Warmists have continuously trotted out Excuses as to why the 21st Century temps had slowed/paused, while at the same time claiming there was no pause/slowdown. Remember when Michael “Hockey Schtick” Mann crowed about the paper that came out last year saying It Never Happened?
Just out in Science is a new article by Tom Karl of NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center and colleagues driving another stake through the heart of the supposed “hiatus†or “pause,†i.e. what I like to call the “Faux Pause.â€
I expect this article will be attacked by climate change deniers who are unhappy to see the demise of a narrative they helped frame, a narrative that arguably took hold due in part to the “seepage†of contrarian framing into mainstream climate science discourse.
Well, as Reason’s Ronald Bailey notes
Mann is now a co-author on the new study that pulls that stake out:
It has been claimed that the early-2000s global warming slowdown or hiatus, characterized by a reduced rate of global surface warming, has been overstated, lacks sound scientific basis, or is unsupported by observations. The evidence presented here contradicts these claims.
That last bit in italics was written by Mann. Bailey excerpts this bit from Nature News
The latest salvo in an ongoing row over global-warming trends claims that warming has indeed slowed down this century.
An apparent slowing in the rise of global temperatures at the beginning of the twenty-first century, which is not explained by climate models, was referred to as a “hiatus†or a “pause†when first observed several years ago. Climate-change sceptics have used this as evidence that global warming has stopped. But in June last year, a study in Science claimed that the hiatus was just an artefact which vanishes when biases in temperature data are corrected.
Now a prominent group of researchers is countering that claim, arguing in Nature Climate Change that even after correcting these biases the slowdown was real.
“There is this mismatch between what the climate models are producing and what the observations are showing,†says lead author John Fyfe, a climate modeller at the Canadian Centre for Climate Modelling and Analysis in Victoria, British Columbia. “We can’t ignore it.â€
Fyfe uses the term “slowdown†rather than “hiatus†and stresses that it does not in any way undermine global-warming theory.
I love that last bit. The argument over warming is not about warming, it is over causation. Even a slowing blows out the global warming hypothesis, which states that Mankind’s release of greenhouse gases, especially carbon dioxide, has caused global temperatures to go up, and they have the computer models to prove it! And that’s about all they have to prove it. It’s all based on those computer models. The problem for the Warmists is that the real temperatures are not complying with those models. In most scientific endeavors, if the data did not match the models, if the outcomes failed to match the hypothesis, they’d admit that the models and hypothesis were wrong. With the Cult of Climastrology, they change the data, the facts, to match.
Of course, one of the things the study attempts to do is go back to one of their old Excuses, namely that the oceans ate their warming, and we get this from Mann
“The temporary slowdown in no way implies that human-caused warming has ceased or slowed down,†Mann said. “It was temporarily masked by natural factors.â€
Got that? Warming is only caused by Mankind, but, nature can mask it. Are you surprised that I refer to this as a Cult? And you can bet they will use this paper to continue pushing that cult.
