The Economist on climate sensitivity

The Economist covers the climate sensitivity debate in a must-read article and accompanying leader article.

The mismatch between rising greenhouse-gas emissions and not-rising temperatures is among the biggest puzzles in climate science just now. It does not mean global warming is a delusion. Flat though they are, temperatures in the first decade of the 21st century remain almost 1°C above their level in the first decade of the 20th. But the puzzle does need explaining.

The mismatch might mean that—for some unexplained reason—there has been a temporary lag between more carbon dioxide and higher temperatures in 2000-10. Or it might be that the 1990s, when temperatures were rising fast, was the anomalous period. Or, as an increasing body of research is suggesting, it may be that the climate is responding to higher concentrations of carbon dioxide in ways that had not been properly understood before. This possibility, if true, could have profound significance both for climate science and for environmental and social policy.

This is an absolute must-read. Wow.

Article here.

Comments

[kim]

When the wolves close in on the troika, the most odoriferously alarming is pitched out the back.
==================

[jferguson]

MikeH
I "hope" you see this, lost as it might be in the Bishop's attic. Many many thanks for drawing my attention to "Audacity of Hope." It was one of those phrases which washed over me without sticking, despite having read the book.

When you pay it some attention you quickly realize that it is either nonsense since it seems unlikely that a hope could ever be audacious, or it is revealing that the hope might be for someone else to show up and fix the problem - someone else, not the hoper. Hope is passive, at least outdoors, as far as I can tell.

thank you again,

john

[Pharos]

Nic Lewis - Humble apologies! You were right to query my and others speculation over Oliver Morton authoring the main article. I have just now seen this comment by Judith Curry on her blog.

'The article is written by The Economist’s new editor for energy and environment, John Parker. What an absolutely superb job by someone who has no obvious background in the climate area. He did email me for input, and I sent him a few pages from my forthcoming testimony, which he clearly paid attention to.'

and she adds in conclusion

'I would like to see the Committee on Climate Change also respond to the Economist article. And I would be pleased if the IPCC AR5 does as a good a job as John Parker has in terms of assessing the issue of climate sensitivity.'

http://judithcurry.com/2013/03/31/uk-msm-on-climate-sensitivity/#more-11424

[not banned yet]

An audit of Carbon Neutral Government:

http://nofrakkingconsensus.com/2013/04/02/auditor-general-slams-carbon-offset-system/

http://www.bcauditor.com/pubs/2013/report14/audit-carbon-neutral-government