Click images for more details



Recent comments
Recent posts
Currently discussing

A few sites I've stumbled across recently....

Powered by Squarespace
« The FCO misleads | Main | Is there a backstory to the EPA pollution incident? »

The night remains dark

As the latest paper to try to explain the pause appears, it's hard not to smile. Reason follows explanation follows rationale follows excuse, and the interested layman is left with the abiding impression that the night remains very very dark indeed.

This is not to say that these are not valiant efforts to get to the bottom of things, but let us not kid ourselves, a la Guardian, that anyone really has much of a clue about what is going on yet. Claims that climate models are even more accurate than previously thought are the scientific equivalent of a fart joke and deserve the same response.

As if to confirm this point, we watch in bemusement as the sea ice resolutely refuses to do what anyone expects. The Greenland ice melt has gone fast, then slow and some are even claiming that the refreeze has started weeks ahead of schedule. The pause in the alleged Arctic death spiral looks set to extend to another year, but the Antarctic has blipped below its long-term mean for the first time in years.

There's a lot to learn isn't there?


PrintView Printer Friendly Version

Reader Comments (29)

Oh noes! Don't tell me that after all those desperate post-Hanson explanations about how global warming was always actually going to make ("counter-intuitively" was much used, I recall) the Antarctic sea ice extent increase... it has now going to go into retreat!
Much tearing of hair results! The work of the "climate scientists" is never done!
Reverse ferret!

Aug 14, 2015 at 11:20 AM | Unregistered CommenterJack Savage

There are those, such as Dr Trenberth, that suggest that natural variability in climate cycles can cover up the rise in global temperatures for years at a time. I have no problem agreeing with the good doctor on this, just as long as he is prepared to accept that climate cycles are just as capable of creating the illusion of rising temperatures when no such rise exists.

Aug 14, 2015 at 11:23 AM | Unregistered CommenterBloke down the pub

'the scientific equivalent of a fart joke and deserve the same response.'

they remain however standard pratice for climate 'science' and with Paris coming up we 'are' going to see much more of them.

Aug 14, 2015 at 11:24 AM | Unregistered Commenterknr

The seeming symmetry between the Poles (when one gets icy the other does the opposite) is one of the few good hints that extra-planetary particles really do affect the climate.

The difference appears where the magnetic poles are opposite too.

Aug 14, 2015 at 11:25 AM | Registered CommenterM Courtney

Surely, no one can continue forever, to propose a hypothesis as fact and spend vast amounts of time and money, defending, it when facts continually suggest it is wrong. Very wrong.

Aug 14, 2015 at 11:27 AM | Unregistered CommenterPeter Stroud

Watching each successive explanation is the best spectator sport in years, about 18 to be exact.

The pause


Aug 14, 2015 at 11:46 AM | Unregistered CommenterPointman

The only significant conclusion that can be drawn is that it's all much better than they expected. If only they'd actually admit that so we can begin to repair the misconceived climate policy that is driving us towards total deindustrialisation & mass poverty.

Aug 14, 2015 at 12:00 PM | Unregistered CommenterJamesG

Every field has its Trenberth-like figures: People who are sufficiently influential that they can publish essentially any opinion, anywhere, any time. It is part of the trappings of academic success. The competent scientists pay little attention to such pieces.

But other fields are generally not as politicised as Cli-Sci (at least, not fields that still take themselves seriously as scientific endeavours). The arrivistes of Cli-Sci will take Trenberth's latest partly as further confirmation that they are still as right as they ever were, and partly as a direct order as to how to frame the excuses in the lead up to Paris.

Aug 14, 2015 at 12:00 PM | Unregistered Commentermichael hart

Your eminence does f@rt jokes a great disservice.
I recall the story of the two boys in a railway carriage, sitting opposite a middle aged man. A heavily pregnant lady enters and the man smiles and helps her with her cases, being the good Joe that he is.
The two boys whisper to each other then start a disagreement.
'No. It's W O O M B WOOMB' the first lad spells out the letters
'No , no no. It's W H H O O M WHHOOM' the second lad

The man smiles at the lady , turns to the boys and says
'Actually boys, it is W O M B womb. I should know, I am a climate scientist'

'Oh. and have you ever been scuba diving with a hippopotamus ?'
'Then how do you know what it sounds like when one f@rts under water'

Aug 14, 2015 at 12:06 PM | Unregistered CommenterEternalOptimist

@ Peter Stroud

Ah but that is exactly what even renowned scientists do. Even Rutherford, the Father of Nuclear Physics, has been criticised as holding back progress for a generation by pooh-poohing the work of his successors.

Then you have the political class, totally unable to admit error and the Institutions the same.

The real problem with CAGW is that almost the entire range of professions and professionals have a vested interest in promoting it.

Politicians because they have declared it true and can't backtrack, Trans-national bodies like the UN as it is a wedge for more power and influence, Universities because it brings in research funds and boosts egos, Environmental movements because it plays to their 'malignant man' views, big business and finance because it generates opportunity, subsidy and grants, the media ever on the look out for attention grabbing, fear-mongering stories. Almost the only loser is the common man in the street.

Aug 14, 2015 at 12:09 PM | Unregistered CommenterPeter C

Almost the only loser is the common man in the street.

And the truth.

Aug 14, 2015 at 12:48 PM | Registered CommenterMartin A

Trenberth is promoting his latest paper at The Conversation. There are many ongoing signs that the planet is heating up, even “on fire.”

Aug 14, 2015 at 12:57 PM | Registered CommenterPaul Matthews

I do wish those pesky Arctic Sea Ice graphs would show what they're SUPPOSED to show - instead of just - you know - melting in the summer and freezing in the winter...

Its just SOOOOOOOO unfair....

Aug 14, 2015 at 1:23 PM | Unregistered Commentersherlock1

I guess that as it's taken them 18 years to start pretending that warming hasn't ended (not "paused"), they really are starting to panic. Hence all the data "homogenisation", the pretence that buckets dipped in the water are more accurate than Argos, that RSS is lying, indeed, that ALL the data is lying and needs correcting - in the same way as dissidents were "corrected in the USSR and China. Torture - I thought it had been banned.

Beyond hope or help, really. WTF will they do when temperatures start to fall?

Aug 14, 2015 at 2:18 PM | Unregistered CommenterJeremy Poynton

No no no no no !!!!

Aug 14, 2015 at 2:20 PM | Unregistered CommenterJeremy Poynton

Arctic ice trends up, Antarctic ice trends down. Bi-polar seesaw?

Aug 14, 2015 at 2:41 PM | Unregistered Commenteroldbrew

The video linked to in the post above - no trick's zone - is very interesting. I can't comment on the science, but it seems very plausible to me (confirmation bias playing its part no doubt, nevertheless...)

Here's the main points.

1. The 18+ years temperature pause is real. (4.09)
2. Natural cycles are behind the current pause.
3. Ice cores show CO2 lags temperature. (5.00)
4. 7000 years ago there was 50% less Arctic ice. (8.20)
5. The 1000-year cycle is real. (9.20)
6. Planet has been cooling over past 10,000 years. (9.34)
7. Natural cycles are driving our climate. (10.04)
8. Shows cooling from 2023 to 2150.
9. Current warming is perfectly natural.
10. Milankovitch cycles driving large-scale cycles. (13.00)
11. Gravitational forces can bulge Earth’s core by 1.4 km (15.35)
12. Gravitational forces impact global temperature (17.20)
13. Warming and cooling both begin at the poles (17.48)
14. Arctic warming/melt was caused by warm ocean pulses (19.50)
15. “Now starting to see a dramatic cooling in the Arctic“. (22.50)
16. “Arctic is cooling rapidly now. Rapidly!” (24.06)
17. Both poles are cooling rapidly now. (25.05(
18. Poles don’t show signs of warming. (26.30)
19. Western drought and Eastern cold due to 26-year cycle. (27.55)
20. Polar vortices due to Arctic/global cooling. (29.25)
21. Lunar cycles correlated with warming/cooling cycles. (31.30)
22. Rapid global cooling by 2019. (32.00)
23. “Temperature fiddling” are “more political than anything”. (32.56)
24. “Could be the biggest scientific scandal ever”. (33.20)
25. IPCC using “estimated temperatures”. (34.00)
26. How the government manipulated, rewrote data. (36.00)
27. “This is temperature fiddling.” Not the truth. (36.45)
28. NASA, NOAA’s “politically driven press releases”. (37.00)
29. Met Office calls NOAA’s 2014 claim untrue. (38.00)
30. Major data fiddling, cheating by NOAA. (39.50)
31. “The 97% consensus is bogus”. (41.00)
32. John Cook cooked the consensus data. (41.30)
33. 85% meteorologists say climate change is natural. (42.20)
34. Global cooling is the real danger. (43.20)
35. Volcanoes and cooling often correlated. (44.00)
36. Crop failures from cooling “very likely”. (45.45)
37. “Extremely cold” from 2025 to 2050. (46.36)
38. Global cooling next 125 years. (47.00)
39. “The cooling is coming”

At the fine old age of 64, I hope to see these bastards choke on their peer-reviewed nonsense.

Aug 14, 2015 at 3:07 PM | Unregistered CommenterJeremy Poynton

"'the scientific equivalent of a fart joke and deserve the same response.'

"they remain however standard pratice for climate 'science' and with Paris coming up we are going to see much more of them."

I fear it's not so much see them as smell them.

Aug 14, 2015 at 4:00 PM | Unregistered CommenterPhilip Foster

Jeremy Poynton

WTF will they do when temperatures start to fall?
Remember Bernard Wooley's reply to Hacker's question "Whose side would you be on, mine or Sir Humphrey's, if the chips were down?"
"My job, Minister, is to make sure the chips stay up."
Just like the temperatures. "Ah but, Europe/US/Antarctica/India/China/[insert required bit of the globe here] is only a small part of the earth. Now if you care to look away while I move these thimbles round a bit ..."
It's amazing how you can persuade people that what they are experiencing is not what is really happening. Especially if you claim to be a scientist.
Should be good for a year or two, anyway.

Aug 14, 2015 at 5:02 PM | Registered CommenterMike Jackson

Should be good for a year or two, anyway.
Aug 14, 2015 at 5:02 PM | Mike Jackson


Aug 14, 2015 at 6:44 PM | Unregistered CommenterJeremy Poynton

It would seem obvious to me that you are all ignorant of Humpty's Law (aka Mann's Law) of Post Science Modernism™, which states:
"If reality conforms to neither models nor expectations, then reality is wrong"


Aug 14, 2015 at 6:51 PM | Registered Commenterrockape34

Trenberth is a disgrace to physics.

Aug 14, 2015 at 7:50 PM | Registered CommenterPhillip Bratby

Weird things happen in a warming world...

Aug 14, 2015 at 10:22 PM | Unregistered CommenterJeremy Poynton

I don't know why you say it's a fart joke. There's no joke about it. It stinks, and I wish they would restrain themselves -- show some rectitude even.

Aug 14, 2015 at 10:32 PM | Unregistered CommenterRobert Swan

I wonder if any climate scientists have considered the possibility that CO2 really is not a significant factor in global temperature?

A bit radical I know, but sometime thinking outside the barricaded bomb-proof reinforced bunkers of climate science mindsets should be given a try. 20 years of being proved wrong, would make most professions unemployable.

Aug 14, 2015 at 11:52 PM | Unregistered Commentergolf charlie

How is it that Trenberth has escaped all the ridicule that has been heaped on Mann for fraudulently claiming to be a Nobel Laureate - which he continues to do in his NCAR/UCAR cv?

Aug 15, 2015 at 3:42 PM | Registered Commenterdavidchappell

davidchapell 3:42, normal rules of honesty and integrity do not apply in climate science, or to climate scientists, especially if they are self proclaimed experts that governments rely on.

Trenberth and others, are still looking for the missing heat. It still has not occurred to them that the heat is not missing, it just never existed in the first place.

Aug 15, 2015 at 3:56 PM | Unregistered Commentergolf charlie

gc, I agree with you about the normal rules but the sceptic community is ignoring his megalomania completely. Given the stick that Mann has received over his claim, it surprises me.

Aug 15, 2015 at 4:06 PM | Registered Commenterdavidchappell

"Surely, no one can continue forever, to propose a hypothesis as fact and spend vast amounts of time and money, defending, it when facts continually suggest it is wrong. Very wrong."

Oh yes they can.

Aug 17, 2015 at 12:53 AM | Unregistered CommenterUncle Gus

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>