Warmists have continuously trotted out Excuses as to why the 21st Century temps had slowed/paused, while at the same time claiming there was no pause/slowdown. Remember when Michael “Hockey Schtick” Mann crowed about the paper that came out last year saying It Never Happened?
Just out in Science is a new article by Tom Karl of NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center and colleagues driving another stake through the heart of the supposed “hiatus†or “pause,†i.e. what I like to call the “Faux Pause.â€
I expect this article will be attacked by climate change deniers who are unhappy to see the demise of a narrative they helped frame, a narrative that arguably took hold due in part to the “seepage†of contrarian framing into mainstream climate science discourse.
Well, as Reason’s Ronald Bailey notes
Mann is now a co-author on the new study that pulls that stake out:
It has been claimed that the early-2000s global warming slowdown or hiatus, characterized by a reduced rate of global surface warming, has been overstated, lacks sound scientific basis, or is unsupported by observations. The evidence presented here contradicts these claims.
That last bit in italics was written by Mann. Bailey excerpts this bit from Nature News
The latest salvo in an ongoing row over global-warming trends claims that warming has indeed slowed down this century.
An apparent slowing in the rise of global temperatures at the beginning of the twenty-first century, which is not explained by climate models, was referred to as a “hiatus†or a “pause†when first observed several years ago. Climate-change sceptics have used this as evidence that global warming has stopped. But in June last year, a study in Science claimed that the hiatus was just an artefact which vanishes when biases in temperature data are corrected.
Now a prominent group of researchers is countering that claim, arguing in Nature Climate Change that even after correcting these biases the slowdown was real.
“There is this mismatch between what the climate models are producing and what the observations are showing,†says lead author John Fyfe, a climate modeller at the Canadian Centre for Climate Modelling and Analysis in Victoria, British Columbia. “We can’t ignore it.â€
Fyfe uses the term “slowdown†rather than “hiatus†and stresses that it does not in any way undermine global-warming theory.
I love that last bit. The argument over warming is not about warming, it is over causation. Even a slowing blows out the global warming hypothesis, which states that Mankind’s release of greenhouse gases, especially carbon dioxide, has caused global temperatures to go up, and they have the computer models to prove it! And that’s about all they have to prove it. It’s all based on those computer models. The problem for the Warmists is that the real temperatures are not complying with those models. In most scientific endeavors, if the data did not match the models, if the outcomes failed to match the hypothesis, they’d admit that the models and hypothesis were wrong. With the Cult of Climastrology, they change the data, the facts, to match.
Of course, one of the things the study attempts to do is go back to one of their old Excuses, namely that the oceans ate their warming, and we get this from Mann
“The temporary slowdown in no way implies that human-caused warming has ceased or slowed down,†Mann said. “It was temporarily masked by natural factors.â€
Got that? Warming is only caused by Mankind, but, nature can mask it. Are you surprised that I refer to this as a Cult? And you can bet they will use this paper to continue pushing that cult.
And here comes the little guy who exaggerates often in 3…2…1..
William typed:
Actually, it’s a theory, and ummm, no. You should try to understand what you are trying to refute. What is your reasoning?
Does it strike you as counterintuitive that the warmest years on record have all occurred during the “Denier’s pause”, with 2015 the warmest recorded?
Teach we have had 2 historic high temp years in a row
Only the RATE of increase has decreased that is not a hiatus
Teach what do you believe are the reasons that we have had record high temps if not from AGW?
The sun is not any stronger now than in the past 50 years but the temps keep going up
And the ice keeps melting,
Reading and comprehension seems to be missing in Retardville.
John, provide rock solid proof using the scientific method that the current warming is mostly/solely caused by Mankind.
Furthermore, did you miss the part where the warming is much less than what all the models said it would be? If the models have continuously failed, why should we believe the doomsaying and spend trillions and trillions to Do Something? And, have you made your own life carbon neutral yet?
Well Teach NO I have not made my life carbon neutral although that is not something I am demanding of others. I am trying to reduce my carbon footprint AND I am happy that the carbon footprint of Americans is being reduced.
Teach why do you demand perfection in others, but not in your own politics? Isn’t that a bit hypocritical ? You are always ranting about ISIS and Iran but, are you willing to go over and fight yourself? Or do you just want others to do what you yourself will not do? If abortion IS murder why aren’t you doing something about it personally ?
Teach computer models showed that the Earth is getting warmer, they are correct in that. Models are used to predict TRENDS not events.
Teach why do you think the Earth is getting warmer?
Why did you choose as an avatar that particular breed of dog? Is that the name of your favorite thing
William typed:
The increase in CO2 over the past century is solely from mankind burning fossil fuels. Svante Arrhenius, provided rock solid proof, using the scientific method that CO2 absorbs infrared radiation. This has been confirmed multiple times by multiple methods over the past century. This is why almost all real scientists find the Theory of AGW to be persuasive. So there. Done and done. Game over, man! Why do you think the Earth (atmosphere, land and oceans) is warming so rapidly?
That’s just false.
They haven’t.
?
Says the Deni-o-blogger who exaggerates or something.
It’s never been made clear why you find this so important, but we’ll play along.
Have you, as a small government conservative, made your own life government-neutral yet?
Stopped using the roads I build? Didn’t you go to a state university? Do you breathe the clean air that my tax dollars help keep clean? Drink clean water? Do you live in America, where you’re kept safe by the military, police, firemen, FBI and Homeland Security? Have you ever collected unemployment payments? Do you plan to collect Social Security and Medicare?
How can anyone believe a word any small-gov’t conservative utters if they’re all rank hypocrites by not giving up all (not just some) government benefits?
Isn’t that the basis of your argument against the Theory of AGW? It’s a hoax because the proponents haven’t removed all traces of CO2 production from their lives?
john wrote to drowningpuppies:
Great one! Oh, snap. That’s gonna leave a mark!
It’s been made clear time and time again, but you and john just ignore the hypocrisy of demanding others do what you will not.
You then go on to list programs and taxes that are mandated by the government.
There is a huge difference in saying “people should do what I will not do in my life!” and “the government demands I pay into something.”
If you really want to try and make the case of the two being equivalent, you could try something like “since I believe the government should not protect intellectual property or allow patents, I won’t register to protect any patent I own.”
You won’t do that, though. Instead you’ll continue to voluntarily participate in the system you hate in order to make money.
But GC
I am not demanding everyone lead a carbon neutral life
That is quite an extreme position I am unsure of why you would say something that is a lie
CO2 has been shown to trap infrared radiation for over one hundred years
GC is that something you think is scientifically false?
The Sun is no stronger now than in 1960
Why do you think the planet has gotten warmer? Is there any other plausible answer ?
It really is kind of funny to read the comments from the one who exaggerates often and the retarded one after one paper published by a climate modeler and not only undisputed but endorsed by the captain of the “hockey” team that says the “hiatus”, “slowdown”, whatever one wants to call it, was real and that they (little j and ‘tarded j) were and are full of shit.
Mic drop.
Yet you are for every proposal to make people live a carbon free life. Do you ever listen to yourself?
Are you admitting that you are a liar?
Which does not mean that man is causing a temperature rise.
The earth and the universe are dynamic systems john. There is much that we don’t know about the ways the systems within a system works.
Of course, you think that not knowing is the same thing as being “scientific proof” or something like that. It is a hubris that you and others believe that you know all the answers. It is especially troubling when you say something that is false and still try and promote the idea it is true. You and others are wedded to an idea despite – not because – of the science.
You are like conspiracy theorists who see one thing disproved and move onto another only to see that disproved and move onto another only to see that disproved and then you come back to the original disproven point and repeat it again.
This is about money and control which is what leftists really want.
The right famously relies on conspiracy ideation to explain the unexplainable. “The Earth is warming because of unknown physical forces (magic) and there’s a conspiracy of scientists, governments, Democrats, religions, universities, corporations… in fact, the conspiracy involves everyone EXCEPT the far right.
“Not knowing everything” is not the same as “knowing nothing”.
It’s known that the Earth (land, oceans, lower atmosphere) is warming rapidly. It’s known that atmospheric CO2 is rising steadily, and is higher now than at any time in the past 1 million years. It’s known that the increased CO2 comes from humans burning fossil fuels. It’s known that atmospheric CO2 absorbs infrared radiation, warming surrounding molecules.
In fact, it would be surprising if it wasn’t warming. What is the theory of not warming? That is, what physical mechanism(s) might be keeping the Earth from warming (magic is not an acceptable answer)?
I apologize for doubting your omniscience. After all, you know everything. There is never any doubt once you say something. Even though the science doesn’t back you up, we should always rely on you.
Do you want us to pay tribute to you oh great god of self Jeffery, knower of all things?
(sarcasm off)
You may be right. Since we don’t all there is no know about how cancer grows and metastasizes we should wait to treat patients until we’re 100% certain we know everything.
We don’t know everything about tobacco smoke and cancers of the lung, head/neck and bladder, yet the government jack-booted thugs raised cigarette taxes and confiscated monies from the beleaguered tobacco companies. All that effort based on a theory.
Even though scientists (Boo! – hoaxers!) recently demonstrated the apparent existence of gravity waves (confirming Einstein’s century old models) we still don’t understand at all how gravity works! Yet, we act as if we know everything! Thousands of airplanes fly every day, risking the lives of millions based on a theory!!
thanks Jeffery.
That was the singular dumbest post I have read in a long time. I laughed until I realized you were being serious.
Then I just felt nothing but pity for you.