that CFC’s contribute to cooling. Pop open a can of RF12 and you will freeze your fingers. QED.
There is a simple answer for all this: Somehow, someway for every bad event that happens, we are at fault. So now surrender your rights and pay up. P.S. I, the enlightened telling you this, don’t have to pay and will still have full rights.
When you remember that is how environmentalists think, then nothing is a contradiction.
I am reminded of an old saying: “Jesus, save me from your followers.” Although I do not believe in “Mother Earth” or Gaia or anything like that, we could just as well re-word that saying as “Mother Earth, save us from your followers.”
GHGs in the troposphere and stratosphere have different effects. Lapse rate reverses sign, remember…
It’s a bit of a mess really. A few years back they blamed ozone for the increase in Antarctic sea ice extent. Then they blamed melting ice. Then wind and currents. Pot Puri science.
—————–
Anthony, see my last reference.
This is what you get when the inmates get to running the climate change mental asylum.
Or as an old saying goes and this is ever more applicable to climate change science and scientists.
“Some minds are like concrete. All mixed up and set hard”.
It is about time climate scientists took a long walk on a short pier. What use are they in this world, would anyone miss them if they did not exist?
Have you been gulping the cooooool aid again. If they are “just trying to understand” then they should do just that, but instead they constantly produce speculative drivel
http://www.nature.com/news/ozone-loss-warmed-southern-africa-1.13938
So, let’s see: Estrada & co., are using statistical methods to find associations and then concluding physical causality. Right. Someone needs to explain to these guys how science works.
I also enjoyed Ken Carslaw’s view that his “research highlights the value of today’s state-of- the-art models … that enable such unexpected and complex climate feedbacks to be detected and accounted for in our future predictions.”
State of the art climate models that cannot reproduce ordinary climate are nevertheless touted as able to detect unexpected and complex climate feedbacks. Truly bizarro-world.
A better correlation is with the PDO.
http://tinyurl.com/kzmzd8y
Every upward segment is a warm PDO and every downward segment is a cool PDO. I suspect this correlation whips the one they found.
By the way Pippen Kool, how do you know the Ozone hole hasn’t always been there? The hole was discovered in 1985.
Here are a few articles to cheer you up.
“Closing ozone hole may heat up Antarctica – researcher”
Ozone loss warmed southern Africa
Based on the abstract, this might be the funniest paper ever submitted.
“Here we analyse radiative forcing and temperature time series with state-of-the-art statistical methods to address this question without climate model simulations.”
Can you imagine examining the methodology in that?
And we thought slap-stick comedy was gone….
Jimbo says:
November 11, 2013 at 5:51 pm
Does that mean we can bring back the CFCs?
http://www.wisegeek.com/why-is-the-hole-in-the-ozone-over-antarctica.htm
Every 500 years we go thru mini warm/cold climate phases in between big ones and we are in the peak of a mini warm age which the late 90s were it.
Right now it’s trending downwards slowly so there will again be a lot of fluxing going on with global temps in various areas. The East Coast for the next 5-10 years will have a few very scary heatwaves until we lose the heating we gained in the 90s.
Dad back in the 70s who studied these warm/cold cycles knew that it would warm up again in the 90s while everyone else either thought it would be an ice age.
First the scam scientists thought by the 1990s there wouldn’t be enough food to go around then when they couldn’t blame that they blamed the O-zone then after that failed they came up with Global Warming then even after that failed they came up with *Climate Change* to get big money out of you’re tax dollars.
If there is any other scandals I missed feel free to chime in!
I hate how this article makes it look like I can make a name/email without logging in and I lost all of my article about the different scams these scientists have been doing to us for the last 60 years.
Never mind then. Darn!
If anything during WW1 and 2 factories would be at full power!