By Christopher Monckton of Brenchley
Seventeen and a half years. Not a flicker of global warming. The RSS satellite record, the first of the five global-temperature datasets to report its February value, shows a zero trend for an impressive 210 months. Miss Brevis, send a postcard to Mr Gore:
Why did none of the vaunted models predict this long hiatus, stasis, pause, halt, rest, interval, intermission, break, time out, vacation, furlough, gap, plateau, or flat spot?
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
This simply can’t be right.
I re-ran my Global Climate Simulator on my ZX-81 in FAST mode this morning (http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/11/02/new-atmospheric-model-says-tail-wags-dog/) so I could get the results to check this assertion, and found that global warming was proceeding faster than ever!
So, obviously, since your observations don’t match my models, your observations are wrong.
Now, if you excuse me I’m off to model a new window for jetliners. My simulation indicates that right-angled corners are actually a better design.
http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/03/04/latest-updates-on-ukraine-crisis-2/?hp
A White House statement said the United States was ready to provide assistance for what it identified as Ukraine’s four most urgent needs:
“withstanding politically motivated trade actions by Russia, including in the area of energy.”
Lull, respite, coffee break, truce…
Come on people – just admit it.
The heat passed through oceans surfaces (without appreciably heating those surfaces) down to where it can’t be compared to prior temperatures.
Stealth Heat.
Like bacteria that have adapted to penicillin, heat has adapted and is cunningly avoiding our technology!
Clearly the threat is worse than we previously imagined!
Science! Moar Reserach!
Thanks Christopher, Lord Monckton.
The temperature trend for RSS MSU lower tropospheric global mean from 2002 to 2014.18 was -0.78°C per century. I have updated my pages to show this.
See http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/rss/from:1979/to:2014.18/plot/rss/from:1979/to:2002/trend/plot/rss/from:2002/to:2014.18/trend/plot/rss/from:1979/to:2014.18/mean:13
Warren Buffet has begun to talk sense on GW:
http://www.thespec.com/news-story/4394509-buffett-says-climate-change-hasn-t-affected-insurance-calculations/
Maybe we are about to turn a corner. GK
It’s quite simple, really. There are three types of people:
There are people who (like yours truly) know of the physics of radiation transfer, can solve the equations, fill in the numbers (no big computer needed, by the way), and then deduce that CO2 is not a climate driver.
And there are people who don’t know about those things but instead look with honesty at the data and infer that CO2 is not a climate driver.
The rest are either ignorant or charlatans.
JohnWho says:
Is that Warmist math:
17.5 plus 1.5 equals 20
No. Its the standard math of trends. If temps stay low, the length of the zero trend period grows from both ends. Even more pronounced if temps continue and/or accelerate their decline.
@jim Bo 6:26.
The massive waste of public treasure and massive abuse of public trust via propaganda?
Sure ,it has gone to remind us, that fools and bandits do not serve the public.
CAGW, created by, orchestrated by, promoted by and frantically being protected from investigation by; Our professional civil servants.
Our governments seconded their staff to make up the UN IPCC.
One would note, that after these people have shovelled our money into the furnace, accomplishing nothing of benefit to us, they will retire and demand we pay them a pension.
Being indebted due to their incompetence and robbery, I figure on sending them their share.
Interest owed indeed.
So the benefit of this, is that the fools and bandits are fully exposed for all tax payers to see.
For what is worth, when warming up the Earth,
It mustn’t dilly dally on the way.
Off went Gore and Mann with “it’s Warming!” every minute,
I followed on ‘finkin that us Skeptics would win it,
And yes it dallied and it dallied, it dallied and it dallied,
For seventeen years and six months it did pause,
Well you can’t trust those models when the old time weather,
knows that ‘Cee-oh-two’ ain’t never ‘bin the cause.
GeeJam
Adapted from FW Leigh & C Collins 1919 song ‘My Old Man Said Follow The Van’.
My kids are wondering when winter will ever end. Soccer season starts in 2 weeks and there is still about 20 inches of snow on the ground! Do you just plow the field and play on?
I recall when my son finally realized the true identity of Santa Claus and he gave me a roundhouse punch, exclaiming, “You lied!” How long will it be before the schoolchildren of the world realize that the Global Warming Santa is a fraud and “science” lied to them? Growing up is a painful process.
When will western media driven society grow up?
the CSIRO and BOM think it is warming http://www.news.com.au/national/breaking-news/bom-csiro-make-dire-climate-predictions/story-e6frfku9-1226844241944
Andres Valencia writes:
What the hell! Someone should check Stokes trend calculator. How much cooling qualifies as statistically significant cooling?
Oh, by the way, it is plausible that in a few months, the RSS monthly TLT dataset will have more pause than FREAKING WARMING. Because as of right now, we have 212 months of warming and 210 months of pause.
[For all the angry skeptics. I call the “halt” that way to mock Phil Jones, it doesn’t mean I know the future]
It is such a travesty that all the warming has gone to the deep oceans. /joke
My money is on this being the peak of the modern climate optimum. I hope I’m wrong.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/niagara-falls-freezes-for-second-time-as-us-east-coast-shivers-in-recordbreaking-winter-cold-9168293.html
Jim Bo says:
March 4, 2014 at 6:26 am
>>>could anyone kindly offer an answer for the “climate science” ignorant (such as myself) as to ANY practical advancement of the human condition that might have been accrued
____
I can’t, and from the answers above the likelihood is that the “benefits” have been negative.
However, if you classify meteorology as a sub-discipline of climate science, the benefits have been huge to farmers, sailors, futures traders, insurance companies, and commuters, to name just a few. The expectation should be that, as we expand our knowledge, climate science proper will make a contribution.
And it must be pursued, because it is important. If the 1970’s fear of global cooling had been correct the damages in terms of lost crop land and starvation, mass migration, and war would have been in the trillions of dollars. So it is imperative that we try to have some idea of what is happening to climate. As a comparison, consider the danger from asteroids. You would have been right to argue, fifty years ago, that there is nothing we can do about them. However, as our technology has advanced, the claim of our impotence has become false, so the years of study of asteroid trajectories have not been a waste. Similarly, it makes sense to develop a competent theory of how climate works.
That said, it appears that mainstream climate science up to now has been perhaps worse than worthless because so much of it is wrong and because it flows from a political motivation that is unrelated to how nature actually works. So to the question, what is really valuable in mainstream climate science, the answer might be, the work of skeptical climatologists poking holes in the mainstream theory.
“Why did none of the vaunted models predict this long hiatus, stasis, pause, halt, rest, interval, intermission, break, time out, vacation, furlough, gap, plateau, or flat spot?”
because all models and all theories exhibit anomalies. Sometimes the anomaly is small.
Here for example, an anomaly was ignored for over 14 years
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pioneer_anomaly
“Both Pioneer spacecraft are escaping the Solar System, but are slowing under the influence of the Sun’s gravity. Upon very close examination of navigational data, the spacecraft were found to be slowing slightly more than expected. The effect is an extremely small acceleration towards the Sun, of (8.74±1.33)×10−10 m/s2, which is equivalent to slowly accelerating to a velocity of one kilometer per hour (0.6 mph) over a period of ten years. The two spacecraft were launched in 1972 and 1973 and the anomalous acceleration was first noticed as early as 1980, but not seriously investigated until 1994.[1] The last communication with either spacecraft was in 2003, but analysis of recorded data continues.”
You did not see people trot out feynman or popper and demand that the laws of gravitation were falsified. There was an anomaly. Some people choose to ignore it. finally after over a decade of research, the anomaly was explained, or rather an explanation was accepted.
You see the same thing here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galaxy_rotation_problem
The existence of an anomaly tells you nothing. It doesnt tell you, on its face, whether the theory is wrong, or whether the observations are wrong, or whether the theory needs refinement.
Scientists face a pragmatic choice, not a predetermined decision.
1. Go check the data again .
2. Refine the theory.
3. develop a better theory from scratch.
when faced with an anomaly there is nothing in that fact itself that dictates what to do.
If the theory is well connected to many many many other theories ( like gravity) then folks
lean toward checking the data again ( see experiments that appear to violate speed of light for example) or running the experiment again. Or if the anomaly is small people can ignore it.. for decades. There is no popper machine that kicks out falsification every time you find an anomaly. Judgement is involved. Practical judgment. When the theory is less central to the rest of science, it makes sense to spend time looking for refinements. Here, the anomaly in and of itself does not dictate what part of the theory needs improvement. There is no machine no set of rules or laws that told researchers to look at the thermal recoil force. The art of fining which area of a model that needs refinement is not a simple rule. There is no guide that says. If a model fails, check this aspect. There is no rule that says, if the model has an anomaly throw it out. There is a choice.
Finally, if the model is loosely connected to all other theory, then wholsesale changes are much easier to make. But here too there is no rule about how much of the theory needs to be revamped and how much saved. Since all theory relies on logic and math, there is very rarely a situation where we would throw out a theory in its entirety , meaning all claims including logic and math that it depends on.
So, yes. there is an anomaly. Good thing is that its not being ignored as the Pioneer anomaly was for 14 years. Folks are working on it. This is normal science at work. Its always unsettled.
philjourdan says:
March 4, 2014 at 6:56 am
At this rate, we may see a 20 year flat lining within the next 18 months.
****
If they are lucky!
What happens if a cooling trend starts to manifest itself?
Hey look, I still think the models suck and we could cherry pick from 5000 BC and get a nice cooling trend, but to me, it looks like it warmed til about 2002 then started cooling. Thats what I see in the data, thats all I am saying so keep your shirts on OK, 🙂
@ur momisugly James Strom March 4, 2014 at 8:21
The basis of any science is intellectual honesty of its practitioners. A discipline that doesn’t have that, be it because of vested interest, political interference, stupidity or whatever degrades into a pseudo science with high priests and acolytes. That’s what happened to the study of climate over the past few decades. It will only end when enough people realise how much it has and still will cost them.
ColdinWisconsin:
My kids are wondering when winter will ever end. Soccer season starts in 2 weeks and there is still about 20 inches of snow on the ground! Do you just plow the field and play on?
Sorry old boy! Minnetonka MN, flat spot in front yard, 34″ of snow still there. Assuming normal dissipation rates, this is about 3 weeks worth, or almost the END of March to see the grass.
Max
Excellent! Wayne and Garth the new climate experts – NOT!!!!!
Christopher,
I do not dispute your temperature record, although it should be noted that the exact trend depends on the record you choose. Also, despite criticisms on this site and others, the recent Cowtan and Way (2013) paper gives a legitimate reason why the trend could be greater than it is.
But you don’t actually answer this question yourself, and I feel that it should probably be more carefully worded.
“Why did none of the vaunted models predict this long hiatus, stasis, pause, halt, rest, interval, intermission, break, time out, vacation, furlough, gap, plateau, or flat spot?”
Firstly, there is no reason why the models should predict the exact timing and magnitude of any pause (or acceleration) in surface temperature warming, unless they are explicitly forced with the climate observations covering that period, which they can be (England et al. 2013). Otherwise, in the chaotic systems that are the climate system and climate models, exact patterns of internal variability may be expected to rapidly diverge from one another after similar starting conditions. Pauses are therefore likely to occur at different times in models compared with observations. In fact, numerous simulations show such pauses http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/v4/n3/full/nclimate2150.html. Also to be considered is the effect of updating a variety of climate forcings on the models (Schmidt et al. 2013) http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/ngeo2105, which helps reconcile models with observations to some degree.
Of greater concern might be the apparent mismatches between observed and modelled internal variability, which arguably models do not do so well at.
This model of climate oscillation matches the most sophisticated climate general circulation models to date.
ferdberple says:
March 4, 2014 at 7:01 am
oh and yet another benefit
etc.
What this will show to the EU once more, as in the 70’s, is that energy independence is vital. While they can ramp up production of their own carbon based fuel reserves this will take time. If the Russians turn off the tap all the EU have in store will be gone in 3 or 4 months. Lucky that summer is coming otherwise the number of “climate” related deaths could soar.
Expect a further push for the need to go renewable.
Democracy will make fracking difficult in a number of European countries.
Nuclear is a no go.
New energy sources need to be found, the US can help but that will mean pain for the US consumer, is Obama prepared to do that?
They can buy more oil from the middle east but this can also come with unwanted requests and it will take time to accommodate the oil requirement. Oil prices will go up, pain at the pump.
There is only one thing worse then having uncompetitive energy that is having no energy.
This Ukraine situation must be a dream for European Greens and they will push it for all it’s worth. Expect more fib stories about the climate, the masses are conditioned to this now. It is a much harder sell to use the Crimea as the motivation to go renewable and the EU would not want to paint the Russians in the ways of old lest it starts another “cold” war and turns them ever more inwards.
In the meantime Europe can not afford the Russians to turn off the gas.
The lesson the rest of the world will learn from this once more is that energy independence is vital for any country/region that wants to make its own choices.