Skip to content

The Pause Has Returned.

April 5, 2018

By Paul Homewood


from 2001


Hadcrut now have numbers out for February, giving an anomaly of 0.523C, measured against the 1961-90 baseline, slightly down on January’s 0.556C.

This means that the last six months have been below 0.59C.

It is clear that temperatures are settling down at a similar level to the period between 2002 and 2007, following the record El Nino of 2015/16. Bear in mind as well that the degree of accuracy, according to the Hadley Centre, is about +/-0.1C. As such, it cannot be said that there has been any statistically measurable warming since 2001, or indeed previously.

It is possible temperatures may drop further in coming months, with weak La Nina conditions established, although these are predicted to disappear by the summer.


Satellite measurements from UAH also show a similar picture:


from 2001

  1. April 5, 2018 6:25 pm

    There’s nothing like an accuracy of +/-0.1C for a temperature anomaly that doesn’t exist. It ain’t science as we used to know it.

    • April 5, 2018 6:33 pm

      Don’t underestimate the data adjusters.

    • Phoenix44 permalink
      April 6, 2018 9:34 am

      Yes, since the average temperature does not exist, how can it be “accurate”?

      I cannot measure a wholly imaginary thing.

      • Gerry, England permalink
        April 6, 2018 12:17 pm

        And measured only in a tiny number of locations on land let alone the 7/8 of the planet that are the oceans and seas. And then you have micro-climate – Kilimanjaro snowcap anyone? UHI?

      • Harry Passfield permalink
        April 6, 2018 6:50 pm

        And as much use as knowing the average of the last ‘n’ years’ lottery results.

      • MarcSaunders permalink
        April 9, 2018 11:59 am

        Since global warming supposedly depends on heat radiation the mean temperature is not representative. The fourth power of the temperature is relevant so it´s mean value should be recorded.

  2. J Martin permalink
    April 5, 2018 8:13 pm

    You beat Monckton to it. But then he is tied up with a climate court case in the US of A.

    With temperatures where they are now and a solar minimum over the next few years along with a negative AMO, the pause could be with us for a while, or at least until the next El Nino.

  3. Bruce of Newcastle permalink
    April 5, 2018 9:52 pm

    I was looking at this yesterday and was amused that the UAH global anomaly for March 2018 was exactly the same as for March 2002. Both +0.24 C.

    Can’t blame ENSO either. Our BoM ENSO page has neutral conditions, now with no forecast of la Nina to cool things down.

    Why are we spending so much money on something which isn’t happening?

  4. Donald Clifford permalink
    April 5, 2018 10:10 pm

    Should we anticipate a La Nina recurrence soon? Usually a super El Nino is followed soon after by a comparable La Nina. It is already late, but maybe just delayed?

    • dave permalink
      April 6, 2018 8:12 am

      “…La Nina…”

      I am afraid that you have both misread the (badly written) BoM page. When they refer to reaching La Nina temperature thresholds, they mean approaching the El Nina / Neutral boundary from the existing La Nina conditions, i.e. going from an anomaly < -0.5 C to one between – 0.5 and + 0.5 C.

      There has been a weak, recognized*, La Nina for several months now; and the effect -perhaps 0.1 C – on global UAH temperature anomalies is, in theory, now a factor.

      There is little evidence that large episodes of one sort cause large episodes of the opposite sort.

      Incidentally, the RSS update for March is + 0.05 C; this is essentially the same as UAH, which was + 0.04 C.

      * "Officially", it is always recognized in retrospect. To make the subtle distinction, La Nina CONDITIONS have been present but a La Nina "PERIOD" requires some permanency.
      The figures have been plain as anything for at least three months.

  5. April 5, 2018 10:11 pm

    Reblogged this on Climatism.

  6. James Wilson permalink
    April 5, 2018 10:21 pm

    Paul, the thing about your blogs which annoys me is that I can’t Tweet it, or Facebook it. Could you look into this? Please. Its the best way to get your blog out there where it can do some good.

    • April 6, 2018 8:31 am

      Will do!

      • dave permalink
        April 6, 2018 9:02 am

        “Will do!”

        So long as it does not become one of those annoying sites which DEMAND you use Facebook or Google or some telephone app to read it !

    • April 6, 2018 1:03 pm

      Sorted, James

      If you page down to the end of each post, there is a “Share This” box.

      Just click on Facebook etc to share

  7. Athelstan permalink
    April 5, 2018 11:08 pm

    Man made warming?

    It’s all bollocks,and only politicians and the luvvies in the media/goverment believe it.

    Kilimanjaro snows – still there, the Himalayan glaciers ain’t going anywhere as are the polar bears, millions of ‘missing penguins’ rolled up on an ice sheet down in the South Antarctica, the Arctic sea ice is still obscenely healthy, sea levels are nothing of note except pretty flat, (and I could go on – but we all know the fairy tales of misinterpretation, statistical virtuality et bloody cetera) – ie: all of their (alarmunist) ‘predictions’ are utter tosh.

    It ain’t man made CO₂ and temperatures are cooling – if you look to the wider picture, and ref ‘Minoan warming’ on a scale of not much (by comparison) the ‘rise’ in T’s since the LIA has been lovely but natural background warming and there’s nothing but nothing to suggest any sort of man made ‘signal’.

    ave a gander

  8. Afterthought permalink
    April 6, 2018 12:26 am

    Fear of Global Warming is silly.

    In addition to space based reflectors, my prefered method because you can set it up to both coll AND heat the planet, there is also a way to cool the earth using chalk (calcium carbonate).

    See this recent < 7 min TED talk for more.

  9. Afterthought permalink
    April 6, 2018 12:27 am
  10. TedL permalink
    April 6, 2018 12:37 am

    You write “It is clear that temperatures are settling down at a similar level to the period between 2002 and 2007, following the record El Nino of 2015/16. ”

    I think you meant 1998.

    • TedL permalink
      April 6, 2018 12:38 am

      Never mind, I now see how the sentence is constructed

  11. April 6, 2018 1:31 am

    Reblogged this on Climate Collections.

  12. Tom Dowter permalink
    April 6, 2018 6:34 am

    6th April 2018

    Basically, much of the longer term history of global temperatures can be viewed as a long term continuous warming superimposed upon a 60 year cycle of alternate warming and cooling. Thus we have cooling from 1820-1849, warming from 1850-1879, cooling from 1880-1909, warming from 1910-1939, cooling from 1940-1969 and warming from 1970-1999.

    The “pause” is simply the down leg of the cycle superimposed on this same longer term warming. In practice, it has not, as yet, been a real pause but more of a slowing down in the underlying warming. In fact, if we examine the UAH data up to March 2018, we find that there is no period of 7 years or more ending in March 2018 where the trend using a linear regression is other than a warming one.

    This conclusion applies whether or not we simply use the month of March or the pseudo year of 12 months from the previous April(s).

    • Phoenix44 permalink
      April 6, 2018 9:37 am

      That just cherry picks start dates.

      • Tom Dowter permalink
        April 6, 2018 3:32 pm


        I have used every possible start date for the UAH series which gives me at least 7 years’ worth of data.

        The end dats is the latest for which we have evidence.

  13. dave permalink
    April 6, 2018 10:58 am

    “…the longer term warming…”

    Which may itself be the rising part of an still longer cycle. If this longer cycle (solar cause?) turns down while the shorter cycle (ocean conveyor belt?) is still in a downward phase the various measures of temperature anomalies will all turn negative – in time.

    Of course, the idea of an “average global temperature” – with its wiggles, determining the life prospects of every living thing – will still be nonsensical.

    • Tom Dowter permalink
      April 6, 2018 3:41 pm

      Yes. The “longer term warming” could indeed be part of a longer cycle. In fact I think that some, at least, of it is.

      However, It is most unlikely to be of simple solar origin. There are many reasons for this – but I will deal with the two simplest:-

      1) TSI shows a very pronounced 11 year cycle. If variation in the sun’s output were a major cause of temperature change we would expect this cycle to be strongly represented in the various temperature series. Yet, for all practical purposes, it is virtually undetectable therein.

      2) If solar output were the main cause of temperature change, we would expect to see the effect much more strongly when the sun is actually shining. In fact, we find that nights tend to warm faster than days. UM !!!

      • April 6, 2018 4:47 pm

        All the warming followed the cooling of the Little Ice Age.

  14. April 6, 2018 7:06 pm

    Reblogged this on WeatherAction News and commented:
    To the climate troughers, the Pause is like Lord Voldemort –
    He Who Must Not Be Named 😂

  15. HotScot permalink
    April 6, 2018 8:46 pm

    Isn’t it just unbeleviably tragic that we AGW sceptics must wish for precisely what we don’t want, to disprove a phenomenon that doesn’t exist.

    • dave permalink
      April 7, 2018 7:33 am


      Yes; but it is a bit like hoping Gwynyth Paltrow gets so sick that she has no time to advise women to sit on steaming kettles.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: