Skip to content

Mosher Confirms The Pause

January 19, 2017

By Paul Homewood


h/t Mr Mosher – the gift that keeps giving!




Perturbed that satellites show that last year was no warmer than 1998, Steven Mosher wanted to remind us that temperatures really are still rising, and provided the above graph from Woodfortrees.


I actually don’t know any half competent statistician who would read any significance into such a short time series.

But, nevertheless, what trend there has been is only a tiny 0.004C a year, much less then the error margin, which I understand is 0.1C. RSS come up with exactly the same trend.

Even if we extrapolated this, we would only get 0.4C/century, way below what computer models are forecasting, and almost certainly beneficial in overall terms.

And we are expected to spend trillions just for that?

  1. January 19, 2017 1:05 pm

    Well done Mr Mosher!

  2. January 19, 2017 1:06 pm

    Yes. Should we? No.

  3. January 19, 2017 1:22 pm

    another way is to look at the trend profile

  4. 1saveenergy permalink
    January 19, 2017 1:23 pm

    For those who don’t know Mr Mosher ….& those who’d rather not !

    • AndyG55 permalink
      January 19, 2017 8:17 pm

      Mosher is really nothing but an inglorious dodgy salesman

      The only reason BEST could have hired him is as a frontman/mouthpiece..

      Thing is, he is so darn terrible at it. !!

  5. 1saveenergy permalink
    January 19, 2017 1:26 pm

    test ; just tried 3 times to post, just disappeared ???

  6. CheshireRed permalink
    January 19, 2017 1:27 pm

    Trying to prevent a rate of 0.4c p/century ‘warming’ is effectively saying we don’t want the global average temperature to change *at all*. That is plainly nonsense. Kind of in-keeping with the entire AGW scam, then.

  7. Broadlands permalink
    January 19, 2017 1:50 pm

    I’m puzzled at the statement that 1998-2016 is not long enough (“too short”) to detect a “pause”. I thought that this WAS the “pause”… started by the 1997-98 El-Nino and La-Nina. Regardless, the trend is hardly rising at “breakneck” speed. In the US the 1998-2016 trend is still level except that the winters are clearly trending colder.

    • January 19, 2017 2:07 pm

      It’s a question of statistical significance.

      I know one statistician who is an expert on time series, who argues that you need centuries of data

    • January 19, 2017 4:22 pm

      It is also a question of whether you can consider the trend to have predictive power. Centuries of data are needed for that, in order to see cycles and oscillations in the series, and to know where is the present within the pattern.
      In the dictionary sense, a trend is simply the direction of historical measures, and that is meaningful in its own terms.

    • manicbeancounter permalink
      January 19, 2017 7:28 pm

      The “pause” in warming is being compared to previous linear trends from the mid-1970s. Clearly there is a divergence, with RSS only showing 0.004 per year. But this “pause” should really be compared with the theory that the cause of warming is human caused.
      The major greenhouse gas is CO2, and the central estimate (unchanged between the Charney Report 1979 and IPCC AR5 WG1 2013) is that a doubling of atmospheric CO2 levels will cause global average temperatures to rise by 3C. If you assume that the impact of a rise in CO2 levels last year will feed though to a temperature rise this year there the impact would be the blue line below. The crimson line is the average of the last 11 years. indicating a lagged impact.

      After 1998 there should have been an acceleration in the rate of annual warming due to CO2 from less that 0.020 to about 0.025 last year. Add in other greenhouse gases and the warming rate should be greater. Instead it stopped warming. If you look at linear trends over a 30+ year period it could be argued that climate sensitivity is about half the consensus belief. But the divergence between theory and the estimates suggests that the greenhouse gas impact is much smaller than that.
      The above chart was part of a post comparing the CO2 impact with HADCRUT4 trends.

      • Edmonton Al permalink
        January 20, 2017 12:23 pm

        How does one “trap” heat?
        Try this:
        In a pot of boiling water, if one turns up the heat then the water boils faster but the water is still at 100C [an open system]
        The WV doesn’t heat up the water.
        The earth is an open system.
        The water cycle cools the earth; CO2 cools the earth’s atmosphere.
        The oceans heat the atmosphere not the other way around.

  8. Eric Hutchinson permalink
    January 19, 2017 2:12 pm

    Just beginning to wonder why so many people are telling so many porkies. What’s to gain?

    • Mike Jackson permalink
      January 19, 2017 2:43 pm

      The usual answer, Eric, is “money”. Add in “self-importance”, “adulation” (by those who think because you are a scientist you must be right), “legacy” (if you are a politician), and a few others, but money plus a knighthood or a Nobel prize will normally be enough.

    • roger permalink
      January 19, 2017 2:46 pm

      Pork perhaps?
      If you will excuse a legitimate yet vulgar Americanism.

  9. January 19, 2017 3:09 pm

    Mr Mosher never fails to amuse, or put his foot where his mouth presumably is.

  10. AndyG55 permalink
    January 19, 2017 8:11 pm

    The transient decay in RSS has now dropped just below the 1997-2015. ZERO trend line.

    UAH had a bit further to drop, but should do so in January

  11. January 19, 2017 10:22 pm

    ‘And we are expected to spend trillions just for that?’

    And more. But the temperature figures are horribly unreliable anyway, so arguing over them is of limited value except to say the idea that we’re in trouble is a long way off being demonstrated.

  12. Lazarus permalink
    January 20, 2017 12:08 pm

    Cherry picking 1998 and there is still a rise! What happens when you start from 1999?

    • January 20, 2017 6:02 pm


      Picking a trend from a big La Nina year, and finishing in an even bigger El Nino

      Why not start in winter and end in summer?

  13. the other brad permalink
    January 20, 2017 6:49 pm

    Can he post here?

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: