Skip to content

Gavin Denies The Pause

June 5, 2015
tags:

By Paul Homewood 

 

image

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2015/06/noaa-temperature-record-updates-and-the-hiatus#ITEM-18571-0

 

Richard Mallett kindly points me towards Gavin’s comments on the Karl paper. It laughingly contains this comment: 

 

The ‘hiatus’ is so fragile that even those small changes make it disappear.

 

had

rss

http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/rss/from:2001/to:2015/plot/rss/from:2001/to:2015/trend

 

 

 

Yes, really fragile, Gavin!!  

 

 

To compound matters, he then tries a bit of misdirection about the temperature standstill: 

 

 

The ‘hiatus’ is no more?

Part of the problem here is simply semantic. What do people even mean by a ‘hiatus’, ‘pause’ or ‘slowdown’? As discussed above, if by ‘hiatus’ or ‘pause’ people mean a change to the long-term trends, then the evidence for this has always been weak (see also this comment by Mike). If people use ‘slowdown’ to simply point to a short-term linear trend that is lower than the long-term trend, then this is still there in the early part of the last decade and is likely related to an interdecadal period (through at least 2012) of more La Niña-like conditions and stronger trade winds in the Pacific, with greater burial of heat beneath the ocean surface.

 

As he well knows, this has nothing to do with “a change to the long term trends”. If I was born in 1979 and grew till I was 19 years old, would that mean that I was simply growing more slowly now?

Even the UK Met Office acknowledged the pause in July 2013:

The start of the current pause is difficult to determine precisely. Although 1998 is often quoted as the start of the current pause, this was an exceptionally warm year because of the largest El Niño in the instrumental record. This was followed by a strong La Niña event and a fall in global surface temperature of around 0.2oC (Figure 1), equivalent in magnitude to the average decadal warming trend in recent decades. It is only really since 2000 that the rise in global surface temperatures has paused.

http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/media/pdf/q/0/Paper2_recent_pause_in_global_warming.PDF

 

Certainly the pause is still a short term phenomena (though getting close to a significant length of time according to Phil Jones!) But so, of course, was the 19 years of warming seen previously.

 

Gavin also points out that in overall terms the warming trend has been reduced. That, of course, would explain why this was not mentioned in the Abstract or the press release!

19 Comments
  1. Gary H permalink
    June 6, 2015 12:06 am

    Global warming is so fragile that our small changes make it manifest.

    • Ben Vorlich permalink
      June 6, 2015 6:33 am

      Alternatively

      The ‘Anthropogenic Global Warming’ is so fragile that even small changes make it disappear.

  2. June 6, 2015 1:01 am

    I’d be cautious about accepting the conclusions of the article by Thomas Karl & others. After all, aren’t they just a bunch of climate pause deniers?

    • JerryC permalink
      June 7, 2015 4:35 pm

      There never was a pause, comrade. And we have always been at war with Eastasia.

  3. June 6, 2015 1:19 am

    Reblogged this on Centinel2012 and commented:
    The model I developed in 2007 shows the pause will last until ~2035 and it has never been off much since then even with the NOAA $ NASA tampering; without the tampering it would be almost perfect.

    • Kartoffel permalink
      June 6, 2015 9:37 am

      Have you any news lately about Maurice Strong the founding father?

  4. June 6, 2015 2:30 am

    Reblogged this on Climate Collections.

  5. June 6, 2015 3:06 am

    Gavin is a dissembler, isn’t he?

    “…if by ‘hiatus’ or ‘pause’ people mean a change to the long-term trends…”

    Nope. That’s not what has ever been meant by hiatus.

    “If people use ‘slowdown’ to simply point to a short-term linear trend that is lower than the long-term trend…”

    Nope again.

    Pause, Hiatus and means the period during which IPCC and models galore told us warming would run rampant because of CO2 emissions, but it hasn’t happened.

  6. Manfred permalink
    June 6, 2015 7:22 am

    When is the ‘pause’ not a pause? When it’s a trendless interval.

    HAC-Robust Measurement of the Duration of a Trendless Subsample in a Global Climate
    Time Series. (2014) McKitrick, RR. Open Journal of Statistics, 4, 527-535
    http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/ojs.2014.47050

  7. Manfred permalink
    June 6, 2015 7:40 am

    They can singly or collectively confabulate, torture the data, and adjust ad infinitum, but they can never ever get around the fact that their models not only failed dismally to predict the ’98 – 15+ warming interregnum but more importantly, failed to disprove the null hypothesis that adding CO2 anthro-emissions to the atmosphere does not cause warming. In doing this, they not only confirmed CO2 as an infinitesimal theoretical bit player with a tiny, undetectable effect size, they highlighted their dependence on the lights of the Moulin Rouge junket this coming November in Paris.

  8. Kartoffel permalink
    June 6, 2015 9:28 am

    The science of climat change and religion are fully aligned says Pope Francis, and money you agree …. this years conference will tell how many (billions) and where it will be sent.

  9. June 6, 2015 11:50 am

    Thanks, Paul. The warmunistas are restless, you can hear their drums.

  10. June 6, 2015 1:29 pm

    “Paris is a coming,
    And so are the lies,
    No warming pause,
    Now there’s a surprise!
    The weather recorded
    Doesn’t fit with the plan;
    Adjust temperature records,
    Keep blaming man….

    Read more: http://rhymeafterrhyme.net/no-warming-pause-now-theres-a-surprise/

  11. June 6, 2015 6:09 pm

    The big problem is that the popular press like Armaggedon forecasts.
    The “I” on 5th June gave a whole page to Steve Connor the Independents “Science” editor using the NOAA report to rubbish all deniers. Apart from Chris Booker in the Sunday Telegraph there is no coverage of any criticism of the “proven science”. This is because it is hard to excite people by the threats of future energy instability and fuel poverty as it is creeping-up in us but is not obvious.
    I’ve tried several times to get letters published in the “I” criticising the poor quality of its science, but no chance!
    We need some new ideas on raising the coverage of real science.

  12. June 7, 2015 5:00 pm

    If you can disappear years so cold they call them “the ice years” in ICEland, you can make anything “fragile” enough to disappear….

  13. June 7, 2015 11:14 pm

    Reblogged this on Climatism.

  14. Paul Piercy permalink
    June 8, 2015 2:35 am

    Some people miss the bus even when it hits them.

  15. Kartoffel permalink
    June 10, 2015 9:57 am

    Look who is sowing the seeds of confusion
    read : sciantificamerican.com :
    Climat Scientists Helped Create a Spurious Pause in Global Warming

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: