Don’t mention the trend
The warming in the last two decades is 0.06C/decade not 0.22C.
The hottest ever year tells us nothing about the cause of global warming, but the 20 year trend does — and the message from the trend is “the models are wrong”.
Despite the Chinese releasing gigatons of coal fired CO2 into the air, the warming that has happened has been tiny compared to what their models predict. It is so low the Global Worriers won’t talk about the trend. Gone are the days when they would discuss degrees per decade. Meh! The same people who scoffed at skeptics for mentioning one freak season are now reduced to picking on one freak El Nino, and pumping annual tiny fractions of “record” after “record”. If the sun caused global warming (the evidence is there) we’d still be getting warm records, especially in El Nino years. What’s amazing is that after a record El Nino the world hit pretty much the same temperature as it did in 1998.
Dr David Evans has just recalculated the warming trend for the last two decades and found that the warming effect is a big six hundredth of a degree per decade, about one third the rate the expert climate models predicted. If the “best” models we have were right, the world would have warmed by around 0.22C per decade, not 0.06C. The current warming trend is equivalent to less than one degree a century, which is just like last century. Whatever.
CO2 may have done all the warming the models predicted, but all it takes is one dang feedback loop that they forgot, which reroutes that energy to space and CO2 becomes irrelevant.
If the ABC science team were skeptical instead of gullible, they’d know to ask Will Steffen and others about these trends. And if we use the trends from the entire satellite record since 1979 the warming still only comes in at 0.12C — half the rate those models predict. Far from accelerating as our emissions increased, the observations don’t fit the theory. Something else is more powerful than CO2 and the modelers don’t know what it is. — Jo
Guest post by Dr David Evans
Temperature spin: World temperatures hit new high in 2016 for third year in a row, NOAA and NASA say, by the ABC.
World temperatures have hit a record high for the third year in a row in 2016, creeping closer to a ceiling set for global warming with extremes including unprecedented heat in India and ice melt in the Arctic, US government agencies say.
No technical lies there, but it is misleading.
People keep asking me, so here is the truth as measured by our best method of measuring temperature globally, the satellites:
I chose the start date as just after the warming of the mid 1970s to mid 90s was petering out, at a nice round 20 years, because it best makes the point that global warming has more or less stopped. Download the data yourself.
Until global warming slowed dramatically, the warming crowd always loudly told everyone to ignore individual yearly temperatures and to focus instead on trends. So I put in a couple of trend lines on the graph.
The current estimate of sensitivity to increasing carbon dioxide by the IPCC* corresponds to an underlying warming rate of 0.22 °C per decade, but for the last 20 years it has only been warming at 0.06 °C per decade, as shown.
Given that it’s for a period of two decades now, that’s pretty much a FAIL for the big computerized climate models. The first prediction by the IPCC, in their first Assessment Report in 1990, was even higher at 0.30 °C per decade (and they said up to 0.50 °C per decade, but definitely not lower than 0.20 °C per decade), an even bigger FAIL.
We recently discovered that all the climate models have an error in them, subtle but important and baked into the cake for decades. The book I am writing is almost ready, stayed tuned at sciencespeak.com. The major influence on the global temperature is the Sun, which indirectly influences how much incoming radiation from the Sun is reflected back out to space by clouds without warming the Earth. The next climate trend is cooling.
The large upward spikes in 1998, 2010, and 2016 are El Ninos, which technically warm the surface of the Pacific ocean but do not change its heat content (lower winds means the colder water below the surface layer does not mix the surface as much) — so they are pretty much irrelevant for climate trends. 2016 was just warmer than 1998, and the spike went higher. The low spikes are La Ninas — when extra wind cools the ocean surface by mixing it more with the cooler water below — and are also short term phenomena that are not directly relevant to warming or cooling trends.
According to the data used in the graph above, namely the NASA satellite data processed by the people who invented measuring temperatures from space at the University of Huntsville in Alabama, the warmest four years since 1979 when satellite monitoring began were, in order:
2016, at 0.504 °C
1998, at 0.483 °C
2010, at 0.333 °C
2015, at 0.259 °C
(all temperatures with respect to the same arbitrary baseline)
* An ECS of 3.0 °C.
UPDATE: Someone asked about the entire satellite record, which goes back to late 1978 and includes most of the recent warming spurt (mid 70s to mid 90s):