A case of the blind leading the climatologistsRichard Treadgold | January 7, 2012
There has been no significant global surface warming this century, yet experts say that temperatures rose during the first decade, becoming seriously hot. Hotter than ever before, in fact. For example:
Past Decade Warmest on Record, NASA Data Shows
The decade ending in 2009 was the warmest on record, new surface temperature figures released Thursday by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration show.
The agency also found that 2009 was the second warmest year since 1880, when modern temperature measurement began. The warmest year was 2005. The other hottest recorded years have all occurred since 1998, NASA said.
James E. Hansen, director of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies, said that global temperatures varied because of changes in ocean heating and cooling cycles. “When we average temperature over 5 or 10 years to minimize that variability,” said Dr. Hansen, one of the world’s leading climatologists, “we find global warming is continuing unabated.”
But the only thing continuing “unabated” is the linear trend line — it’s still going up, and its slope hasn’t changed. “It’s all right. Only the data show a decline.”
NOAA: Past Decade Warmest on Record According to Scientists in 48 Countries
The 2009 State of the Climate report released today draws on data for 10 key climate indicators that all point to the same finding: the scientific evidence that our world is warming is unmistakable. More than 300 scientists from 160 research groups in 48 countries contributed to the report, which confirms that the past decade was the warmest on record and that the Earth has been growing warmer over the last 50 years.
These guys avoid claiming an actual rising trend, but are duplicitously content to leave the impression of warming.
Past Decade Ties for World’s Hottest
Thirteen of the warmest years recorded have occurred within the last decade and a half, the UN’s World Meteorological Organization said on Tuesday.
The year 2011 caps a decade that ties the record as the hottest ever measured, the WMO said in a provisional report on climate trends and extreme weather events, unveiled at UN climate talks in Durban, South Africa.
“Our science is solid and it proves unequivocally that the world is warming and that this warming is due to human activities,” WMO Secretary-General Michel Jarraud said in a statement, adding that policy makers should take note of the findings.
“Concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere have reached new highs and are very rapidly approaching levels consistent with a 2 to 2.4 Celsius rise in average global temperatures.”
Note they don’t actually blame the (future) temperature rise on the greenhouse gases. After all — that might force them to take a position.
Leading scientists and international climate bodies have been telling us the last decade became warmer than ever before. Read the above statements carefully and you’ll see they clearly make the point that temperatures were rising because they were high. Nitwits. Did they imagine we wouldn’t notice?
The Secretary-General of the World Meteorological Organisation, Michel Jarraud, should lose his job and be charged with fraud. Because it’s manifestly incorrect that temperatures rise because they are high. His pointless assurance that “our science is solid” strikes me as the apprehensive barking of a dog with a make-believe bite.
Think of the grandchildren
So are the climatologists stupid or are they blind? The temperatures were relatively high, but they weren’t going up, they were going down. Perhaps they simply forgot to mention it, but I think their false claim of warming indicates something more serious than forgetfulness.
It indicates climate blindness, which has already affected many climatologists. This is a serious condition that leads to bad dreams and frequent distracted mumblings of “we’re all doomed” and “think of the grandchildren” and “we’ll lose all the cuddly-wuddly polar bears”.
Climate blindness renders graphs of inauthentic climatic effects meaningless. Inauthentic for them has the specific meaning of “does not exist in a publication authored by the IPCC.” That is why the graphs below don’t enter their conscious thinking and why they can believe in warming when every other dataset in the world shows no warming.
James Hansen, the so-called “father of global warming” deserves that title, even if it’s as fictitious as the global warming he allegedly fathered. I’ve heard of a phantom pregnancy, but a phantom fathering? The mind boggles. But he’s still away with the fairies and these graphs prove it.
Along with the odd title, Hansen also deserves reproach, for he as well as anyone could see that temperatures this century have declined. Of course, to do so he would have to acknowledge the existence of global temperature datasets other than his own at GISS, not to mention the existence of satellites, but how hard is that, really? He works for NASA. They launch the things.
C3 Headlines has a collection of wonderful climate graphs. It’s really the place to go, and it offers topical, illuminating comment on climate matters. Clarence, in comments here, drew my attention to this graph showing the lack of a clear trend in recent temperatures together with the undoubted strong rise in the atmospheric level of CO2 (that’s the big arrow pointing to the top right). (Click to enlarge.)
In 15 years CO2 rose by about 30 ppmv, or 8.26%, which is a significant increase in a gas that’s claimed to dominate global temperature. Yet the global temperature didn’t notice and didn’t develop a rising trend. It went up and down willy-nilly. Perhaps it was distracted by all the wild weather. Which wasn’t caused by global warming ‘cos there was none.
That’s half the accepted period of 30 years, over which scientists look for climatic trends, that no warming trend occurred. Sure, it’s not 30 years, but it’s a huge stretch of time. There are only 15 years left for a trend to appear. It’ll have to get a hurry on and it’s certainly going to be a small one.
The models are wrong
Here’s a question: Do you think mankind caused both the rise in CO2 and the cessation of rise in temperature, or did we cause just one of them, or neither?
For CO2 to have no effect on temperature for such a long period means the theory of dangerous AGW is wrong, the models are wrong (because they didn’t foresee this significant period of no warming) and the alarming predictions of doom for the biosphere are wrong. It also, by the way, means every child under 15 years of age has no experience of global warming.
This other graph from C3 is masterful. As well as using the reliable UAH satellite dataset, it adds temperatures from the warmists’ own HadCrut dataset to prove their own models wrong. (Click to enlarge.)
It’s clear that for some time global temperatures have been diverging from the predictions of the climate models used by the IPCC.
It’s becoming impossible
Even if temperatures start seriously to rise right now, they will have to rise at a truly stupendous, unprecedented rate to develop into the dangerous warming the experts have been warning us about.
But it’s becoming more and more unlikely. There’s no sign of them rising now, and every month that passes makes that predicted slope just a little bit more impossibly steep. They’ll never reach the predicted levels. That’s because carbon dioxide doesn’t dominate the temperature of the climate.
The bright green line shows the UAH satellite record and the two blue lines are from HadCRUT. Above them are temperature forecasts from three IPCC scenarios of CO2 emissions. The orange ‘commitment’ line shows what the IPCC thought might happen if CO2 emissions were stabilised in 2000 (fat chance). The darker red, green and blue lines represent different “business as usual” scenarios of CO2 emissions.
Get a real job
Global temperatures have now dropped below even the stabilized CO2 emissions (orange line). As C3 says, this is a “spectacular failure”, as it proves that CO2 levels are not raising temperatures and we now know climate models have no skill in predicting the climate.
Fifteen years so far without warming. How long do we wait for it? How long before we kick the members of the IPCC out of the make-believe world of the climate control business and tell them to get real jobs? Like building fishing dugouts in Bangladesh. Make a difference. Help someone.
Finally, to confirm that it’s not a lack of carbon dioxide that’s keeping temperatures down, the next chart shows global CO2 emissions still rising. Even while CO2 growth continues at the pace of the widely-feared IPCC “business as usual” scenarios, temperatures are not rising.
(These are emissions, not atmospheric levels — they are worlds apart.)
MSM: Hear that? Temperatures are not rising.
Question: Are we responsible for both the rising carbon dioxide and the static temperatures, or just one of them?
Is the rising carbon dioxide responsible for the static temperatures? If not, what has caused the static temperatures, and what is the carbon dioxide up to?
So many questions — so few sighted climatologists.