Well my last post certainly stirred up some Global Warming Enthusiasts who found it difficult to get their heads around the continued existence of The Pause. What will they make of this month’s update? The Pause refuses to go away, despite greatly exaggerated rumours of its death.
Dr Roy Spencer has just released UAH v6.0 data for March. This is a preliminary post with graphs only for the Globe, the Northern Hemisphere, the Southern Hemisphere, and the Tropics. Other regions will be updated in a few days’ time when the full data for March are released. (These preliminary figures may change slightly as well.)
These graphs show the furthest back one can go to show a zero or negative trend (less than +0.1C/ 100 years) in lower tropospheric temperatures. I calculate 12 month running means to remove the small possibility of seasonal autocorrelation in the monthly anomalies. Note: The satellite record commences in December 1978- now 37 years and 4 months long- 448 months. 12 month running means commence in November 1979. The graphs below start in December 1978, so the vertical gridlines denote Decembers. The final plotted points are March 2016.
Except for the Tropics, where The Pause has reduced by three months, in other regions it has remained at the same length.
[CLICK ON IMAGES TO ENLARGE]
Sorry, GWEs, The Pause is still an embarrassing reality! For how much longer we don’t know.
And, for the special benefit of those who think that I am deliberately fudging data by using 12 month running means, here is the plot of monthly anomalies, which shows that The Pause is over in monthly anomalies by my rather strict criterion:
I will continue posting these figures showing these scarey trends from monthly anomalies. The Pause will return sooner with monthly anomalies than 12 month means of course. Meanwhile, shudder at the thought of 18 years and 4 months with a frightening trend of +0.15C +/-0.1C per 100 years.
Yet it is more critical than Islamic terrorism. Go figure.
Wow Curt here we have 2 years in a row that are the hottest on record and The Pause continues !!!
Is their nothing that The Pause can’t do ??
Curt this rss temps from the sattelites
Do they measure the temps on the surface of the Earth where we live ?
Or in the ” lower troposphere” ?
In the last Gallup poll 65% said that humans are causing the climate to change
funny how NOAH originally said their was no global warming and we were in expected ranges, revised their data and then said we were in hottest year on record and now refuses to show they’re data to congress
A poll isn’t scientific method just because you snow people with dubious data doesn’t mean it’s fact
This is what happens when liberals see one of biggest tax increases slipping out of their grubby little lying hands in an effort to save us from threat that is nonexistent in humans to control
All real relevant causes are earths cyclic shifts and solar activity not anything humans have any significant control of
@John: It was hotter in the ’30’s than it was last year. Good to know Gallup has a good grasp on science, climate and weather. What that shows is how many place propaganda above science, data and fact.
You do realize that the global warming “pause” doesn’t actually exist, don’t you? It’s disinformation. The appearance of a pause results from focusing on the temperature data trend relating to a narrow part of the global climate system, rather than looking at the temperature trend of the entire system as a whole.
Study drives a sixth nail into the global warming ‘pause’ myth
Global Warming ‘Pause’ Is A Myth: New Study
The global climate continues to warm rapidly
That’s how rapidly additional heat is accumulating in the entire global climate system. It’s a very large system, but that heat gain adds up, over time.
Why can’t congress see the data
Why is it being hidden
Why are the data collection methods being fudged
Why do you persist in perpetuating a lie
Not one predicted climate change model has been near accurate otherwise we would all be underwater now
Wanna know when it’s real
It’s when coastal properties start going dirt cheap
Somehow don’t see that happening
Why do you believe any of the above claims are true? Consider the first item on the list:
What republican Congressmen have been denied are internal communications between NOAA scientists relating to a recent NOAA climate change study, not the study or data itself.
They’re looking for material to to build another conspiracy theory out of. They don’t want to examine data. They want to discredit individuals and organizations using their private email exchanges as a means of attack.
They’re not even honest about what they want, or what their motives are.
US science agency refuses request for climate records
Data data data
So you think that no unelected official working in government has to comply with request by congress who are elected dependent on their political ideology and its side issues
Of course the left always works in secrecy yet proclaims transparency
Think corporate emails are secret and you don’t have to retain them?
Your side supported this retention and now you want to claim privilege because you’re afraid to defend it or let what’s in it come to light
No wonder you cheats support hillary
I think republican Congressmen have no right to read government scientists’ internal work-related email exchanges, any more than the scientists have to read a Congressmen’s internal work-related email. They have a right to see the data and read the conclusions. They don’t have a right to sift through the informal deliberation processes looking for politically useful comments that can be presented out of context to further the causes of the special interests they represent. That’s really what they want to do. They want tangentially related material they can use to discredit people and organizations they consider to be their opponents.
They seem to think they’ve been empowered to conduct personal investigations of all parties involved any time they’re confronted with information or conclusions they don’t like. They have NOT been so empowered, as the fact that NOAA has essentially told them to take a hike clearly demonstrates.
Republicans should really try to elect fewer jackasses. They might then get a Congressional majority that actually amounts to something, rather than a passel of fools that waste time posturing, monkey-wrenching effective government and engaging in all manner of moronic bullshit, all while accomplishing absolutely nothing useful themselves.
@Greg: Sure, after the manipulated data, the lies, the hidden results that do not support warming and the phony models, why should anyone need to see proof to believe proven liars?
No wonder you slavishly worship Hillary… you LIKE to be lied to.
Nobody here “worships” anybody. So, why Clinton, or why Sanders?
Of course you don’t want that information released, because you are very afraid that the highly politicized liars pushing the false meme of AGW will get caught just like Mann got caught manipulating his data AND the selection of papers and blackballing of anti-AGW scientists in peer reviewed climate journals.
The idiocy of the AGW crowd is never more clearly displayed than when they insist that each year is “the hottest on record” despite records that disprove the claim; or when it snows.in Texas in April; or with the largest artic ice formation since satellites began taking pictures 35-40 years ago.
When flamming hemorrhoids like Algore and DiCaprio stop burning all.that evil jetfuel in their PRIVATE jets as.they.galivant all over the world to one bogus global warming propaganda meeting after another – then maybe these garbage claims would have some validity.
How can any intelligent person assume that the increasingly industrialized activities of a rapidly growing population that already exceeds 7 billion human beings will have no adverse effect on the thin planetary biosphere that they occupy? When you alter one or more variables in a complex dynamic system like climate, it should only be expected that the entire system will somehow be affected.
What we’ve got here is a predisposition to deny what can’t be easily seen and easily understood, fed a steady diet of propaganda memes by special interests who have a powerful monetary interest in keeping things exactly the way they are.
The underlying reality of a thing cannot be altered in any fashion by the pronouncements of politicians, by scientists bought and paid for by various special interests, or by a successfully waged media disinformation campaign. Tobacco does not become harmless because some scientist funded by the tobacco industry tells you the scientific studies are flawed. There is no conspiracy of the world’s climate scientists trying to dupe people into believing that human activity can negatively effect global climate in order to further the cause of One World Government, or whatever the current conspiracy theory is.
Planetary-scale industrialized human activity can actually affect the climate of the planet. It makes no sense to assume that it can’t, and it makes no sense to assume that the consequences will be somehow be magically rendered harmless, eliminating any need for us to thoughtfully alter our behavior in an effort to avoid a negative outcome.
Scientist who developed theory who Al Gore cites in his documentary of doom spent last 30 years of his life saying carbon… Was not as significant as he proposed
The point is what man does is insignificant compared to what small shifts in earths axis and solar activity causes
If it’s true why are the so called scientists using dubious protocol like placing heat recorders in parking lots to fudge the numbers in their favor
So it’s all about the tax increase on us polluting humans or do you believe dinosaurs went extinct because they didn’t drive prius’s
BTW the Strawman argument about how it has to effect climate is bs because your data is make believe and doesn’t follow basic scientific method
Again this what happens when liberal politicians hijack a cause reality goes out the window in favor of emotion and imagery
Al Gore is a politician. He talks about what scientists have concluded. He’s not a scientist. He doesn’t conduct the studies, compile the data, create the computer climate models, analyze the results, or draw the conclusions himself. Attacking Al Gore as if Al Gore were the topic itself, or the source of the conclusion that the world is slowly warming as a result of specific human activities, is nothing more than a diversionary tactic.
There’s nothing “so called” about the scientists. They are scientists, and among climate scientists theirs is far and away the majority opinion.
Why does it make sense to think they’re part of some sort of conspiracy to promote a delusion, while thinking that deniers—who are often directly or indirectly funded by special interests having an obvious monetary interest in maintaining the status quo—should be considered inherently trustworthy? What sort of logic is that?
The fact is that many of the most outspoken deniers aren’t professional scientists or scientists specialized in climate study. A number of them seem to be deniers by profession, who have a history of taking the minority view on a number of unrelated but controversial issues. Directly or indirectly, denial itself is a source of attention and income to them.
While we’re at it, let’s deal with another propaganda meme:
Are surface temperature records reliable?
Basically, yes, they are reliable. Specific examples of instances of less than ideal placement do not represent the norm. You can always find anomalous examples of anything. The fact that a certain number of automobile engines spontaneously catch fire does not mean that most automobile engines are by nature prone to spontaneously catching fire.
@Greg: Assuming anything can be dangerous. Why assume it HAS (without any proof) and spend trillions of dollars trying to reverse something that isn’t happening? Now, THAT sounds stupid to me.
Actually it’s pretty close to a fifty fifty split of academics touting global warming and those saying its overblown not some overwhelming majority
And let’s take Europe who has been screwing their citizens for decades w taxes and regulations to combat this
Think they’re goin to recant and let all that great socialist income disappear
It’s all about the nanny state in your pocket
But all the fudging is coming from the proponents of it with dubious science
Also Al Gore wasn’t the subject rather the father of carbon emission warming theory recanting his findings
Notice how the left again tried to change the subject off topic
When a scientist gives up his integrity to maintain a continuous flow of funds into his bank account, he is no longer a scientist. He more closely resembles women who have sex for money.
When a scientist uses computer models as fact instead of a tool to develop a hypothesis, he is no longer a scientist since he deviated from using the scientific processes to arrive at conclusions.
When a scientist cherry picks his data instead of using statically valid sample points, a scientist loses his integrity and is no longer a true scientist.
When a scientist alters his data to achieve a political point, he is now a politician and not a scientist.
Sixty percent of the data collection points used to collect temperatures by NOAH and NASA fail to meet the basic criteria for accuracy.
When the government pays for research, the government has an obligation to make sure that the government is getting valid results for the money. Congress is tasked with that obligation under the Constitution.