We know that there are well over 70 excuses for the Pause, a period where the warming was, depending on the source used, either net zero during that time or statistically insignificant. It really got to the point where no one was bothering to keep track, especially when so many were just the same excuses in new clothes. The real consensus was that 95% of the models were wrong, per actual observations. So, of course
Detailed look at the global warming ‘hiatus’ again confirms that humans are changing the climate
For years, the global warming ‘hiatus’ from 1998 to 2012 puzzled scientists and fueled skeptics looking to cast doubt on the very idea that Earth’s temperature has been on the rise, largely because of human-produced greenhouse gas emissions such as carbon dioxide — and that significant policy changes would need to be made to keep that rise in check.
Recent papers have begun to chip away at the idea of the slowdown. Now, a new analysis in the journal Nature brings together many of those arguments to show that the hiatus may not have been quite what it seemed.
“A combination of changes in forcing, uptake of heat by the oceans, natural variability and incomplete observational coverage reconciles models and data,†the researchers from the Institute for Atmospheric and Climate Science in Switzerland wrote. “Combined with stronger recent warming trends in newer datasets, we are now more confident than ever that human influence is dominant in long-term warming.â€
Got that? Their data is incomplete and there’s natural variability. Oh, and the oceans ate their warming. So, that means you are at fault for refusing to pay lots of fees and taxes and give up your freedom to big government. One of the findings
Climate change models did not perfectly characterize all the right complicating factors — how much solar radiation there was in a given year, for example, or the extent of the cooling effect from volcanic activity and human-produced aerosols. When those estimates are updated to reflect what actually happened, the models get much closer to reality.
So, the models stink, yet, the Cult of Climastrology was making prognostications of utter doom using them. Interestingly, there is virtually nothing that actually makes the case that all the warming was caused by Mankind’s output of greenhouse gases, especially CO2. The paper, and this LA Times article, simply mention that there was warming, it paused for a bit, then it supposedly restarted. The debate is not on warming, it is on causation. And the Cult cannot prove it has been caused and will continue to be caused mostly/solely by the works of Man.
And speaking of the Pause
Warmists deal with the hiatus by "lowering modeled temp. trends while raising the observational temp. trend" https://t.co/TTgV0hqc9F
— Tom Nelson (@TomANelson) May 4, 2017
