An article in Nature magazine, Climate Change: The Case of the Missing Heat, discusses why the global warming ended for a time in 1998 (actually, besides that El Niño of 1998 it began earlier). About the global average, the article says
Simulations conducted in advance of the 2013–14 assessment from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) suggest that the warming should have continued at an average rate of 0.21 °C per decade from 1998 to 2012. Instead, the observed warming during that period was just 0.04 °C per decade
Now 0.04°C per decade is only 0.02°F per decade, and is only 0.4°C per CENTURY. NO CATASTROPHE HERE!
But it also tells us how WRONG scientists can be.
The article further states that
One important finding came in 2011, when a team of researchers at NCAR led by Gerald Meehl reported that inserting a PDO pattern into global climate models causes decade-scale breaks in global warming.
No shit, Sherlock. Actually entering in a real-world (and pertinent) phenomenon into the models made them act more like the real world?
The PDO is the Pacfic Decadal Oscillation. It was discovered in 1997. You might ask what it is. And you might also ask what climate scientist discovered it.
Answering the latter first, it was NOT discovered by a climate scientist at all. It was discovered by a biologist researching trends in salmon catches by fishermen in the northern Pacific. His name is Steven Hare.
As to what the PDO is? It is the observed shifting of the climate in the northern Pacific from one phase to another and then back again. The shifts are called “phases,” and the phases are not short, and they are consistently long term, lasting about 2 or 3 decades or more. (Hence the “decadal” in the name of the PDO.) In a PDO warm phase, the northern Pacific is warmer than average, and the SE USA is also warm. The rest of the USA in that case will be cooler than usual. The opposite holds true in a PDO cool phase: A cool northern Pacific matches with a cool phase in the SE USA, while the rest of the country is warmer than usual. These phases are persistent. There seems to BE no neutral phase to speak of – the PDO is usually in either a warm phase or a cool phase, but not long in the middle.
More than ten years ago people were already saying that the timing of the PDO’s phases indicated that its patterns suggested that we were likely to be ending our time in a PDO warm phase and thus heading into a slowdown and a possible/probable global cooling.
By 1990 we were all told that they knew what was happening with the climate and that it was CO2 causing the climate to warm – strongly implying that all the factors were known and all the factors were accounted for in the models and in their overall thinking. When the PDO was discovered, none of the climate scientist came out and said, “You know, we need to incorporate the PDO into the models, don’t we?”
OBVIOUSLY, ALL of the factors should be in the models. Any twerp with half a brain would know that.
It took them from 1997 – coincidentally the beginning of the hiatus (mentioned in the Nature paper) until 2011 – to FINALLY even THINK of putting the PDO into the models. And when they did, VIOLA! the models began to act more like the real world!
Are these guys numb nuts or what?
This is a science with so little science in it that it boggles the mind. Or at least too few actual scientists with brains capable of logic instead of wishful thinking. Not to mention the blatant cherry picking of not only data but also cherry picking of FORCINGS. Forcings are a fancy way of saying “causes.” Leaving the PDO out until now is simply mind-blowing.
Maybe in about 250 years they will figure out that Trenberth’s sequestered heat in the oceans is just a total wishful thinking speculation/delusion. The editors of journals seem to be incapable of recognizing delusions and mere speculations. For now, they are so illogical that they can’t tell the difference between speculation and evidence. Trenberth’s sequestered heat is an extraordinary claim – something never seen before or thought about before. He pulled it out of his butt, after all. And as an extraordinary claim, IT requires extraordinary proof. Yet, the editors at Nature cannot bring themselves to demand such extraordinary proof. Instead, they accept it at face value as if it is the truth of the matter.
So, once again, the skeptics who do demand the extraordinary proof are themselves now the ones who will be required to disprove Trenberth’s TOTAL GUESS.
Science, in other words, has been stood on its head.
The REAL story here should be this:
When INCLUDING the PDO makes the computer models behave like the real world, then the climate models were wrong all that time they did not include the PDO.
Instead, they shunt this important finding into the background and return to Trenberth and his delusion.
It just makes your mind reel, doesn’t it?