Global warming pauses... for sixteen years

beenthere

New Member

desert dude

Well-Known Member

You mean skeptics like Phil Jones?

"Professor Phil Jones, director of the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia, who found himself at the centre of the ‘Climategate’ scandal over leaked emails three years ago, would not normally be expected to agree with her. Yet on two important points, he did. The data does suggest a plateau, he admitted, and without a major El Nino event – the sudden, dramatic warming of the southern Pacific which takes place unpredictably and always has a huge effect on global weather – ‘it could go on for a while’."
 

ginjawarrior

Well-Known Member
You mean skeptics like Phil Jones?

"Professor Phil Jones, director of the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia, who found himself at the centre of the ‘Climategate’ scandal over leaked emails three years ago, would not normally be expected to agree with her. Yet on two important points, he did. The data does suggest a plateau, he admitted, and without a major El Nino event – the sudden, dramatic warming of the southern Pacific which takes place unpredictably and always has a huge effect on global weather – ‘it could go on for a while’."
phil jones misquoted again by the mail? never!!
 

beenthere

New Member
You mean skeptics like Phil Jones?

"Professor Phil Jones, director of the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia, who found himself at the centre of the ‘Climategate’ scandal over leaked emails three years ago, would not normally be expected to agree with her. Yet on two important points, he did. The data does suggest a plateau, he admitted, and without a major El Nino event – the sudden, dramatic warming of the southern Pacific which takes place unpredictably and always has a huge effect on global weather – ‘it could go on for a while’."
Give it up, they came prepared, they have a chart! LMAO
 

londonfog

Well-Known Member
I know. Disagree with a liberal, say government is too big, propose cutting taxes, and head straight to the white sheet fitting room.
Do you agree with Ron Paul on voting against the Civil Rights Act ??? Do you also agree that I should have the right to kick people out of my laundromats base solely on the color of their skin. Do you also think that Martin Luther King should not have a "national holiday"? Do you also believe that North should have paid to buy slaves from southern slave owners to avoid the war, rather than the South renouncing slavery ???
 

desert dude

Well-Known Member
where as you have a rehashed report from "the mail" one of the highest scientific journals about.. no wait something is wrong there

"Like Prof Curry, Prof Jones also admitted that the climate models were imperfect: ‘We don’t fully understand how to input things like changes in the oceans, and because we don’t fully understand it you could say that natural variability is now working to suppress the warming. We don’t know what natural variability is doing.’"

What? The models are imperfect? The science is settled! I am pretty sure I heard that somewhere.
 

desert dude

Well-Known Member
Do you agree with Ron Paul on voting against the Civil Rights Act ??? Do you also agree that I should have the right to kick people out of my laundromats base solely on the color of their skin. Do you also think that Martin Luther King should not have a "national holiday"? Do you also believe that North should have paid to buy slaves from southern slave owners to avoid the war, rather than the South renouncing slavery ???
Is government, especially federal government, too large? Are taxes too high as a consequence of government overstepping its constitutional duties? Are such thoughts racist?
 

ginjawarrior

Well-Known Member
"Like Prof Curry, Prof Jones also admitted that the climate models were imperfect: ‘We don’t fully understand how to input things like changes in the oceans, and because we don’t fully understand it you could say that natural variability is now working to suppress the warming. We don’t know what natural variability is doing.’"

What? The models are imperfect? The science is settled! I am pretty sure I heard that somewhere.
imperfect does not = wrong

the models we have at the moment have shown themselves to be accurate enough any improvements will just show more accuracy rather than proving the past models wrong
 

londonfog

Well-Known Member
Is government, especially federal government, too large? Are taxes too high as a consequence of government overstepping its constitutional duties? Are such thoughts racist?
I asked 4 questions...you answered none..all these questions are views from your choice of would be POTUS..
 

beenthere

New Member
You guys need to get a job or a hobby. I know it's hard to admit when you were wrong but you were lied to. Man made global warming is a hoax and the majority of level headed people realize it.
 

desert dude

Well-Known Member
imperfect does not = wrong

the models we have at the moment have shown themselves to be accurate enough any improvements will just show more accuracy rather than proving the past models wrong
Nor does it make them right.

When a model fails to predict the observed facts, then one must change the model to account for the observations.

If I build a model of gravity that predicts an object will float above the earth's surface then I am compelled by reality to fix that problem. If I then use that imperfect model to demand political, economic and social changes to the world's operation I should expect a bit of pushback from the people I am demanding money from.
 

ginjawarrior

Well-Known Member
[h=2]http://metofficenews.wordpress.com/2012/10/14/met-office-in-the-media-14-october-2012/
mets response to the article

"Met Office in the Media: 14 October 2012[/h] 14 10 2012 An article by David Rose appears today in the Mail on Sunday under the title: ‘Global warming stopped 16 years ago, reveals Met Office report quietly released… and here is the chart to prove it’
It is the second article Mr Rose has written which contains some misleading information, after he wrote an article earlier this year on the same theme – you see our response to that one here.
To address some of the points in the article published today:
Firstly, the Met Office has not issued a report on this issue. We can only assume the article is referring to the completion of work to update the HadCRUT4 global temperature dataset compiled by ourselves and the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit.
We announced that this work was going on in March and it was finished this week. You can see the HadCRUT4 website here.
Secondly, Mr Rose says the Met Office made no comment about its decadal climate predictions. This is because he did not ask us to make a comment about them.
You can see our full response to all of the questions Mr Rose did ask us below:
Hi David,
Here’s a response to your questions. I’ve kept them as concise as possible but the issues you raise require considerable explanation.
Q.1 “First, please confirm that they do indeed reveal no warming trend since 1997.”
The linear trend from August 1997 (in the middle of an exceptionally strong El Nino) to August 2012 (coming at the tail end of a double-dip La Nina) is about 0.03°C/decade, amounting to a temperature increase of 0.05°C over that period, but equally we could calculate the linear trend from 1999, during the subsequent La Nina, and show a more substantial warming.
As we’ve stressed before, choosing a starting or end point on short-term scales can be very misleading. Climate change can only be detected from multi-decadal timescales due to the inherent variability in the climate system. If you use a longer period from HadCRUT4 the trend looks very different. For example, 1979 to 2011 shows 0.16°C/decade (or 0.15°C/decade in the NCDC dataset, 0.16°C/decade in GISS). Looking at successive decades over this period, each decade was warmer than the previous – so the 1990s were warmer than the 1980s, and the 2000s were warmer than both. Eight of the top ten warmest years have occurred in the last decade.
Over the last 140 years global surface temperatures have risen by about 0.8ºC. However, within this record there have been several periods lasting a decade or more during which temperatures have risen very slowly or cooled. The current period of reduced warming is not unprecedented and 15 year long periods are not unusual.
Q.2 “Second, tell me what this says about the models used by the IPCC and others which have predicted a rise of 0.2 degrees celsius per decade for the 21st century. I accept that there will always be periods when a rising gradient may be interrupted. But this flat period has now gone on for about the same time as the 1980 – 1996 warming.”
The models exhibit large variations in the rate of warming from year to year and over a decade, owing to climate variations such as ENSO, the Atlantic Multi-Decadal Oscillation and Pacific Decadal Oscillation. So in that sense, such a period is not unexpected. It is not uncommon in the simulations for these periods to last up to 15 years, but longer periods are unlikely.
Q.3 “Finally, do these data suggest that factors other than CO2 – such as multi-decadal oceanic cycles – may exert a greater influence on climate than previously realised?”
We have limited observations on multi-decadal oceanic cycles but we have known for some time that they may act to slow down or accelerate the observed warming trend. In addition, we also know that changes in the surface temperature occur not just due to internal variability, but are also influenced by “external forcings”, such as changes in solar activity, volcanic eruptions or aerosol emissions. Combined, several of these factors could account for some or all of the reduced warming trend seen over the last decade – but this is an area of ongoing research.
———–
The below graph which shows years ranked in order of global temperature was not included in the response to Mr Rose, but is useful in this context as it illustrates the point made above that eight of the warmest years on record have occurred in the past decade.
Graph showing years ranked in order of global temperature."
 

ginjawarrior

Well-Known Member
Nor does it make them right.

When a model fails to predict the observed facts, then one must change the model to account for the observations.

If I build a model of gravity that predicts an object will float above the earth's surface. If I then use that imperfect model to demand political, economic and social changes to the world's operation I should expect a bit of pushback from the people I am demanding money from.
the models are correct and see the Met offices response to the bad reporting
 
Top