This comes within the greater context of stating that conservatives distort and misrepresent climate scientists, saying that global warming is not on hiatus. This is all part of the wider whining as to why people aren’t listening, why they don’t care, and about those mean “deniers” putting out disinformation, blah blah blah
Norman Loeb, an atmospheric scientist with NASA, gave a crash course in climate change science for the public at Virginia Air and Space Center on Tuesday. He talked about all the evidence that the planet is warming—like the fact that temperatures right now are the hottest they’ve been since record-keeping began in 1850. He also noted that the rise in surface temperatures has slowed considerably since 2000. This doesn’t contradict the theory of global warming, he explained. Land temperature regularly varies, and much of the warming in the last decade is happening unseen in the ocean.
Ah, the old “the warming is playing hide and seek”. [debunked] [debunked] [debunked]
The key thing to understand is that changes in global temperature don’t occur at a steady pace. It’s why climate scientists don’t only look at a single decade’s worth of temperatures. Loeb explained all of this in his presentation. And the Daily Press, a local paper that actually attended the presentation, relayed the explanation correctly. Temperature change, the newspaper’s account said, looks more like a “stock market graph, with jagged ups and downs built into a long, upward trend.†The long-term trend is clear, despite the hiatuses.
Of course, their computer models say something entirely different. None predict any big pauses. They predict an ever increasing world temperature, as do their talking points, which are even more outlandish, yammering on about 5-10 degrees Fahrenheit by 2100.
Yes, there has been a long term trend. Global temps have risen since 1850. In fits and starts. The longer term trend over the last 7,000 years shows a warm period followed by a cool period followed by a warm period, and so on. Multiple Holocene warm periods have been warmer than the current one. What Loeb is trying to do is use the historical norms to continue propping up the blaming of Mankind.
We can add this all to the big list of 30 excuses, via The Hockey Schtick, with a new and updated graphic from C3 Headlines.
The computer models aren’t designed to predict what is currently unpredictable, e.g., el Nino and la nina and volcanoes. They also are not designed for short term projections. That said, the models have predicted the continued warming.
Jeff,
Gosh, then why do the computer modelers say that their models have failed?
Then, if the CO2 is high and constant and the reason for climate change, then why don’t we see a more consistent temp elevation that is across the board? For instance, here in the South, we are having the coldest summer ever and we do not have any ninas.
dave,
The modelers say their models have failed? I didn’t know that.
Why is there variability in the mean global surface temperature record? Note first that the surface temperature represents only a small amount of the Earth that is warming. Wind patterns, ocean currents, El Ninos, La Ninas, PDO all serve to redistribute the incoming heat between the oceans and the atmosphere. Teach calls these excuses, scientists call them facts.
That your tiny patch in Louisiana is cooler now than last year does not falsify the theory of AGW, any more than a 104F day in Wyoming proves the theory. (Note that the US represents about 2% of the Earth’s surface.)
Jeff,
Sorry, but the fact that the summer is cool here does disprove the CO2 thing
dave,
“Sorry, but the fact that the summer is cool here does disprove the CO2 thing”
No intelligent person agrees with you.
“That said, the models have predicted the continued warming.” Good one, J. First, the models predicted the warming as linear, which isn’t true. Second, the models predicted warming, which has stopped. Third, the models can’t even replicate climate in the past. Fourth, the temperature figures have been “adjusted” by NOAA. They cool the past, which seems to warm the present.
j,
First, of course the models predict linear warming – but over long periods.
Second, warming hasn’t stopped. You’re either ignorant, lying or both.
Third, of course the models replicate the past record.
Fourth – Can you show your evidence that NOAA has adjusted any data incorrectly?
Fifth – What data do you rely on to support your false claim that warming has stopped?
[…] The Pirate’s Cove – New Warmist Excuse: Warming Happens In Fits And Starts […]
[…] The Pirate’s Cove – New Warmist Excuse: Warming Happens In Fits And Starts […]
j,
Your overarching point seems to be that we can’t tell if it’s warming or not because it’s too hard to accurately measure mean surface temperature over time. Fair enough. According to another commenter here the surface is actually cooling based on his local weather this summer.
Obviously, if we can’t measure temperature today, our estimates of thousands or millions of years ago are also suspect.
[…] The Pirate’s Cove – New Warmist Excuse: Warming Happens In Fits And Starts […]
[…] The Pirate’s Cove – New Warmist Excuse: Warming Happens In Fits And Starts […]
[…] The Pirate’s Cove – New Warmist Excuse: Warming Happens In Fits And Starts […]
Jeff,
Man, you really hurt my feels. To be told such a thing by someone who has such little knowledge and ability. If I had any respect for your statements, I might feel bad for a few seconds. Plus, you didn’t even understand the statement.
[…] The Pirate’s Cove – New Warmist Excuse: Warming Happens In Fits And Starts […]
dave,
My apologies for hurting your feels.
[…] The Pirate’s Cove – New Warmist Excuse: Warming Happens In Fits And Starts […]
[…] The Pirate’s Cove – New Warmist Excuse: Warming Happens In Fits And Starts […]
First, I’m not a Climate (whatever it is this week) Denier. I remember the late 1980’s Time Magazine cover article “The Coming Ice Age”. Well, the Ice Age didn’t pan out, so it became “Global Warming” and when it wasn’t, it’s now “Climate Change”, at least for this week. The Left, always adroit in their choice of words, suggest that denier denotes a refusal to recognize something that is really valid in their argument.
No matter which crisis, the remedy is always the same… more regulations, more government controls and more taxes. Just what the Socialists have been plugging for the last hundred years. Is this just a coincidence?
For a little perspective, I ran a consulting company in the late 1960’s and we developed one of the first computer simulations, to forecast the financial results of an investment in real estate- an office building, apartments, and the like. It had about 50 data inputs, and our job was to research the inputs and use our best judgement about each one. We had to run it on the largest mainframe computer available at the time, an IBM 2200, if I remember correctly. (Just a few years later, about 1983, I could do the same analysis on an Apple II, using Visicalc.) Anyway, we discovered early on that by making a few small, un-noticable tweaks in five or six variables, we could make the analysis come out… any way we wanted it to.
I suspect the same still applies to the climate-forecast “models” which I am sure have far more data points to play with.
You can classify me as a Climate (whatever) Guffawer.
[…] The Pirate’s Cove – New Warmist Excuse: Warming Happens In Fits And Starts […]