Global warming 'pause' didn't happen, study finds

[futurecurrents]

Global warming has not undergone a ‘pause’ or ‘hiatus’, according to US government research that undermines one of the key arguments used by sceptics to question climate science.

The new study reassessed the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (Noaa) temperature record to account for changing methods of measuring the global surface temperature over the past century.

The adjustments to the data were slight, but removed a flattening of the graph this century that has led climate sceptics to claim the rise in global temperatures had stopped.

“There is no slowdown in warming, there is no hiatus,” said lead author Dr Tom Karl, who is the director of Noaa’s National Climatic Data Centre.

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/jun/04/global-warming-hasnt-paused-study-finds

 

[futurecurrents]

The rate of global warming during the last 15 years has been as fast as the warming seen during the last half of the 20th Century, according to new study published in Science this month by scientists from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).

The new study used the latest global surface temperature data and other improvements in the quality of the observed record. This study refutes the notion that there has been a slowdown, hiatus, or Pause, in the rate of global warming in recent years. The Pause has been a rallying cry for those not wanting to accept climate change as real.

Of course, conspiracy theorists claim that NOAA purposefully tampered with the data to make sure it showed a warming trend (The Week).

Because that’s what scientists do. Right?

The Pause was an idea from a 2013 UN report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) that concluded the upward global surface temperature trend from 1998 to 2012 was markedly lower than the trend from 1951 to 2012.

But Thomas Karl, Director of NOAA’s National Centers for Environmental Information, says, “Our new analysis suggests that the apparent hiatus may have been largely the result of limitations in past datasets, and that the rate of warming over the first 15 years of this century has, in fact, been as fast or faster than that seen over the last half of the 20th century.”

The Pause never made sense to me given the other warming data available over this time period:

- the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets lost huge ice mass

- glaciers continued to shrink worldwide

- Arctic sea ice and Northern Hemisphere spring snow cover continued to decrease in extent

- ocean warming continued unabated

Besides, the IPCC data in the 2013 report didn’t actually show much of a Pause anyway. The report actually concluded, “Warming of the climate system is unequivocal, and since the 1950s, many of the observed changes are unprecedented over decades to millennia.”

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2015/06/15/a-pause-in-global-warming-not-really/

 

[Arnie]

LOL

 

[Ricter]

You know when satellites indicate the Earth is receiving more energy than it is radiating back to space that the heat has to be going somewhere. If it's not accumulating in eastern North America, it is accumulating somewhere else.

 

[wildchild]

So the raw data clearly showed a pause, and after the 'scientists' adjusted the data it stopped showing a pause. How sweet of a deal is that? If data doesn't support your claim just adjust it until it does.

 

[futurecurrents]

So the raw data clearly showed a pause, and after the 'scientists' adjusted the data it stopped showing a pause. How sweet of a deal is that? If data doesn't support your claim just adjust it until it does.

But there were good scientific reasons for making the adjustments and there was never any pause. There was never any pause in rise of the ocean's heat content.

As Ricter wisely points out, the energy balance measured via satellite of the in vs out has not changed and has been net positive. Only a large drop in solar output would change the trend and that is not happening.

 

[Scataphagos]

Yeah. That's an example of "Mayer's Corellory" to Murphy's Law.... "When the current theory is not supported by the facts, they will be ignored."

 

[Arnie]

Does anyone here believe that NOAA would have taken another look at the data if the original data had shown there was no pause?

 

[Ricter]

Does anyone here believe that NOAA would have taken another look at the data if the original data had shown there was no pause?

Sure, some graduate student would have looked at the data as part of his/her thesis project. That's what scientists do.

 

[gwb-trading]

Sure, some graduate student would have looked at the data as part of his/her thesis project. That's what scientists do.

That graduate student would have automatically gotten an "F" at most universities if any part of their thesis project disagreed with the assertions of the global warming cabal.

My daughter experienced this as an undergrad at App State when the her class was told by the professor that any paper or test denying climate change would receive an automatic "F".

This is why students don't stray from the talking points of the climate cabal. Would you risk your scholarship to reveal the academic fraud?