Bob Tisdale has already effectively dealt a death-blow to Michael Mann’s claims, here: On Steinman et al. (2015) – Michael Mann and Company Redefine Multidecadal Variability And Wind Up Illustrating Climate Model Failings
But, this recent press release deserves some exposure for the sheer audacity of the claims made by Mann in it. I wonder if Mann is even cognizant of just how AWOL the climate models were at predicting what he claims?
From Penn State:
Interaction of Atlantic and Pacific oscillations caused ‘false pause’ in warming
The recent slowdown in climate warming is due, at least in part, to natural oscillations in the climate, according to a team of climate scientists, who add that these oscillations represent variability internal to the climate system. They do not signal any slowdown in human-caused global warming.
“We know that it is important to distinguish between human-caused and natural climate variability so we can assess the impact of human-caused climate change on a variety of phenomena including drought and weather extremes,” said Michael Mann, Distinguished Professor of Meteorology, Penn State. “The North Atlantic and North Pacific oceans appear to be drivers of substantial natural, internal climate variability on timescales of decades.”
Mann, Byron A. Steinman, assistant professor of geological sciences, University of Minnesota-Duluth and a former Penn State National Science Foundation postdoctoral fellow and Penn State researcher Sonya K. Miller looked at a combination of real-world observational data and state-of-the-art climate model simulations used in the most recent report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change to understand the competing contributions to climate variability in the Northern Hemisphere during the historic era. They report their results today (Feb 26) in Science.
The Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation (AMO) describes how North Atlantic sea-surface temperatures tend to oscillate with a periodicity of about 50 to 70 years. The Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) varies over a broader range of timescales. The researchers looked only at the portion of the PDO that was multidecadal — what they term the Pacific multidecadal oscillation (PMO).
Using a wide variety of climate simulations, the researchers found that the AMO and PMO are not significantly correlated; they are not part of the global “stadium wave” oscillation, as some researchers had claimed. What they found was that the Northern Hemisphere was warming more slowly, not because of the AMO — which has been relatively flat — but because of a sharply down-trending PMO.
The researchers conclude that the down-trending PMO and the unusual slowing of warming over the past decade are tied to heat burial beneath the tropical Pacific and a tendency for sustained La Niña type conditions. While there is paleoclimate data suggesting that this type of response could come from subtle features of climate change itself that climate models do not currently capture, the researchers note that the most likely explanation is the random excursions of the AMO.
“Our findings have strong implications for the attribution of recent climate changes,” said Mann. “Internal multidecadal variability in Northern Hemisphere temperatures likely offset anthropogenic warming over the past decade.”
The researchers conclude that given past historical patterns of variation in the AMO and PMO, this situation will likely reverse and add to human induced warming in the future.
###
Mann-o-mann, here is my contribution to Monday Funny …
Illusory Data Rings False
http://www.maxphoton.com/redressing-manns-hockey-stick-fallacy/
HEY MAN! THAT’S MY DAUGHTER!…just kidding [:-)
She winks. Fabulous.
========
“The researchers conclude that given past historical patterns of variation in the AMO and PMO, this situation will likely reverse and add to human induced warming in the future.”
Does the report specify when and how much it will add? We need that info so we can heap ridicule on them when it doesn’t happen.
In my office at the Pentagon, I have a sticky on the wall that says “2016 Ice-free Arctic Summer”, a prediction made by Maslowski at the Naval Postgraduate School using RASM. I’m looking forward to asking them in Fall of 2016 why it didn’t happen, and then diverting their “excess” funding to more useful research.
Does the current temperature of the surface of the Pacific means the La Nina?
http://oi57.tinypic.com/9zra6v.jpg
CAGW meme come tumbling down like the walls of Jericho? WOO-HOO le the joy begin! I love such back pedaling.
“While there is paleoclimate data suggesting that this type of response could come from subtle features of climate change itself that climate models do not currently capture, the researchers note that the most likely explanation is the random excursions of the AMO.”
Translation, Mann’s work leads him to believe that the medieval Warm Period was not global, but was instead held down by LaNina like effects in the tropics. The implications are that such a long term negative feedback in the climate would hold down global warming and therefore warming in climate models is vastly overstated.
I have heard Mann agree to this statement(including ‘vastly overstated’ when giving a talk to scientists. “I have a reputation out there as some sort of climate alarmist, but I think there is a missing negative feedback.”
It is good that Mann is attempting to use the phrase “natural variability.” But he does not know what it means. Climate Science is the study of natural variability in climate. For Mann, “natural variability” is something you drag in as needed to explain away falsified predictions and ludicrously failed computer models.
‘this situation will likely reverse’ of course they give no time line nor even how ‘likely’ this is so once again climate ‘science; employs the ‘heads you lose tails I win’ approach . Worthless BS from an master of such approaches .
To start the Mann’s AMO curve is wrong, this is what it should look like (blue line)
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/AM-LPF.gif
That press release is just LOL. So many choice quotes of utter inanity.
This one is a blockbuster. Knowing natural variability is important and doing something about it is two completely different things. Reminds of a small claims court TV like Judge Judy where the defendant claims their defense for not paying a loan was, “I told them I was going to pay it, I just never did because I didn’t”. The last part of the quote is a doozer, like they have any means at all to measure the effects human-caused climate change on weather extremes. Utter nonsense, complete fabrication.
The closing line is worth mentioning also due to the sheer stupidity demonstrated.
.
Are they really saying proof of human induced global warming remaining a crisis is that natural variability stopped it? I have heard religious leaders arguing better proof for the existence of God and yes I know there is no rational scientific argument for the existence of God.
I know there is no rational scientific argument for the existence of God.
Yes there is. Bayesian Statistics. People believe it. –> There must be some truth there. QED.
Sarc on: “the Ice Age is just part of natural variability and hasn’t stopped mankind’s warming of the planet”
“…using historical climate model realizations…”
LOL
In other words, “We were wrong because we are right! Just wait.”
(Ironically, if Mickey hadn’t pulled his nature trick, the stick would have been closer to reality. That is “closer” but still out there.)
“looked at a combination of real-world observational data and state-of-the-art climate model simulations”
Translation: “looked at land temperature records that were adjusted to more closely resemble our wildly fanciful climate models”
This rewriting of their own data and history should be grounds for removal from their jobs and possible prison time for fraud.
The key message of the hockey stick graph was that natural climate variability over the past millennium has been close to a flatline until the twentieth century and that a sharply accelerating warming since then could only be due to anthropogenic CO2 emissions. Now, after two decades of no warming, Dr. Mann tells us that natural oceanic oscillations which have been going on for millennia have completely over-ridden the planet busting power of AGW. If so, he appears to have conclusively refuted his own hockey stick and, as the same oscillations were previously at play in the warm phase of their cycle, he has also explained the cause of the late twentieth century warming.
One can only hope Dr. Mann receives full credit for his masterful debunking of the hockey stick fraud as well as the CAGW hysteria and I am proud to be among the first to congratulate him.
The pause that satisfices?
This is news?
Isn’t this essentially item #33 on the 66 item list of excuses for the pause over at Hockey Schtick?
dis-enligthenment on/ (enlightenment off/)
Mann, so you mean, like, the various different length periods of no warming in the various GASTA datasets and LTT datasets are just unimportant artifacts of a fossil industry con$piracy?
dis-enlightenment off/ (enlightenment back on/)
John
Mann’s approach is to close the barn door after the horse gets out.
That still leaves the horse manure.
Isn’t Mann the one who published a paper blaming sulfur from chineese coal is the reason it hadn’t warmed as expected? I guess he gave up on it when it gained no traction?? It amazes me how many different explanations are given for this lack of warming, yet anyone suggesting that co2 simply doesn’t have the expected effect is lambasted.
This is exactly what small children do when an adult catches them doing something bad like raiding the cookie jar or flushing all the napkins down the toilet: they come up with the strangest stories increasingly unbelievable to explain how they didn’t do anything (ninjas snuck in and ate the cookies!).
The ninjas were turtles. Saw it on TV. Must be the truth.
Is it the models that are wrong? No. It is the weather that is wrong.
So basic summary of this paper: using models to show that models are reliable. Gosh, what a platoon of idiots.
I like “platoon of idiots” but unfortunately these people are not idiots, but deliberately obfuscationist.
It’s the year 2025, and the Nuremberg Climate Trials are about to begin. Let’s resolve now to be merciful, to be the better Man.
I thought I saw somewhere a statement along the lines of “we ran the models using only natural forcings, and then we ran the models including anthropogenic forcings. The rise in temperatures since the (add your favourite decade here) can only be explained by including the anthropogenic forcings”. Which of course means that they fully understand all natural forcings.
I can not see any better confirmation of the Soon and Briggs paper on the irreducibly simple model than what is said in this statement from Mann and his cohorts. The models do not capture major characteristics of the climate system, such as what Mann calls “variability internal to the climate system”. Thus they can not explain the climate system, since they can not explain what Mann assumes to be “variability internal to the climate system”.
If scientists were members of a profession (like doctors, lawyers, and accountants), having to adhere to a code of ethics of their professional body, Michael Mann, by now, would have long been hauled before a disciplinary committee and struck-off and banned from practicing as a scientist.
Sadly, scientists do not have to uphold the highest standards demanded by a professional body.
Sadly, Michael Mann tarnishes the reputation of scientists.
So let me get this straight: they used computer simulations to determine the correlations between two natural variables?
So these “geniuses” have “proved” that the two variables are not correlated – in their model? Ha ha ha how stupid are these dopes! What bearing does this have on real life?