The New Pause lengthens by another month to 5 years 7 months

Sunsettommy

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2018
Messages
8,933
Reaction score
6,390
Points
2,050
Watts Up With That?

The New Pause lengthens by another month to 5 years 7 months

3/5/2021

By Christopher Monckton of Brenchley

Excerpt:

The New Pause continues. To the end of December 2020, it was 5 years 4 months. To the end of January 2021, it was 5 years 6 months. To the end of February 2021, it is 5 years 7 months:

1614970502642.png


LINK

=======

CO2 is failing once again!
 

westwall

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2010
Messages
70,467
Reaction score
25,158
Points
2,250
Location
Nevada
Watts Up With That?

The New Pause lengthens by another month to 5 years 7 months

3/5/2021

By Christopher Monckton of Brenchley

Excerpt:

The New Pause continues. To the end of December 2020, it was 5 years 4 months. To the end of January 2021, it was 5 years 6 months. To the end of February 2021, it is 5 years 7 months:

View attachment 464474

LINK

=======

CO2 is failing once again!





Yup. It's amazing, amazing I tell ya. How all that heat is somehow magically being stored in the deep oceans.
 
OP
Sunsettommy

Sunsettommy

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2018
Messages
8,933
Reaction score
6,390
Points
2,050
Watts Up With That?

The New Pause lengthens by another month to 5 years 7 months

3/5/2021

By Christopher Monckton of Brenchley

Excerpt:

The New Pause continues. To the end of December 2020, it was 5 years 4 months. To the end of January 2021, it was 5 years 6 months. To the end of February 2021, it is 5 years 7 months:

View attachment 464474

LINK

=======

CO2 is failing once again!





Yup. It's amazing, amazing I tell ya. How all that heat is somehow magically being stored in the deep oceans.
Even more amazing are the warmist/alarmist continued AGW fantasy propaganda that has NEVER been shown to be a real force in the heat budget of the planet.
 

abu afak

ALLAH SNACKBAR!
Joined
Mar 3, 2006
Messages
3,709
Reaction score
1,050
Points
315
OH NO!
Another "Pause" (IOW, not straight up.. of course. Nothing is.)

Tommy has seen this before of course.
My
with 48 PAGES! of discussion.


Still Going Down the Up Escalator
3 February 2012

The Escalator, originally created as a simple debunking to the myth "Global warming stopped in [insert date]", turned out to be a very popular graphic. Going Down the Up Escalator, Part 1 recently surpassed 20,000 pageviews, Part 2 has an additional 4,000+ views, and the graphic itself has been used countless times in other blogs and media articles. Due to its popularity, we have added a link to The Escalator in the right margin of the page, and it also has its own short URL, sks.to/escalator.

The popularity of the graphic is probably due to the fact that (1) it's a simple, stand-alone debunking of the "global warming stopped" myth, and (2) that particular myth has become so popular amongst climate denialists.

As The Escalator clearly illustrates, it's easy to cherry pick convenient start and end points to obtain whatever short-term trend one desires, but the long-term human-caused global warming trend is quite clear underneath the short-term noise.


The original Escalator was based on the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature (BEST) data, which incorporates more temperature station data than any other data set, but is limited to land-only data; additionally the record terminates in early 2010. We originally created the graphic in response to the specific myth that the BEST data showed that global warming had stopped.

It is interesting to apply the same analysis to a current global (land-ocean) temperature record to determine whether short term trends in the global data can be equally misleading. A global version of the Escalator graphic has therefore been prepared using the NOAA NCDC global (land and ocean combined) data through December 2011 (Figure 1).

GRAPHIC






`
 
Last edited:

ding

Confront reality
Joined
Oct 25, 2016
Messages
81,575
Reaction score
7,927
Points
1,855
Location
Houston
OH NO!
Another "Pause" (IOW, not straight up.. of course. Nothing is.)

Tommy has seen this before of course.
My
with 48 PAGES! of discussion.


Still Going Down the Up Escalator
3 February 2012

The Escalator, originally created as a simple debunking to the myth "Global warming stopped in [insert date]", turned out to be a very popular graphic. Going Down the Up Escalator, Part 1 recently surpassed 20,000 pageviews, Part 2 has an additional 4,000+ views, and the graphic itself has been used countless times in other blogs and media articles. Due to its popularity, we have added a link to The Escalator in the right margin of the page, and it also has its own short URL, sks.to/escalator.

The popularity of the graphic is probably due to the fact that (1) it's a simple, stand-alone debunking of the "global warming stopped" myth, and (2) that particular myth has become so popular amongst climate denialists.

As The Escalator clearly illustrates, it's easy to cherry pick convenient start and end points to obtain whatever short-term trend one desires, but the long-term human-caused global warming trend is quite clear underneath the short-term noise.


The original Escalator was based on the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature (BEST) data, which incorporates more temperature station data than any other data set, but is limited to land-only data; additionally the record terminates in early 2010. We originally created the graphic in response to the specific myth that the BEST data showed that global warming had stopped.

It is interesting to apply the same analysis to a current global (land-ocean) temperature record to determine whether short term trends in the global data can be equally misleading. A global version of the Escalator graphic has therefore been prepared using the NOAA NCDC global (land and ocean combined) data through December 2011 (Figure 1).

GRAPHIC






`
Why do you want to the planet to be colder during an ice age?
 

abu afak

ALLAH SNACKBAR!
Joined
Mar 3, 2006
Messages
3,709
Reaction score
1,050
Points
315
`
22 seconds




`
 
Last edited:
OP
Sunsettommy

Sunsettommy

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2018
Messages
8,933
Reaction score
6,390
Points
2,050
He doesn't realize how stupid he is, he doesn't realize how little CO2 effects the heat budget and that it doesn't prevent IR from leaving the planet, it has actually increased in leaving the planet as the world warms slowly.

The escalator was predicted to show up in the comment section of the link, as I will fully quote here:

Steve Case

March 5, 2021 2:50 am

My search for “GISTEMP” in the article comes up 0/0 and our good friends in the so-called popular press usually quote GISTEMP data and GISTEMP’s Land Ocean Temperature Index (LOTI) shows that the new pause goes back to November 2018.

Source:
https://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata_v4/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt

But that is a pause of 2.16 years years and counting. In a few days GISTEMP will come out with LOTI to include data from February 2021 and probably the expected 300 or so changes to the monthly entries all the way back to January 1880. So who knows?

However should this new pause actually get some press, the folks at Skeptical Science are sure to dust off their “Escalator”:

comment image

LINK

=====

The escalator argument was always stupid as hell and warmist/alarmist science illiterates don't even know why.

:auiqs.jpg: :auiqs.jpg: :auiqs.jpg:
 

abu afak

ALLAH SNACKBAR!
Joined
Mar 3, 2006
Messages
3,709
Reaction score
1,050
Points
315
He doesn't realize how stupid he is, he doesn't realize how little CO2 effects the heat budget and that it doesn't prevent IR from leaving the planet, it has actually increased in leaving the planet as the world warms slowly.

The escalator was predicted to show up in the comment section of the link, as I will fully quote here:

Steve Case

March 5, 2021 2:50 am

My search for “GISTEMP” in the article comes up 0/0 and our good friends in the so-called popular press usually quote GISTEMP data and GISTEMP’s Land Ocean Temperature Index (LOTI) shows that the new pause goes back to November 2018.

Source:
https://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata_v4/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt

But that is a pause of 2.16 years years and counting. In a few days GISTEMP will come out with LOTI to include data from February 2021 and probably the expected 300 or so changes to the monthly entries all the way back to January 1880. So who knows?

However should this new pause actually get some press, the folks at Skeptical Science are sure to dust off their “Escalator”:

comment image

LINK

=====

The escalator argument was always stupid as hell and warmist/alarmist science illiterates don't even know why.

:auiqs.jpg: :auiqs.jpg: :auiqs.jpg:
I caught your Stupid RW ass in a Bungle/Lie and YOU KNEW IT and STFU for Days.
In fact, it stopped your thread dead in it's tracks.
except for empty but hostile Westwall it was over.
He TROLLED me/the thread with a meme, No text.
His usual 'contribution.'

Now you only respond to his goofy post. (aka "whoring"/Gossip on many mbs)

That 'lie' being misleading context.
Cherry picking at 5 year "Looks like down graph" but isn't.

2016 and 2020 are tied for hottest Year.

It's like Dishonest Creationists lying about evolution by finding OUT of context quotes by people who DO believe in evo.
That's called "quote mining."
You were creating a False impression with an Idiotic un-contexted short graph. 'year shopping'.
Now known as "Going down the up escalator."

Stop reading WUWT/WTFUWT.

Dismissed mod Westwall (a discredit to USMB) never says anything of merit/On topic.
Refuted NOTHING.
Trolled up a meme.
He's the most deluded of the RWers, and claims he's a progressive!

`

`
 
Last edited:

ReinyDays

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2019
Messages
5,960
Reaction score
2,369
Points
210
Location
State of Jefferson
Thanx for the weather update ... none of those charts have anything to do with climate ... restrict your sample pool and we can make statistics tell us anything we want them to ... easy peasy ...

Now look at the data starting in 1880 ... instead of 1970 ... that data doesn't tell the same tale now does it ...
 
OP
Sunsettommy

Sunsettommy

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2018
Messages
8,933
Reaction score
6,390
Points
2,050
Thanx for the weather update ... none of those charts have anything to do with climate ... restrict your sample pool and we can make statistics tell us anything we want them to ... easy peasy ...

Now look at the data starting in 1880 ... instead of 1970 ... that data doesn't tell the same tale now does it ...
Who and what are you responding to?
 
OP
Sunsettommy

Sunsettommy

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2018
Messages
8,933
Reaction score
6,390
Points
2,050
Who and what are you responding to?
Anyone who thinks 50 years worth of data is statistically significant ...

It's not ...
:rolleyes:

You didn't answer the questions.

Who made the 50 year claim? It isn't the article I posted at all, you been drinking all afternoon??

You are being vague.
 
Last edited:

ReinyDays

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2019
Messages
5,960
Reaction score
2,369
Points
210
Location
State of Jefferson
You didn't answer the questions.
Who made the 50 year claim? It isn't the article I posted at all, you been drinking all afternoon??
You are being vague.
The answer requires math ... something beyond your abilities apparently ...
Go look at the OP again ... see how all the charts only go back 5 years ... so, yes, I'm speaking directly to that ...

I had to drive last night, so no afternoon drinking for me ...
 

ding

Confront reality
Joined
Oct 25, 2016
Messages
81,575
Reaction score
7,927
Points
1,855
Location
Houston
Thanx for the weather update ... none of those charts have anything to do with climate ... restrict your sample pool and we can make statistics tell us anything we want them to ... easy peasy ...

Now look at the data starting in 1880 ... instead of 1970 ... that data doesn't tell the same tale now does it ...
Do these charts have to do with climate?

F2.large.jpg


transition to icehouse.png


 

ding

Confront reality
Joined
Oct 25, 2016
Messages
81,575
Reaction score
7,927
Points
1,855
Location
Houston
... sad ...
How so?

Feel free to clarify what you would classify as statistically valid. You might even show an example of what you believe is statistically valid. You know... as I just did.

You could even explain what you believe the statistically valid data is showing or means. Don't be shy.
 

ReinyDays

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2019
Messages
5,960
Reaction score
2,369
Points
210
Location
State of Jefferson
Feel free to clarify what you would classify as statistically valid. You might even show an example of what you believe is statistically valid. You know... as I just did.
You could even explain what you believe the statistically valid data is showing or means. Don't be shy.
100 year averages, absolute minimum ... so your charts show million year averages, which are valid in climatology ... if we accept the inference, and I don't have a valid reason to not accept the proxy data ... but with the empirical data, we only have 140 years worth, best we can do is split the difference and take our 70 year averages ... and indeed we find the first 70 years cooler than the most recent 70 years ... by definition, that's global warming, keeping in mind we are short of data a bit ... a few grains of salt need be tossed over our shoulders if we try and make any grand conclusions ...

Your chart shows it's colder today than it ever has been during the Quaternary Period ... the OP's charts show the oceans boiling off next week ...

Keep in mind that "statistically valid" doesn't mean "completely valid" ... far from it ... statistics are a wonderful tool to help us guide our research in the right direction ... but in of itself, statistics can be troubling ... we need always be wary of any results ...
 

ding

Confront reality
Joined
Oct 25, 2016
Messages
81,575
Reaction score
7,927
Points
1,855
Location
Houston
Feel free to clarify what you would classify as statistically valid. You might even show an example of what you believe is statistically valid. You know... as I just did.
You could even explain what you believe the statistically valid data is showing or means. Don't be shy.
100 year averages, absolute minimum ... so your charts show million year averages, which are valid in climatology ... if we accept the inference, and I don't have a valid reason to not accept the proxy data ... but with the empirical data, we only have 140 years worth, best we can do is split the difference and take our 70 year averages ... and indeed we find the first 70 years cooler than the most recent 70 years ... by definition, that's global warming, keeping in mind we are short of data a bit ... a few grains of salt need be tossed over our shoulders if we try and make any grand conclusions ...

Your chart shows it's colder today than it ever has been during the Quaternary Period ... the OP's charts show the oceans boiling off next week ...

Keep in mind that "statistically valid" doesn't mean "completely valid" ... far from it ... statistics are a wonderful tool to help us guide our research in the right direction ... but in of itself, statistics can be troubling ... we need always be wary of any results ...
The charts I posted show trends in the earth's climate; inconvertible, undeniable climate trends. Trends which exist for good reason. Reasons that we can understand. Reasons that make sense. Specifically the transition from a greenhouse planet to an icehouse planet. Or if those terms disturb you.. a trend towards an ice age. Where bipolar glaciation creates more frequent and drastic temperature changes. A climate that is driven by northern hemisphere glaciation. A condition that is so rare it has never been shown to exist in the geologic record.

So when looking at short term trends of even 100 years no conclusion should be reached without considering the background conditions which are in place today that led to the transition from a greenhouse planet to an ice age planet. As such we should not be surprised that the temperature is rising because we are in an interglacial cycle and still below the peak temperatures of previous interglacial cycles.

Say, can you send me the podcast link of that geologist you like where he discussed oxygen isotope data? I seem to have misplaced mine.
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top