By Christopher Monckton of Brenchley
The monthly satellite lower-troposphere temperature anomaly from Remote Sensing Systems, Inc., is now available.
Taking the least-squares linear-regression trend on this dataset (the bright blue horizontal line through the dark blue data), there has now been no global warming – at all – for 17 years 5 months.
Would readers like to make a projection of how many mainstream media outlets will report this surely not uninteresting fact?
It shows that the Hiatus hernia for true believers in the New Religion continues.
My own prediction is that the number of media reporting 17 years 5 months without any global warming will be approximately equal to the number of general-circulation models that predicted such a long Pause notwithstanding ever-rising CO2 concentration.
Print out the graph as a postcard and send it to the editor of a newspaper near you that has shut down democratic debate by announcing that it will refuse to print any letters at all from “climate deniers”.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Walter Dnes has an article at
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/02/01/the-january-leading-indicator/
I do not know how accurate it will be for this year. Nor do I know if a La Nina will develop this year since the latest number is -0.7 C. However the January anomaly for RSS was 0.262 so the best “guess” according to my interpretation of Walter Dnes would be an average of 0.205 or a final ranking of 11 for RSS for 2014.
Then for encores, is it perhaps possible, or just wishful thinking, that fitting some circle and getting a smaller RMS deviation, than this FLAT trend line, would be indicative of the circle being the better fit; or is that just some BS I might have stepped on ??
Anyhow my eye says it curves down, just like my eyebrows.
Eyes are notorious for their abilities to find trends where none exists. You could easily test it in Excel with a second order fit.
Is the “Trend -0.00%” really that accurate? I was taught not to pad the zeros if they are not significant. (The earliest value in the displayed plot is lower than the latest value, which tends to imply rounding off.) Jist askin’, Milor’.
Michael B. Combs says:
February 6, 2014 at 7:44 pm
Dear Skunk,
Can you find out who is responsible for the “color commentary” on your trip. I could not find it. National Geographic is in with both (all) feet regarding CAGW but the “expert” on board may be someone such as a retired university instructor. Some such are less strident than others but likely will follow the program if they want to get another paid vacation.
Please do report back.
I think it will be Lisa Kelley. Her bio shows her to be very accomplished, so it will be interesting to get her take on the global warming issue in the Antarctic. https://www.expeditions.com/why-us/expedition-team/staff-bios/lisa-kelley/
george e. smith says:
February 6, 2014 at 7:58 pm
Anyhow my eye says it curves down, just like my eyebrows.
You are right. It curves down at the end just like a sine wave. But since WFT makes lines easiest, see the following down slope.
http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/rss/from:1996.65/plot/rss/from:1996.65/to:2005/trend/plot/rss/from:2005/trend
So much for Santer’s 17 years! http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/11/04/rss-reaches-santers-17-years/
What I love is the scale that you have to use to show anything at all happening. You have to talk about 10th and 100ths of a degree. It is *insanity* to worry about these numbers.
jones, u.k.(us), Ben D, Werner,
I have been above my life’s average height for many many years. However, at my last annual doctor’s visit the nurse told me I was getting shorter (and wider, but let’s not talk about that). My working hypothesis is that Earth’s atmospheric temperature peaked a few years ago and, like my height, is now dropping. Neither of these things do I think of as good.
brians356 says:
February 6, 2014 at 8:20 pm
Is the “Trend -0.00%” really that accurate?
The number according to WFT is slope = -0.000 139 029 per year. Of course we all know it is not accurate to the nearest billionth, but the thing to note is that it is negative and not positive.
However if you are interested in statistically significant warming for RSS, that is since November 1992: CI from -0.018 to 1.936.
See: http://moyhu.blogspot.com.au/p/temperature-trend-viewer.html?Xxdat=%5B0,1,4,48,92%5D.
although applying linear regression through none-linear, stochastic data is technically/mathematically totally incorrect and an invalid technique, it does serve the purpose of showing that GSTA have neither increased nor decreased over the past 17.5yrs, which is the easiest statistical technique to comprehend for the human brain and general public enlarge. It shows AGW is not accelerating as some pundits may claim. Neither does it show warming, nor cooling. It would be even better to add the temporal atmospheric CO2 concentrations below, above or behind this plot to show the none-correlation between CO2 and GSTA.
Applying none-linear stochastic statistics to this type of data is most appropriate, but alas the general public won’t understand it. So for now, let’s carry on. Brilliant work and let people know that warm is not the same as warmING…
John F Hultquist;
However, at my last annual doctor’s visit the nurse told me I was getting shorter (and wider, but let’s not talk about that). My working hypothesis is that Earth’s atmospheric temperature peaked a few years ago and, like my height, is now dropping. Neither of these things do I think of as good.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
The condition can be remedied by ensuring that you lie down whilst the measurements are being taken. In this manner, your most recent results will indicate that you are getting thinner and taller.
I hope this works from my taet. It has become quite the pain doing youtube ffrom a mobile device lately in a post…..
This whole thing just doesn’t smell right!
Just sayin……
Mods, little help?
Go figure!
I am sure the CAGW believers will say we are “cherry picking” to get this result. However, cherry picking is selecting BOTH the beginning and end point. When one of the end points is the present, that is not cherry picking. No warming in 17 years 5 months is just what it is, no warming.
The pause continues.
What happens if we take the RSS back 30 years or even back to the beginning of its measurements? I’m guessing the trend would show a minuscule rise, probably right in line with the natural variability of our climate over the last few thousand years….
I call it…The Unchanging Climate.
But the government will “fight it”???
Looks like ( Ex) Prince Charles was right about “flat” Earthers, just in the wrong way!
Tumbrils please.
Rob,
“Climate Stasis”?
I suspect too much is being made of this.
I’m not able to calculate this, but I would make a strong guess that the 1998 peak has a strong influence in making the trend line flat. If that year was not present (or if the temperature was average), I would expect the trend over the last 17 years to be positive.
A simple test for this would be to identify the trend since 1999. Another way would be to lower the 1998 figure to the average for the period so that its influence is removed.
[snip and it’s really hard to stomach a website full of made up stuff like your citation of “rationalwiki” take it elsewhere -mod]
Reblogga detta på Norah4you's Weblog and commented:
Så visade sig det att verkliga data från satelliterna inte alls stödde CO2-hot folkets påstående om Global uppvärmning…..
Vart har alla pengar för klimatkompensation, ‘rädda isbjörnar’ m.m. gått? Frågan måste besvaras snarast.
AndyL at 10:38
The 1998 peak resulted from physical processes and the follow-on but smaller peaks are related to the first. Get rid of the first and you get rid of them all. This would be just playing with numbers and have nothing to do with the processes.
~~~~~~~~~~~
Matt at 10:45
You failed to mention anything about the Remote Sensing Systems (RSS) report or the finding of the 17 years and 5 months without warming. Why not have a look at what they do and see if it makes any sense to you.
http://www.remss.com/
If I were to read a weather forecast on the web I would not be interested in what the writer thought about religion, aids, or Jello. Please try to be useful in these discussions. Thanks.
So…No issue with the findings as reported, but you’ll write a page-long diatribe to cry “hypocrite” over two words at the end of a single sentence in the article speculating on the reaction (or lack thereof) to the chart? Priceless.
Matt,
Monckton is not posting anything even analogous to your rant (February 6, 2014 at 10:45 pm) in this forum. So why don’t you take your trash talk elsewhere and stuff it up your a**. This is a science related forum.
Print out the graph as a postcard … .
Great idea! I’ll make several and send them to….
A high school senior I know…
_________________________________________________
Hi, Kate,
There has been NO warming of global temperatures since…
before you were born! Very cool, no?
Love,
Janice
__________________________________________________
And a college senior I know…
__________________________________________________
Hey, Zach,
No global warming since you were 4 years old. And, yes,
that completely blows Al Gore, et. al. out of the water.
Bwah, ha, ha, ha, haaaaa!
Go with Rice U. — Berkley is a has been.
Take care,
Janice
____________________________________________________
And a 20-something entrepreneur…
__________________________________________________
Hi, Danni,
NO GLOBAL WARMING SINCE you went to Disneyland for the
first time. CO2 UP. WARMING STOPPED.
Buy: Conoco, XTO, and United States Steel Corp. (that pipeline
WILL happen) — oh, and Boeing (of course!) #(:))
(re: that guy you brought home for Christmas — dump him
he is just using you until that talking Barbie doll Karissa gets back;
he talked about HER the entire time he was here!!! ugh)
Love and a hug,
Janice
_______________________________________________