Viscount Monckton of Brenchley
The New Pause has lengthened by a further month, from 6 years 8 months to 6 years 9 months. As usual, it is calculated as the longest period, up to the most recent month for which data are available, during which the trend on the UAH global mean lower-troposphere temperature dataset is zero.
If anyone has seen a mention of this emerging and now quite long Pause in any mainstream news medium, let me know in comments. Here in the UK, the unspeakable BBC has kept the fact secret from its rapidly-dwindling audiences, preferring instead to broadcast a hysterical piece saying that the frequency of local temperature measurements worldwide exceeding 50 C° has risen in recent decades. Of course, the leftist numbskulls at the BBC took no steps to verify the extent to which the measurements had become more frequent because in hot countries more temperature stations are in operation, and still fewer steps to deWattsify the temperature record by excluding stations inappropriately sited or inadequately shaded. Besides, in a generally warming world one would expect new high-temperature records.
HadCRUT4 has at last updated its surface-temperature record to August 2021, showing no global warming for 7 years 6 months. For almost all the period between IPCC’s 2013 and 2021 Assessment Reports, there has been no global warming at all.
My noble friend Simon Clanmorris has kindly sent me a revealing analysis of the discrepancies between the HadCRUT3, -4 and -5 datasets. It shows that almost 20% of the warming imagined in the HadCRUT5 dataset arises from ex-post-facto adjustments (whether justified or not) to the previously-estimated temperature record.
Why does these long Pauses matter? It is not just that they cause entertaining conniptions among the ungodly (just watch the pompous, pietistic whining by the lavishly-paid trolls who seek to disrupt these threads day after day, convincing none but themselves).
What a long Pause shows – and the New Pause is now a long Pause – is not that there has not been warming in the past, nor that there will be no warming in future, but that for whatever reasons the Earth is at present likely to be in approximate radiative balance with its surroundings, notwithstanding an undiminished and continuing linear uptrend in anthropogenic radiative forcing.
IPCC (2021) imagines that there is an Earth energy imbalance of 0.8 Watts per square meter. But the long Pause indicates that the imbalance (which is extremely difficult to measure directly, and is subject to very wide error margins) is not significantly different from zero.
In short, our activities may be exerting a far smaller influence on the weather than the profiteers of doom would wish us to imagine. Cue trolls.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
What imbalance there is is due to a Super El Nino with multiple-year impacts.
“IPCC (2021) imagines that there is an Earth energy imbalance of 0.8 Watts per square meter. But the long Pause indicates that the imbalance (which is extremely difficult to measure directly, and is subject to very wide error margins) is not significantly different from zero.”
IPCC AR6 WG1 cites Schuckmann 2020 which states that the EEI is +0.87±0.12 W/m2. That is significantly different from zero.
EEI from early 2000s, ending on a Super El Nino. Real representative. Schuckmann said the data from before 2005 was unreliable. The 18+ year pause up to 2015 would make one pause before accepting EEI data that included a later Super El Nino.
Where in that publication is it said that data before 2005 is unreliable?
The +0.87±0.12 W/m2 is figure is from 2010-2018. The ONI averaged -0.01 during this period. Not that it matters since ENSO has little effect on the long term evolution of the EEI. ENSO just moves heat around within the climate system. It doesn’t create heat or perturb the energy balance of the climate system as a whole long term.
One cannot be sure that the recent spate of extreme El Nino events is attributable purely to internal variability. It is possible that some of the warming comes from heightened subocean volcanic activity.
In response to bdgwx, IPCC’s midrange estimate of the Earth’s energy imbalance is 0.79 Watts per square meter, which is the mean of the values given in two recent papers.
However, the long Pause suggests that, regardless of IPCC’s estimate, there is in fact no significant Earth energy imbalance.
As far as I can tell, most postings about “The Pause” are a bit of statistical mischief intended to throw a cat amongst the pigeons.
Judging by the heat:light ratio of the comments, it succeeded admirably.
The statistical entertainment of finding a pause in a noisy data set with a general trend does have an implicit point which seems to have been missed. If a flat line can be found in a noisy data set (i.e. a period which exactly offsets the trend), similar periods where the noise reinforces the trend will also occur.
An 18 year interval without any warming despite steadily rising CO2 was an obvious problem for the CACA hypothesis. The inconvenient truth spawned dozens of desperate explanations. The Pause ended only due to another Super El Nino, comparable to that at its beginning.
Now following Super El Nino 2015-16, Earth is cooling, leading to a new Pause which overlaps with the previous one. Should the cooling trend last long enough, the Pauses will unite, for a period without warming lasting longer than the 21st century. This is a real possibility, given Solar Cycle 25’s likely weakness, and an interval of more Las Ninas than Los Ninos.
Should the new Pause lengthen at an average of one year per year, unification could happen before 2033.
Sadly for lovers of the Pause, this is extremely unlikely.
Even if this year’s lower temperatures continue at the current level, the start date of the “New Pause” will start to creep forward – as indeed has already happened (by 1 month, so far)
The start-date for the New Pause as reported in last month’s column was January 2015. The start-date as reported above was January 2015. It is the length of the Pause, not its start-date, that has crept forward by one month.
If there is a winter La Nina, its effect will be felt in the next month or two. That would lengthen the Pause still further.
Then CO2’s impact on the atmosphere is simply noise? If it quits acting for 18+ years, it isn’t very noisy, is it?
I can’t wait until the serious global cooling kicks in. There will be blood in the streets from the ignorant libnuts jumping from tall buildings.
To the wet, moronic trolls…..
Why do I have to constantly tell you that it has not warmed from 1958 to 2000….??
Why do you find it so difficult to accept direct atmospheric measurement?
Continued…
Dear wet, moronic trolls,
Everyone (except you perhaps) can see that radiosonde and satellite data agree. That means they are correct. You can also see here that there has been no warming to 2020 either…
If I read that the oceans ate my warming one more time…..
Until we have a reliable and independent metric for global temperature, not a lot can be said about global temperature.
The figure below is comparison of IPCC projections and observations from my recently published paper (https://doi.org/10.1029/2019EA001015) for the 30-year moving GMT trends for the period 1880-2018, showing the observed trend is approaching IPCC’s minimum projection of 1.5 deg C/century.
That result accords with UAH, whose trend since 1979 is equivalent to about 1.4 K/century. However, not all of the warming was anthropogenic. Furthermore, IPCC’s original prediction in 1990 was for warming of more like 3.4 K/century equivalent. These long Pauses indicate that the Earth is quite close to radiative equilibrium with respect to its surroundings.
The problem with this is, it’s clearly not climate science. If it were, then we would see more certainty, like “pause now at 6 years, 9.003 months”. Also, it’s missing the standard disclaimer “we know CO2 is causing this phenomenon.” Does not matter that the graph debunks the standard line. This Monckton guy is not gonna get past peer review.
/s/, I promise.
CNN keeps telling us it was “the warmest year ever” and “the dryest year ever” in headlines. but when you get to the actual article, it was only a few states along the West coast that experienced these conditions and avereraging that out across the entire continent makes it seem everywhere was warm. In fact everywhere east of the Rockies had an average to cool year and the entire east half of the nation had a pleasantly rainy year (in a few spots, a bit too much rain).
Maybe tens of millions of people just shouldn’t be living in the California desert.
And yet models need more water in the air in order to get ECSs above 2.0 degrees C per doubling of CO2, so there should be more precipitation, not less.
With the current decline in solar activity, I predict a long-term La Niña trend.
re
https://www.iup.uni-bremen.de/gome/gomemgii.html
The largest “positive anomaly” temperatures are now in the Arctic.