Global Warming Pause Real, But A Natural Blip, New Study Claims

A slow-down in global warming is not a sign that climate change is ending, university researchers have found. The phenomenon is a natural blip in an otherwise long-term upwards trend, their research shows. In a detailed study of more than 200 years’ worth of temperature data, results backed previous findings that short-term pauses in climate change are simply the result of natural variation. The findings support the likelihood that a current hiatus in the world’s year-on-year temperature increases – which have stalled since 1998 – is temporary. —Reporting Climate Science, 20 July 2015

chart

I can reveal that the US House of Representatives science committee, led by the Texas Republican Lamar Smith, also has doubts. At the end of last month, committee staff sent emails to several experts in Britain, saying Mr Smith ‘is making climate change data within NOAA a priority’. The committee, they added, was seeking outside help to ‘analyse’ NOAA’s claims – apparently, it would seem, because some members do not trust NOAA’s ‘input’ alone. Among those submitting evidence that challenges NOAA’s assertion is the UK sceptic think-tank, which is chaired by Lord Lawson, the Global Warming Policy Foundation. –David Rose, The Spectator, 22 July 2015

Even accepting the statistical approach taken by Karl et al. it is clear that their errors are larger than they realise, and that the trends they obtain depend upon cherry-picked start and end points that include abnormal conditions, i.e. the 1998-2000 El Nino/La Nina and the 2014 northeast Pacific Ocean “hot spot.” I conclude that the elimination of the hiatus claimed by Karl et al 2015 is unsafe because of bias due to the choice of start and end points that are extremes of natural fluctuations in the global surface temperature record, as well as a overemphasis on statistically poor results. –David Whitehouse, Global Warming Policy Forum, 22 July 2015

The lesson is that no study should rely upon trends over selected short periods of time to make claims about a series with as much variability over time as global temperatures. That is as true for the relatively large increase from 1976 to 1998 as for the more recent period. Even that trend has been exceeded in 10% of all 23-year periods since 1880. Even if the study had not drastically underestimated the amount of variability in 17-year trends in the historical data, there is another problem that is not addressed. This is: what is or was the starting point of the trend?  In the spirit of the classic warning to all statisticians – Darrell Huff’s book titled ‘How to Lie with Statistics’ – it is possible to use a particular set of data to generate a wide range of trends simply by choosing a suitable starting point. –Gordon Hughes, Global Warming Policy Forum, 22 July 2015

Trackback from your site.

Leave a comment (newest first):

Comments (10)

  • Avatar

    GR82DRV

    |

    At best, today’s climate models are like looking into a large dark room – through a key hole – using a soda straw. Trying to describe a complete picture is absurd, and directing the soda straw at bias-selected areas while ignoring others is dubious to say the least.

    Reply

  • Avatar

    John West

    |

    ’long-term upwards trend, their research shows. In a detailed study of more than 200 years’ worth of temperature data”

    So, less than 0.0000000005% of the planets history is long term?

    Reply

    • Avatar

      JayPee

      |

      Remember amirlach

      these are the same jerks who claimed the missing global warming heat was hiding in the oceans

      And of course

      None can address the fact that

      THERE IS NO GREENHOUSE EFFRECT

      Reply

      • Avatar

        Me

        |

        It should be called the thermodynamic effect.

        Reply

        • Avatar

          Me

          |

          Yeah, they won’t use that, because that is law, they deal in probablies and maybes, and most likelys, you know weasel words. They deal in predictions and when that didn’t work out they meant projections, as if their projections was based in LAW and engineering behind their models. It srtill didn’t served them well and they made garbage well onto the future where they will never be around and leave it to their cult to deal with. pretty much sums it up, just like religion, all BS lots of gain, Snake and the apple biblee story all over again.

          Reply

          • Avatar

            Me

            |

            JayPee there is a greenhouse effect, it is what happens in a greenhouse, it is governed by the laws of thermodynamics, but they want to throw that out the greenhouse window and apply it to the real world, and reality is dissagreeing with them. They claim to hate capitalism but use it to capitalise for their gain. Life is a bitch.

          • Avatar

            Me

            |

            Or you can say life is for suckers! if it makes you feel better. of is that too PC too?

          • Avatar

            Me

            |

            Because I said a word before that may offend someone, and it begins with a B Ends with an H. With an ITC in the middle, and it is something we say about what life is!

  • Avatar

    amirlach

    |

    [quote] The phenomenon is a natural blip in an otherwise long-term upwards trend, their research shows. In a detailed study of more than 200 years’ worth of temperature data, results backed previous findings that short-term pauses in climate change are simply the result of natural variation. The findings support the likelihood that a current hiatus in the world’s year-on-year temperature increases – which have stalled since 1998 – is temporary. [/quote] Yes… So rebounding from the LIA is natural and likely to continue. What is interesting is that despite a half of a doubling of Co2. No signature from the claimed Co2 warming effect is detectable. In other words, the RATE of Warming is unchanged from this background warming that began at the end of the so called “Little Ice Age”.
    https://anhonestclimatedebate.wordpress.com/2008/09/16/dangerous-human-caused-warming-can-neither-be-demonstrated-nor-measured/

    The climate slowdown was predicted by an incredibly simple “model” here.
    [img]http://www.coyoteblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/Slide52.jpg[/img]
    http://www.climate-skeptic.com/category/temperature-history

    Reply

  • Avatar

    JayPee

    |

    How much demonstration and PROOF that there is no greenhouse effect as well as unproof of their ridiculous claims is necessary before these adherents realize that they are fools and asses ?

    Reply

Leave a comment

No Trackbacks.