By Christopher Monckton of Brenchley
The New Pause, notwithstanding the much-publicized heatwaves in Britain and some other countries, has lengthened by another month to 7 years 11 months. The least-squares linear-regression trend on the UAH satellite lower-troposphere monthly global mean temperature anomalies has settled into a steady state that may yet be perturbed either by another la Niña later this year, which would lengthen the New Pause still further or, in the next year or two, a new el Niño event, which would shorten it or – if the spike were big enough – extinguish it altogether.
As the indefatigable Eric Worrall reported here a couple of weeks back, the Forces of Darkness are becoming concerned at the lengthening of the New Pause. They are beginning to write the nervous little pieces that they wrote when the previous Great Pause began to become significant.
I well remember the first time I drew the attention of the U.S. House of Representatives to the fact that, at that time (in 2007 or thereby), as now, there had been no global warming for seven or eight years: in fact, there had been a small cooling. The news that there had been cooling during that period caused consternation among the “Democrats”.
Against me was Tom Karl, then in charge of the clattering train at NOAA. He was as consternated as his fellow “Democrats” at the news that there had been no global warming for so long a time. He furiously tried to undermine the result by saying that it had not been proper for me to average the temperature anomalies of four distinct global-temperature datasets, one of which was his own. I countered that it made no difference either way, since all four of the datasets I had used, including that of NOAA, had shown a global cooling for the previous seven or eight years.
Eventually Rep. Joe Barton (R: TX), then chairman of the Republican minority caucus on the House energy committee, intervened and ordered both sides to write to the committee justifying their stances. For me, that was easy: I sent individual graphs of the four datasets on which I had relied, including that of NOAA, which all showed cooling. Tom Karl was splutteringly furious, but the data are the data. “It is what it is,” as Roy Spencer puts it.
At the end of that Great Pause, in November 2015, Senator Cruz (R: TX) showed our HadCRUT4 graph to the Senate, again provoking fury from the “Democrats”. At that time the inconvenient and unpredicted truth was there had been no global warming for 18 years 9 months.
If, therefore, the new Pause continues to lengthen satisfactorily, and if – as now seems certain – the crippling consequences of the economic hara-kiri that the West has allowed certain hostile alien powers to inveigle it into perpetrating become all too painfully apparent even to the “Democrat” electorate, the fact underlying these long Pauses will become known not just to the open-minded few but to all, whether the climate Communists like it or not.
That fact is that the rate of global warming predicted by Hansen in 1988 and then by IPCC in 1990 is simply not occurring. Nothing like. In 1990 IPCC had confidently predicted warming equivalent to 0.34 K/decade in the period to 2030. Well, we are now already well into 2022, almost a third of a century after that over-excited prediction, and the observed warming was not the 1.1 K that ought to have occurred by now but just 0.45 K:
Thus, IPCC had predicted almost two and a half times the warming that has actually occurred in the third of a century since its prediction. Yet, as Dr Roy Spencer has just brilliantly pointed out at his website, the anthropogenic forcings are continuing to follow a pattern that would lead to a forcing equivalent to a doubling of CO2 concentration by the end of the 21st century, approximately in line with Representative Concentration Pathway 4.5, and not the deliberately extreme 8.5.
Yet the currently-predicted warming for a forcing equivalent to that from doubled CO2, in the CMIP6 models (Zelinka et al. 2020), is 4 K/century equivalent, or 0.4 K/decade equivalent, up a little on the 0.34 K/decade equivalent predicted in IPCC (1990).
It has long been obvious from the temperature record that the rate of global warming is nothing like what was originally predicted: and yet the predicted warming in the models has officially increased. The decadal equivalent of the currently-predicted centennial rate of warming is now about thrice the observed decadal rate of warming.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. There is a reason why the models continue to predict about thrice as much global warming as is actually happening. But I trust that regular readers will not need me to tell them what that reason is.
Meanwhile, the temperature in England rose above 40 Cº one blissful day in July. Since I am used to living in hot countries, I astonished the assembled company by wearing a tweed jacket throughout the day. I’d normally have worn my heavy leather biker jacket, the best protection against hot weather, but I’m away from home just now. But I was the only person present who did not complain of the heat, for I was comfortably warm, not unbearably hot. I leave it to the reader to work out the sound science behind how that works.
Try it next time the weather is well hot, and you will see what I mean. I was once in Texas, where it was a little hot. I was wearing my biker jacket. Daisy the barmaid was baffled. I told her to put her hand between me and the jacket. She did so and was astonished at how cool it was. Us Brits have the neatest chat-up lines.
Of course, the unspeakable BBC blubbed about how dozens of people were going to be killed by the heat (in a good cold spell the weather can wipe out tens of thousands at a time).
But there is a growing impatience among the electorate at the one-sidedness of the global-warming argument, and at the failure of the BBC or any of the major channels to give both sides of the story. We are going to dump the BBC from our viewing altogether next month, as millions of others have already done. No more license fee for us.
Unfortunately, the relentless propaganda, and the increasingly vicious silencing of all who would otherwise have dared to speak out, have had their effect. I have recently discovered that neither the British intelligence services nor the Cabinet Office have the slightest idea that the global warming nonsense is not merely peddled assiduously by the Communist traffic-light tendency – the Greens too yellow to admit they’re really Reds. It originated in the disinformation directorate of the KGB. But today’s spooks have no idea. One of them, who did not realize that my hearing is sharp, was overheard to say that I was “very Right-wing.” Moi? Zut alors!
Though the anti-social media giants will continue their campaign of outright Communist censorship, by a growing variety of samizdat methods the truth will emerge. Not long now, I think. The climate nonsense has almost run its course. It was all very well when there was little cost to it. But now that households all over the West are going bankrupt trying to pay their power bills and blackouts are only averted by panic measures, the people won’t stand for climate Communism much longer. In Britain on one recent day, the national grid paid more than $11,000 per MWh (or getting on for 400 times good old coal-fired power at $30 per MWh) to keep the lights on in London. And all this insanity on the basis of an elementary error of physics.