Explanation #10 for the pause …”coincidence” has just completed the top 10 list, thanks Gavin! Party on! Excellent!
There is a new paper by Gavin Schmidt et al that comes in as #10 in the growing list of explanations for ‘the pause’. Now that we have a top ten list, let’s review:
- New study claims low solar activity caused “the pause” in global temperature – but AGW will return!
- THE OCEANS ATE OUR GLOBAL WARMING! Trenberth and Fasullo, 2013. But the heat will come back when you least expect it.
- Chinese coal caused the ‘pause’, published in the proceedings of the National Academy of Science. The study blamed Chinese coal use for the lack of global warming. Global warming proponents essentially claimed that coal use is saving us from dangerous global warming. Kaufmann et al 2011.
- The Montreal Protocol caused the ‘pause‘, which reduced CFC’s – but warming will return soon. Estrada 2013.
- Cowtan and Way’s (2013) underrepresented Arctic stations get adjustment to fiddle the numbers so that ‘pause’ never existed, but not so fast. It seems all isn’t quite as it seems. Dr. Judith Curry doesn’t think much of it either.
- Volcanic aerosols, not pollutants, tamped down recent Earth warming, says CU study – Neely et al March 2013: A team led by the University of Colorado Boulder looking for clues about why Earth did not warm as much as scientists expected between 2000 and 2010 now thinks the culprits are hiding in plain sight — dozens of volcanoes spewing sulfur dioxide.
- Contributions of Stratospheric Water Vapor to Decadal Changes in the Rate of Global Warming. Solomon et al, 2010 Science Magazine.: Stratospheric water vapor concentrations decreased by about 10% after the year 2000. Here we show that this acted to slow the rate of increase in global surface temperature over 2000–2009 by about 25% compared to that which would have occurred due only to carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases.’
- Slower Pacific Trade winds caused the pause England Et al 2014. A paper published today in Nature Climate Change adds the eighth excuse for the ‘pause’ in global warming: strengthened Pacific trade winds, which according to the authors, were “not captured [simulated] by climate models.” On the basis of those same highly-flawed climate models, the authors predict rapid global warming will resume in a decade or so when those trade winds abate. But in 2006, we were told the opposite.
- Stadium Waves. Wyatt and Curry 2013. ‘Stadium waves’ could explain lull in global warming. Not un-plausible.
- “Coincidence, conspired to dampen warming trends” Schmidt et al 2014. NASA’s Gavin Schmidt et al says: ‘Here we argue that a combination of factors, by coincidence, conspired to dampen warming trends in the real world after about 1992. CMIP5 model simulations were based on historical estimates of external influences on the climate only to 2000 or 2005, and used scenarios (Representative Concentration Pathways, or RCPs) thereafter.’
More on #10, from Andrew Montford, who writes in The mind-boggling coincidence hypothesis:
============================================================
Schmidt and his colleagues are looking at the hiatus in surface temperature rises and considers why the CMIP5 ensemble all got it so wrong. In their new paper they explain that the reason for this is not – as wild-eyed readers at BH might think – that the models are wonky. In fact it’s all down to an incredible, incredible coincidence
Here we argue that a combination of factors, by coincidence, conspired to dampen warming trends in the real world after about 1992. CMIP5 model simulations were based on historical estimates of external influences on the climate only to 2000 or 2005, and used scenarios (Representative Concentration Pathways, or RCPs) thereafter4. Any recent improvements in these estimates or updates to the present day were not taken into account in these simulations. Specifically, the influence of volcanic eruptions, aerosols in the atmosphere and solar activity all took unexpected turns over the 2000s. The climate model simulations, effectively, were run with the assumption that conditions were broadly going to continue along established trajectories.
Apparently, if you go back and rework all the forcings, taking into account new data estimates (add half a bottle of post-hoc figures) and ‘reanalyses’ of old data (add a tablespoon of computer simulation) you can bridge the gap and explain away the pause.
We conclude that use of the latest information on external influences on the climate system and adjusting for internal variability associated with ENSO can almost completely reconcile the trends in global mean surface temperature in CMIP5 models and observations. Nevertheless, attributing climate trends over relatively short periods, such as 10 to 15 years, will always be problematic, and it is inherently unsatisfying to find model–data agreement only with the benefit of hindsight.
So, with the benefit of hindsight, the climate modellers can fit their square peg into a round hole. It wasn’t that the models were running too hot, it was just that nature has got it in for climate modellers.
============================================================
You can see Schmidt et al Reconciling warming trends here
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Dang. I wanted to close the bold tag after one word and something went wrong. My bad.
in psychology type 1 errors like false positive errors http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_positive#Type_I_error can lead to anxiety http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anxiety which can be treated by CBT
” Therapists or computer-based programs use CBT techniques to help individuals challenge their patterns and beliefs and replace “errors in thinking such as overgeneralizing, magnifying negatives, minimizing positives and catastrophizing” with “more realistic and effective thoughts, thus decreasing emotional distress and self-defeating behavior” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_behavioral_therapy
the whole co2=warming is characterised by catastrophizing?
if the evidence was not enough to change people’s theories and they cling to hypothesis in spite of the facts then really we need to be looking at other methods for them? Merely presenting the evidence to them or the failure of them to find evidence will only work on a rational mind? If so then no matter what evidence was presented to them they wouldn’t accept it?
How bizarre. The popular media hacks deny the science while the alarmist scientists scramble to find answers to a divergence they cannot deny.
We live in interesting times.
AndyG55 says:
February 28, 2014 at 12:30 am
Ken Hall says:
12, Pine forests emitting that lovely pine scent.
Which they only started doing this century.
Because of Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming brought on by the CO2 released from using fossil fuels for economic development.
someone needs to ask them at what point will they give up? What is the final barrier that would make them reconsider? When does the experiment fail?
At the moment we have their predictions that go out 100 years. which is a basically ‘not in my lifetime’ statement? So it looks to me there is NO point EVER they would give it up the co2 deathstar. Which is not science. Its a mania.
they cannot identify when their experiment fails .
I just read the paper from Trenberth and Fasullo 2013….”The ocean ate my heat”….and found this on page 30…
“Natural variations in clouds, changes in the Sun, and increases in minor volcanic eruptions may have accounted for up to a 20% reduction in radiative forcing and TOA energy imbalance in part of the 2000’s but the Sun has now recovered and is now a factor in increased warming.”
The Sun has now recovered? Solar cycle 24 was one of the weakest in a century….and 25 looks to be weaker. Please excuse my ignorance…..but did I miss something?
Gavin Schmidt et al would be banned from the Guardian for such blatant Climate Denial.
The pause isn’t happening at all – SkS say so.
Co-incidentally we have Volcanoes, then SO2 and then CO2 just happening along it the right time span and with the right magnitudes to produce a remarkably regular pattern since 1850.
http://climatedatablog.wordpress.com/combined/
That is SOME Co-incidence!
You know, you are a bunch of cynical old buggers!
It cannot be variations in Solar output! FACT! They have repeatedly told us in ALL 5 UNIPCC reports that the Sun doesn’t affect Climate here on Earth! Except in the past of course, & every other time the Earth’s Climate has changed, but definitely NOT now!!!! Do they really think the populous is that stupid? I think they really do, & they think that they possess a so much more superior intellect with it. I think that is the definition of arrogance!
I don’t get why ‘Stadium Waves’ is included. That in my mind is hardly a pro-AGW excuse.
Coincidence has to be one of the last resorts isn’t it.
If there is no warming for another 3 or 4 years, will they then take the next step and start rewriting the theory?
Probably not, there are hundreds of other explanations that 10,000 idle scientists can come up with.
Seems to me all those reasons (save coincidence) have been acting for the entire life of this planet.
“Nevertheless, attributing climate trends over relatively short periods, such as 10 to 15 years, will always be problematic, and it is inherently unsatisfying to find model–data agreement only with the benefit of hindsight.”
What a stunning admission by Schmidt!
Love the Pic from Wayne World.
I recently found your web site, and wanted to say grats, thanks, and keep up the great work
It was Satan made it happen – he’s the great deceiver! Have faith brother/sister! Trust in the IPCC!
The ushers will now move amongst you – give, give so we can continue the lords great work. Hallelujah!
Rock and Roll!
That what’s to blame.
With out Rock and Roll.
There would not be so much hot dancing.
I liked the Aussie’s explanation best so far: Excuse 1 = they have been bullshitting us, á-labs-Mann.
There was no detectable human-induced trend to begin with therefore there is nothing to explain. At some point the wringing of hands will transition to the washing of hands.
Gavin’s Coincidence: the less-than-1-in-a-1000-chance that bad scientists using bad methods to simulate badly adjusted data forced by badly understood natural causes would make bad predictions of future data points.
The hiatus I look forward to is the cessation of tampering and a pause in the manufacture of artful dodger explanations that delay the very necessary review and reduction of the estimated forcing effect of anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions.
My intention was
Bullshit-a-la-Mann
[Grrr…autocorrect function…]
To paraphrase Douglas Adams: A puddle (if it could think) would find it a remarkable coincidence that it had found a depression in the ground that fitted it perfectly. (Religious people hate this). I miss you, Mr Adams.
anyone have a link or copy i can check out of the Gavin Schmidt and others article
http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/v7/n3/full/ngeo2105.html
Would be interesting to read this crap. If I was Gavin I think I would be doing some serious back peddling
Check out this video inside F-16 low and fast in snowy mountains
http://ianbachusa.wordpress.com/2014/02/22/friends-f-16s-in-south-korea/
Caution may cause dizziness, overwhelming faith in mankind’s abilities, vertigo
Cheers !
So, if the ‘pause’ over the last 17 years is a ‘coincidence’ of unforeseen factors, isn’t the explanation for the temp increase from 1978-1998 also able to be explained away as ‘coincidence’?
Reblogged this on gottadobetterthanthis and commented:
We need a top ten list for why climate alarmists won’t give up their obviously failed memes. Group think, just cause corruption, among other things, but it seems to me the most obvious reason the alarmists hold to their beliefs is that their beliefs are in fact the faith of their new religion. Yes, climate alarmism is a cult, a religion, or perhaps better stated as a substitute for the religion that most of us use to nourish our souls. Such a religion as theirs only poisons souls.
If anyone has access to a copy, please send it to me. Thanks!
[A copy of what? Mod]
I have to be missing something. Wasn’t it the burning of coal that got us into this catastrophic death spiral to begin with? It would appear that now the cause of global warming (the science is settled) is also the cure (equally settled?). EUREKA! All we have to do is decide what temperature it is we all like and burn just enough coal to keep it there. We’re saved!
‘…solar activity all took unexpected turns over the 2000s.’
The change in solar activity wasn’t unexpected for many. Landscheidt predicted it. But then why would this be a problem since it is claimed that the sun makes no difference to our climate?