by Kenneth Richard, November 9, 2017 in NoTricksZone
Though advocates of the dangerous anthropogenic global warming (AGW) narrative may not welcome the news, evidence that modern day global warming has largely been driven by natural factors – especially solar activity – continues to pile up.
Much of the debate about the Sun’s role in climate change is centered around reconstructions of solar activity that span the last 400 years, which now include satellite data from the late 1970s to present.
by Willis Eschenbach, November 8, 2017, in WUWT
Back in 2014, Anthony put up a post called “NOAA shows ‘the pause’ in the U.S. surface temperature record over nearly a decade“. In it, he discussed the record of the US Climate Reference Network (USCRN). I can’t better Anthony’s description of the USCRN, so I’m stealing it to use here: (…)
See also here
by Hermann Harde, March 30, 2017 in Inter.J.Atm.Sciences
Including solar and cloud effects as well as all relevant feedback processes our simulations give an equilibrium climate sensitivity of = 0.7°C (temperature increase at doubled CO2) and a solar sensitivity of = 0.17°C (at 0.1% increase of the total solar irradiance). Then CO2 contributes 40% and the Sun 60% to global warming over the last century.
by N. Scaffetta et al., September1, 2017 in Int.J.Heat.Technology
The period from 2000 to 2016 shows a modest warming trend that the advocates of the anthropogenic global warming theory have labeled as the “pause” or “hiatus.” These labels were chosen to indicate that the observed temperature standstill period results from an unforced internal fluctuation of the climate (e.g. by heat uptake of the deep ocean) that the computer climate models are claimed to occasionally reproduce without contradicting the anthropogenic global warming theory (AGWT) paradigm. In part 1 of this work, it was shown that the statistical analysis rejects such labels with a 95% confidence because the standstill period has lasted more than the 15 year period limit provided by the AGWT advocates themselves.
See also here
in Benoît Rittaud, 26 septembre 2017 in M,M&M
L’incroyable nouvelle a été annoncée par Mathieu Vidard dans l’émission La Tête au carrésur France Inter, le 20 septembre 2017 (ici, très brièvement, à partir de 10’, il faut bien viser) :
Maintenir le réchauffement climatique en dessous de 1,5°C, c’est encore possible, c’est l’objectif qui avait été fixé par les Accords de Paris à l’issue de la COP 21. La bonne nouvelle vient d’une équipe de recherche internationale. D’après leurs analyses, l’ampleur du réchauffement climatique qui a déjà eu lieu a été surestimée et la quantité de carbone que l’humanité peut émettre à partir de 2015 en restant en-dessous de ce seuil de 1,5°C serait trois fois supérieure à ce qui avait été annoncé.
by Kenneth Richard, August 31, 2017 in NoTricksZone
In the press release for a newly published and controversial peer-reviewed scientific paper, Australian scientist Dr. Jennifer Marohasy unveiled one of climate science’s better-kept secrets.
She and her colleagues are well aware that the post-1940s Northern Hemisphere (NH) proxy evidence from tree-rings, bore holes, pollen, etc., consistently fails to affirm sharply rising temperatures from the late 20th century onwards.
by Prof. Quansheng Ge, August 8, 2017 in ClimateChangeDispatch
Prof. Quansheng Ge and his group from the Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, collected a large number of proxies and reconstructed a 2000-year temperature series in China with a 10-year resolution, enabling them to quantitatively reveal the characteristics of temperature change in China over a common era.
See also here
by David Whitehouse, June 22, 2017 in Financial Post
Few things illustrate the poor state of the communication of climate science better than the reaction to Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt’s comments about global temperatures in the past 20 years. It was made in written comments to the Senate following his confirmation hearing. He wrote, “over the past two decades satellite data indicates there has been a leveling off of warming.” Has the temperature increase of the Earth’s surface and lower atmosphere “stalled” in the past 20 years or so? Does this change our view of climate change?
by Dr David Whitehouse, July 4, 2017 in GWPF
The China Meteorological Administration (CMA) has recently developed a new global monthly land-surface air temperature data set called CMA GLSAT. Using it researchers from the administration reanalysed the change in global annual mean land-surface air temperature during three time periods (1901–2014, 1979–2014 and 1998–2014) to see if there was any evidence of a hiatus or pause in recent surface global warming.
The researchers find very clear evidence for the recent warming hiatus. Their results show linear trends of 0.104 °C per decade, 0.247 °C per decade and 0.098 °C per decade for the three periods, respectively. The trends were statistically significant except for the period 1998–2014, the period that is also known as the ‘‘warming hiatus”.
by David Whitehouse, June 29, 2017
Between the start of 1997 and the end of 2014, average global surface temperature stalled. This 18-year period is known as the global warming pause, also sometimes referred to as the global warming hiatus. The rise in global temperatures that alarmed climate campaigners in the 1990s had slowed so much that the trend was no longer statistically significant. It has been the subject of much research and debate in peer-reviewed scientific journals.
by Y. Xie, J. Huang and Y. Liu, June 26, 2017 in CO2Science
One of the many conundrums facing climate alarmists — who predict that dangerous future global warming will result from increasing concentrations of atmospheric CO2 — is the existence of the aptly-named “warming hiatus.” Also referred to as the “warming pause,” this phenomenon describes a nearly two-decade-long leveling off of global temperatures despite a ten percent increase in atmospheric CO2 concentration since 1998. The significance of these observations resides in the fact that all climate models project that temperatures should not be levelling off, but should be increasing (despite interannual variability) in direct consequence of the ongoing rise in atmospheric CO2.
by David Whitehouse, Financial Post, June 22, 2017
Some are adamant that the “hiatus” does not and never has existed, and will never change their minds. But the evidence is irrefutable. As a large number of influential climate scientists have just said in the journal Nature Geoscience, since the turn of the century there has been a substantial slowdown in warming that computer climate models did not predict or can explain. In fact, such models predict a warming twice that observed.
by Reinformation.TV, 21 juin 2017
Un papier scientifique publié cette semaine par Nature Geoscience du groupe « Nature », peu suspect de complaisance à l’égard des climatoceptiques, constate que le réchauffement climatique a été surestimé par les modèles de prédiction qui justifient l’action concertée contre les émissions de gaz à effet de serre. L’article a la particularité d’avoir pour auteur principal Ben Santer, l’un des pionniers du mouvement qui accuse l’activité humaine du réchauffement climatique.
by David Whitehouse, June 2, 2017, in GWPF
The reduction in global temperature after the recent El Nino continues though not as swiftly as some predicted. The next few months will be interesting to see if it returns to levels seen before the recent El Nino took place when global annual average temperatures changed little for at least 15 years.
by Keenan et al., November 8, 2016, Nature
Terrestrial ecosystems play a significant role in the global carbon cycle and offset a large fraction of anthropogenic CO2 emissions. The terrestrial carbon sink is increasing, yet the mechanisms responsible for its enhancement, and implications for the growth rate of atmospheric CO2, remain unclear.
Jim McIntosh , David Mulberry and 2 others posted in Air-Climate-Energy (Jim McIntosh 9 May at 11:18): Reposting because those AGW alarmists hate this report. Yes, plants are doing it better than any carbon tax and they do it for free… as long as we don’t cut them down. You’d think we’d learn by now that managing climate comes back to how we have mismanaged the planet’s forests.