Why Hasn't the Earth Warmed in Nearly 15 Years?

Jul 18, 2011 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: The Cato Institute

Patrick Michaels is senior fellow in environmental studies at the Cato Institute and author of Climate Coup: Global Warming's Invasion of our Government and our Lives.

Comments

Showing posts 1 - 20 of20
LessHypeMoreFact

Orangeville, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1
Jul 18, 2011
 
Total bogus claim from a right wing think tank funded by 'fossil fuel interests'. They have NO scientific credentials or credibility.

The mainstream science has all the credibility from the fact that they are serious researchers who understand the issues.

Boreholes:
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/globalwarming/...

Oceans:
http://www.argo.ucsd.edu/global_change_analys...

Air:
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs/

“Happy, warm and comfortable”

Since: Oct 10

Mountain hideaway, SE Spain

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2
Jul 19, 2011
 

Judged:

2

2

2

It doesn't matter much what 'mainstream science' thinks if policy makers don't act, Mr undoubtably Spelt Fourty.
LessHypeMoreFact

Orangeville, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3
Jul 19, 2011
 
Earthling-1 wrote:
It doesn't matter much what 'mainstream science' thinks if policy makers don't act, Mr undoubtably Spelt Fourty.
Well, facts do matter regardless. If policy makers don't act, we will still have to deal with the problem of AGW and the costs to the economy, socieity and civilaization.

You will have to grow up and stop saying 'make it didn't happen'.

“Happy, warm and comfortable”

Since: Oct 10

Mountain hideaway, SE Spain

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4
Jul 19, 2011
 

Judged:

2

2

2

LessFactMoreHype wrote:
Well, facts do matter regardless.
Yes,'facts' do matter.
LessFactMoreHype wrote:
If policy makers don't act, we will still have to deal with the problem of AGW and the costs to the economy
The human race has managed quite well, so far and another 1 or 2ºC of warming won't stop it from continuing.
LessFactMoreHype wrote:
socieity and civilaization.
I suggest you take more water with whatever it is you're drinking.
LessFactMoreHype wrote:
You will have to grow up and stop saying 'make it didn't happen'.
"Make it didn't happen," means what, exactly?

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5
Jul 19, 2011
 

Judged:

2

2

2

In this new piece, Michaels poses and then tries to answer a rhetorical question: "Why Hasn't The Earth Warmed In Nearly 15 Years?"

I am not going to go into the detail of why his specific arguments in his opinion piece are wrong, self-serving, or serious misinterpretations of good, peer-reviewed science.

Why? Because his fundamental premise -- his initial rhetorical question -- is wrong. Very simply, the Earth has warmed over the past 15 years. Significantly.

Michaels' essay is like trying to prove why the sun goes around the Earth. Or why gravity doesn't work. Or how the U.S. faked the moon landing. It doesn't matter what his arguments are: his initial premise is wrong.

There are really only two simple pieces to this: the actual temperature record; and all of the other ways the planet is screaming to us that the heat balance of the planet is out of whack. On both of these accounts, Michaels is simply wrong.

First and most simply: the temperature of the Earth has risen substantially over the past 15 years. As reported by the BBC, data and observations show that global temperatures have warmed by around 0.19˚C between 1995 and 2010. This warming has a statistical confidence level of 95 percent, which means that there are one in twenty odds that the trend came about by chance.

Second: scientists also know that "warming" is only one of many indicators of a screwed up planetary heat balance. We know that an important part of the energy imbalance of the Earth caused by humans doesn't go toward raising global temperatures. Substantial excess energy is going into the oceans and unprecedented Arctic ice melt. Additional energy is going into raising the sea level relentlessly at over 3 millimeters per year. Added energy is going into intensifying precipitation patterns and storm intensity. And there is new evidence that some of the imbalance is being temporarily masked by new pollution from China's coal plants.

We also know that periods of slower or faster warming will occur, simply because of natural variations in temperature, and that these periods say nothing about the growing influence of humans on climate.

Michaels has been around the climate debate long enough to know all of these things. Or he should, if he really cared about understanding the science. What does this imply about his continued misrepresentation of the science, and increasingly desperate efforts to explain away the facts? I can't speculate. As for Forbes, they've seemingly decided that ignoring or misrepresenting climate science is in their political or economic best interest, even if it isn't in the planet's.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/peter-h-gleick/...

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6
Jul 19, 2011
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Temperature trend since 1996:

http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/gistemp/from...

Since: Apr 10

Milwaukee, WI USA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7
Jul 19, 2011
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Fair Game wrote:
Michaels is simply wrong.
First and most simply: the temperature of the Earth has risen substantially over the past 15 years. As reported by the BBC, data and observations show that global temperatures have warmed by around 0.19˚C between 1995 and 2010.
I get 1.25°C over that period but let's not quibble.

I haven't a clue why he said that. Plimmer said Volcanoes spew more CO2 than human activity does. He's wrong too. I suppose there are some others on my side of things that don't do their homework. I wish they would. There's is enough evidence in the empirical record to sink the good ship "Global Warming" without resorting to embellishing, fudging or just plain lying in order to accomplish the goal.

Since: Apr 10

Milwaukee, WI USA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8
Jul 19, 2011
 

Judged:

1

Uh ... make that 0.125°C Grrrrr! I hate it when that happens.

“Happy, warm and comfortable”

Since: Oct 10

Mountain hideaway, SE Spain

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9
Jul 19, 2011
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Steve Case wrote:
I get 0.125°C over that period but let's not quibble.
I haven't a clue why he said that. Plimer said volcanoes spew more CO2 than human activity does. He's wrong too. I suppose there are some others on my side of things that don't do their homework. I wish they would. There's enough evidence in the empirical record to sink the good ship "Global Warming" without resorting to embellishing, fudging or just plain lying in order to accomplish the goal.
Agreed, "embellishing, fudging or just plain lying" should be left to alarmist scientists, they do it well, due to the practice they've had over the years.

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10
Jul 20, 2011
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Michaels seems to have forgotten his own advice from 2008- anther La Nina year:
Make an argument that you can get killed on and you will kill us all.

If you lose credibility on this issue, then you lose the issue.

What happened, and this is why this argument is so very, very dangerous, is that solar activity and the La Nina we're in now have conspired to add up to produce very, very little temperature change in the last couple of years. What's going to happen is, one of these years, that's going to turn around. If you make that argument now, you're going to have a very, very difficult time defending the future.

Global warming is real and the second warming of the 20th century- people have something to do with it. Get over it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch...

“Happy, warm and comfortable”

Since: Oct 10

Mountain hideaway, SE Spain

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11
Jul 20, 2011
 

Judged:

2

2

2

FuGyou wrote:
Michaels seems to have forgotten his own advice from 2008- anther La Nina year:
So what controls climate, CO2 or ENSO, PDO?
It's make your mind up time.

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12
Jul 21, 2011
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Earthling-1 wrote:
<quoted text>So what controls climate, CO2 or ENSO, PDO?
It's make your mind up time.
The scientific consensus has been that the warming effect of anthropogenic CO2 is visible in the global temperature record over and above natural variability for the last 20 years.

A fact that Michaels himself recognised in the quote above.

Quite why he has decided to deny this now is a bit of a mystery. My guess is he is focusing on some particular short term political expediency and has decide to push the idea that the world is not warming despite having warned against this argument himself calculating that it won't matter what happens after the political aim is achieved.

My guess again is the US elections- where the climate change deniers aided by Koch industries have hijacked the Republican party and made it a reality-free denial zone.

It would be quite amusing if the achieved power lead by some anti-science moron like Palin only to see global temperature records falling as Michaels warned.

“Happy, warm and comfortable”

Since: Oct 10

Mountain hideaway, SE Spain

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13
Jul 21, 2011
 

Judged:

1

1

1

"On the one hand, as scientists we are ethically bound to the scientific method. On the other hand, we are not just scientists but human beings as well. To do that we need to get some broad based support, to capture the public’s imagination. That, of course, means getting loads of media coverage. So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we might have. Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest."
Dr Stephen Schneider

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#14
Jul 21, 2011
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Earthling-1 wrote:
"On the one hand, as scientists we are ethically bound to the scientific method. On the other hand, we are not just scientists but human beings as well. To do that we need to get some broad based support, to capture the public’s imagination. That, of course, means getting loads of media coverage. So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we might have. Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest."
Dr Stephen Schneider
On the one hand, as scientists we are ethically bound to the scientific method, in effect promising to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but – which means that we must include all doubts, the caveats, the ifs, ands and buts. On the other hand, we are not just scientists but human beings as well. And like most people we’d like to see the world a better place, which in this context translates into our working to reduce the risk of potentially disastrous climate change. To do that we need to get some broad based support, to capture the public’s imagination. That, of course, means getting loads of media coverage. So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we might have. This “double ethical bind” we frequently find ourselves in cannot be solved by any formula. Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest. I hope that means being both.
The lie is in the omissions.

http://climatesight.org/2009/04/12/the-schnei...

In contrast, what sort of honesty can you expect from someone paid to post misinformation on Topix 12 hours a day?

Obviously not much.

“Happy, warm and comfortable”

Since: Oct 10

Mountain hideaway, SE Spain

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15
Jul 21, 2011
 

Judged:

1

1

1

FuGyou wrote:
The lie is in the omissions.
How does omitting, "I hope that means being both" constitute a lie?
FuGyou wrote:
In contrast, what sort of honesty can you expect from someone paid to post misinformation on Topix 12 hours a day?
I wouldn't know, when you have sufficient evidence to back your unjustifiable assumption, get back to me.
Until then, I suggest your make a serious attempt to curb your obsessive enthusiasm.
Fun Facts

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#16
Jul 21, 2011
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Any measurement of temperature that cannot be backed up with the data and methodology, is not valuable.

Any attempt to homogenize the various temperatures and climates of the earth into a single value is a fool's errand.

In the end, the only place we see 'global warming' at any given time is in the single number produced that cannot be verified or independently replicated.

Is the earth warmer, my precetpion says yes, is it warmer everywhere, my research says no.

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#17
Jul 21, 2011
 
Earthling-1 wrote:
<quoted text>How does omitting, "I hope that means being both" constitute a lie?
<quoted text>I wouldn't know, when you have sufficient evidence to back your unjustifiable assumption, get back to me.
Until then, I suggest your make a serious attempt to curb your obsessive enthusiasm.
Simple question for you:

Are you paid to post on Topix?

“Happy, warm and comfortable”

Since: Oct 10

Mountain hideaway, SE Spain

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#18
Jul 21, 2011
 

Judged:

1

1

1

FuGyou wrote:
Simple question for you:
Are you paid to post on Topix?
Here we go again.
I asked you these simple questions a long time before you began this merry dance routine and I'm still waiting for an answer:
What are your scientific qualifications?
Are you a professional scientist, as opposed to the amateur variety?
What is your specialised field of science?
How closely allied to climate science is your specialised field?

You regularly accuse others of ignorance, so prove why you should be heard above the rest?

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#19
Jul 22, 2011
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Earthling-1 wrote:
<quoted text>Here we go again.
I asked you these simple questions a long time before you began this merry dance routine and I'm still waiting for an answer:
<quoted text>
Often, the proponents [of doubt] unite into a movement that can, in these electronic days, bombard its enemies and give the impression of being far larger than it really is.
http://thinkprogress.org/romm/2011/07/22/2754...

Exactly how many people here posting "sceptical" comments about AGW stories are actually paid to do so like you, I wonder?

I have to say, squatting on the forum for 12 hours a day makes it a bit obvious, even before your problem with answering a simple question, one that, on a public forum, anyone should be willing to answer.

“Happy, warm and comfortable”

Since: Oct 10

Mountain hideaway, SE Spain

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20
Jul 22, 2011
 

Judged:

1

1

1

FuGyou wrote:
Exactly how many people here posting "sceptical" comments about AGW stories are actually paid to do so like you, I wonder?
Where's your evidence?
FuGyou wrote:
I have to say, squatting on the forum for 12 hours a day makes it a bit obvious
Obvious to you, maybe, but as an alarmist you can make anything fit your agenda.
FuGyou wrote:
even before your problem with answering a simple question, one that, on a public forum, anyone should be willing to answer.
It's a very simple question, but if you recall, I've been waiting for an answer to these simple questions for over two years now:
-
What are your scientific qualifications?
Are you a professional scientist, as opposed to the amateur variety?
What is your specialised field of science?
How closely allied to climate science is your specialised field?

You regularly accuse others of ignorance, so prove why you should be heard above the rest?

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 1 - 20 of20
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••
•••
•••
•••