Now Even Michael Mann Admits the ‘Pause’ in Global Warming Is Real; Throws Allies to Wolves

“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,” the paper in Nature Climate Change says.

Though the paper’s findings are not controversial – few serious scientists dispute the evidence of the temperature datasets showing that there has been little if any global warming for nearly 19 years – they represent a tremendous blow to the climate alarmist “consensus”, which has long sought to deny the “Pause’s” existence.

First, the study was published in Nature Climate Change a fervently alarmist journal which rarely if ever runs papers that cast doubt on the man-made-global-warming scare narrative.

Secondly, it directly contradicts a widely-reported study produced by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) last year which attempted to deny the existence of the “Pause” (also known as the “hiatus”). This NOAA study was widely mocked, quickly debunked and is now the subject of a Congressional investigation by Rep Lamar Smith. What’s novel about this new study in Nature Climate Change, though, is that it’s not skeptics and Republicans doing the mocking and the debunking: it’s the kind of people who in the past were very much in the alarmist camp, including – bizarrely – none other than Michael “Hockey Stick” Mann, who co-authored the paper.

What we have here, in other words, is signs of a major rift within the climate alarmist camp with different factions adopting different tactics to cope with the failure of their collapsing narrative.

On one side are people like Thomas Karl and Thomas Petersen, the hapless NOAA scientists given the unenviable task of producing that risible paper last year which did its best to deny that the Pause was a thing.

On the other are what might be called the “rats deserting the sinking ship” faction who have produced this new paper for Nature Climate Change, in which finally they concede what skeptics have been saying for many years: that there has been no “global warming” since 1998.

This divergence in the alarmist camp is now going to create a dilemma for all those liberal media outlets – from the BBC to the Guardian to the LA Times – which reported on NOAA’s “death of the pause” study as if it were a reliable and credible thing.

Are they now going to report on the counter-narrative? Or are they going to ignore it and hope no one notices?

The man who would like more than anyone to know the answer to this question is David Whitehouse, Science Editor of the Global Warming Policy Foundation and a former science editor at the BBC (till the point when his skepticism became too much for his employer).

That’s because in 2007, he was one of the first scientists to draw attention to the mysterious slowdown in global warming.

Read the rest at Breitbart.

No, 2015 Was Not the Hottest Year Evah…

Every time you do so, reach for your Browning. Whoever makes this claim will be an idiot, a liar, a charlatan – or, in the case of many establishment climate scientists, most likely all three.

I’ll explain why in a moment. But first, meet the morons:

Peter Hannam, Environment Editor of the Sydney Morning Herald

At some point, you would think most climate change deniers would throw in the towel.

Fifteen of the 16 hottest years on record have happened this century and the other year wasn’t much earlier, in 1998. And 2015 was a breakaway year.

Joe Rottweiler, George Soros’s pet Romm

We just lived in the hottest year on record

Some guy in the National Journal

Glob­al tem­per­at­ures in 2015 were the warmest since re­cord-keep­ing began—and it wasn’t even close.

This other guy in the New York Times

Scientists reported Wednesday that 2015 was the hottest year in the historical record by far, breaking a mark set only the year before — a burst of heat that has continued into the new year and is roiling weather patterns all over the world.

 Damian Carrington of the Guardian

Experts warn that global warming is tipping climate into ‘uncharted territory’, as Met Office, Nasa and Noaa data all confirm record global temperatures for second year running

Bob zzzzzzz Ward, Grantham shill; writer of long letters about climate change so boring you can’t fini

This [record heat] should put pressure on governments to urgently implement their commitments to act against climate change, and to increase their planned cuts of greenhouse gases. The warming is already affecting the climate around the world, including dangerous shifts in extreme weather events. Those who claim that climate change is either not happening, or is not dangerous, have been conclusively proven wrong by the meteorological evidence around the world.”

Etc

Here is why they’re all talking rubbish and you needn’t worry about that “Hottest Year Evah” one bit.

Read the rest at Breitbart.

Study: NOAA Overestimated US Warming by 50%

This one, co-authored by meteorologist Anthony Watts (of Watts Up With That? fame) shows that at least half of the “global warming” in the US since 1979 has been fabricated by NOAA.

While satellite records have shown no global warming for at least 18 years, the land based data sets like the ones maintained by NOAA for the US Historical Climate Network (USHCN) continue to show a warming trend.

One reason for this discrepancy, the study suggests, is that NOAA has been cherry-picking its raw data. That is, it has ignored the evidence from those weather stations showing little or no late Twentieth century warming and instead placed undue emphasis on the ones that do show warming.

But the ones that do show warming also happen to be the least trustworthy. These are the ones, the study shows, which have been most corrupted by the Urban Heat Island effect – and other environmental factors.

Some, for example, have been surrounded by buildings or had roads built next to them since they were first sited. Others have had airports vastly expand next door to them. What this inevitably means is that their more recent temperature measurements have been running hot – i.e., they have been distorted by factors which have nothing to do with weather or climate.

Yet, bizarrely, these are the ones that NOAA has been using as the basis for its claims about “global warming” in the US.

If, however, you look at those weather stations that haven’t been corrupted – “unperturbed” stations – what you get is US global warming roughly half as much as NOAA claims.

Read the rest at Breitbart.

On The Eve of COP21 Paris Talks: World Just Doesn’t Care about Global Warming Any More

Most people in most of the 20 countries surveyed say they don’t want their leaders to set ambitious climate targets.

Fewer than half describe climate change as a “very serious” problem.

The survey, conducted by GlobeScan for the BBC, could scarcely have come at a worst time for the global environmental movement. After the disastrous failure of the last major climate conference in Copenhagen in 2009, they have been pulling out all the stops to make the talks which begin in Paris next week a success.

Earlier this year UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon flew to the Vatican to enlist the Pope’s support; President Obama has declared that there is “no greater threat” than climate change; John Kerry, Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders and the Prince of Wales have all said it’s worse than terrorism; the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has helped out by erasing “the Pause” in global warming; the IUCN has magicked up a study claiming the doing-just-fine polar bears are in trouble….

Read the rest at Breitbart.

Science Says: Evil Coral Reefs Acidify Oceans

It seems that Ocean Acidification is not, after all, the result of man’s selfishness and greed and refusal to amend his lifestyle. Apparently, according to New Scientist, it’s caused by those hateful Gaia-raping monstrosities we call coral reefs:

Acidic water may be a sign of healthy corals, says a new study, muddying the waters still further on our understanding of how coral reefs might react to climate change.

Andreas Andersson of the Scripps Institution of Oceanography in San Diego, California, and his colleagues carefully monitored a coral reef in Bermuda for five years, and found that spikes in acidity were linked to increased reef growth.

“At first we were really puzzled by this,” says Andersson. “It’s completely the opposite to what we would expect in an ocean-acidification scenario.”

Andersson’s puzzlement is understandable, given the plethora of articles over the last few years that have tried to big up ocean acidification as the “evil twin” of climate change and inevitably trying to pin the blame on man.

Read the rest at Brietbart.

American Meteorological Society: Investigating NOAA’s Dodgy Scientists Is ‘Intimidation’

It thinks that NOAA’s dodgy, data-fudging, parti-pris scientists should be allowed to go on spending taxpayers’ money on green propaganda unimpeded by the scrutiny of pesky skeptics like Rep Lamar Smith (R-Tex).

Here’s how the AMS’s executive director, Keith L Seitter, puts it in an open letter to the congressman:

Read the rest at Breitbart.

NOAA Attempts to Hide the Pause in Global Warming: The Most Disgraceful Cover-Up Since Climategate

Despite being a public, taxpayer-funded institution, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) insists that it is under no obligation to provide the research papers, as demanded in a subpoena by Rep Lamar Smith (R-Texas).

Gosh. What vital information of national secrecy importance could NOAA possibly have to hide?

That question is entirely rhetorical, by the way. The answer is obvious – well known to every one within the climate change research community. And the whole business stinks. When these documents are released, as eventually they surely must be, what will become evident is that this represents the most disgraceful official cover-up by the politicized science establishment since the release of the Climategate emails.

At the root of the issue is the inconvenient truth that there has been no “global warming” since January 1997.

This is clearly shown by the most reliable global temperature dataset – the RSS satellite records – and was even grudgingly acknowledged in the most recent Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Assessment report. While still insisting that there has been a slight warming – an increase, since 1998, of around 0.05 degrees C per decade – the IPCC had in all honesty to admit that this is smaller than the 0.1 degrees C error range for thermometer readings, and consequently statistically insignificant.

But if there has been no “global warming” for nearly 19 years how can alarmist proselytisers like President Obama and John Kerry possibly hope to convince an increasingly skeptical public that this apparently non-existent problem yet remains the most pressing concern of our age?”

Step forward the Obama administration’s helpful friends at NOAA. It’s not supposed to be a politicized institution: its job is to do science, not propaganda. But the memo must have been missed by NOAA scientists Thomas Karl and Thomas Peterson who, in May this year, published a “study” so favourable to the alarmist cause it might just as well have been scripted by Al Gore and Greenpeace, with a royal foreword by the Prince of Wales, and a blessing from Pope Francis.

“Data show no slowdown in recent global warming” declared NOAA’s press release. “The Pause”, in other words, was just the construct of a few warped deniers’ twisted imaginations.

Naturally this new “evidence” was seized on with alacrity by the usual media suspects.

Read the rest at Breitbart.

Global Warming? Yeah, Right

Precisely distorted

Have a look at this chart. It tells you pretty much all you need to know about the much-anticipated scoop by Anthony Watts of Watts Up With That?

What it means, in a nutshell, is that the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) – the US government body in charge of America’s temperature record, has systematically exaggerated the extent of late 20th century global warming. In fact, it has doubled it.

Is this a case of deliberate fraud by Warmist scientists hell bent on keeping their funding gravy train rolling? Well, after what we saw in Climategate anything is possible. (I mean it’s not like NOAA is run by hard-left eco activists, is it?) But I think more likely it is a case of confirmation bias. The Warmists who comprise the climate scientist establishment spend so much time communicating with other warmists and so little time paying attention to the views of dissenting scientists such as Henrik Svensmark – or Fred Singer or Richard Lindzen or indeed Anthony Watts – that it simply hasn’t occurred to them that their temperature records need adjusting downwards not upwards.

What Watts has conclusively demonstrated is that most of the weather stations in the US are so poorly sited that their temperature data is unreliable. Around 90 per cent have had their temperature readings skewed by the Urban Heat Island effect. While he has suspected this for some time what he has been unable to do until his latest, landmark paper (co-authored with Evan Jones of New York, Stephen McIntyre of Toronto, Canada, and Dr. John R. Christy from the Department of Atmospheric Science, University of Alabama, Huntsville) is to put precise figures on the degree of distortion involved.

For the full story go to Watts Up With That NOW!

There is, of course, one very, very sad aspect to this story – and truly it pains me to mention it but journalistic duty compels me to do so – and that’s the dampening effect it may have on the grandstanding of a hapless fellow by the name of Professor Richard Muller.

Poor Professor Muller has been telling anyone who’ll listen – his amen corner in greeny-lefty MSM, mainly – that as a former “skeptic” he has now been forced by weight of evidence to conclude that global warming is definitely man-made and there has been lots of it (a whole 1.5 degrees C – Wow! that’s like almost as much as you’d get if you drove from London to Manchester!!!) since 1750. Tragically – as Watts has very reluctantly and by-no-means-experiencing-any-kind-of-Schadenfreude had to point out is that the data used by Muller to draw these conclusions was unreliable to the point of utter uselessness.

So, in the spirit of magnanimity in total crushing victory I would urge readers of this blog not to crow too much about the devastating blow Watts’s findings will have on the Guardian’s battalion of environment correspondents, on the New York Times, on NOAA, on Al Gore, on the Prince of Wales, on the Royal Society, on Professor Muller, or on any of the other rent-seekers, grant-grubbers, eco-loons, crony capitalists, junk scientists, UN apparatchiks, EU technocrats, hideous porcine blobsters, demented squawking parrots, life-free loser trolls, paid CACC-amites and True Believers in the Great Global Warming Religion.

That would be plain wrong.

Related posts:

  1. Uh oh, global warming loons: here comes Climategate II!
  2. ‘Global warming? What global warming?’ says High Priest of Gaia Religion
  3. Inventor of Mann-made global warming feels the heat
  4. Only morons, cheats and liars still believe in Man-Made Global Warming

3 thoughts on “Global Warming? Yeah, right”

  1. Rocky Mountain says:24th August 2012 at 10:07 amJames – I’m neither a “warmist” nor a “denier” and am certainly open to any sane presentation of facts (assuming that’s possible). My general impression is that there are some records being broken with regard to higher temperatures in some places (although I think it is amusing to find out that many of the earlier records were set in the 19th century which makes me wonder what was going on then). I read this AM about Artic Sea ice shrinking in volume/area and is quite a bit lower then to be expected. What’s your reading of this?
  2. Delingpole Hates Science says:27th August 2012 at 6:30 amFunny, James claims that Global Warming isn’t taking place at all yet his argument is that it is now being exaggerated instead of simply not existing.

    Do denialists even bother looking at what’s been written for them by the Oil companies before they click submit?

    1. Rocky Mountain says:29th August 2012 at 12:51 pmBut the question I would ask is whether its possible to arrive at a “denialist” version of events without invoking the very conspiratorial “Oil Company” cabal? As I stated previously, I am neither a ‘warmist’ or a “denier” but somehow an issue about climate has become politically partisan and it appears to be because either position leads to political solutions. A good example is Thomas Friedman’s book “Hot, Flat, and Crowded” which, while interesting, is clearly biased politically. This puts a neutral conservative in a bad position. However, at the end of the day I think “Green” is not a bad thing as long as it doesn’t keep individuals from choosing to live the way they want. Maybe SUVs will become prohibitively expensive and finally put to rest but I would like to see that occur because of market forces. Anyway, I don’t believe that SUVs in and of themselves cause global warming. An interesting point in Friedman’s book is that cows and deforestation combined produce the bulk of CO2 and Methane emissions. I think it would be more beneficial to concentrate on either both or one of the other first, assuming, of course, that these emissions are causing global warming and additionally assuming thaty global warming is actually happening on the scale that it is sometimes reported.

Comments are closed.