BPSDB “1998 Revisited”
“Even some of our most distinguished journalists …” 😆
In the latest Climate Denial Crock of the Week Sinclair has once again debunked the ‘Climate change ended in 1998’ aka ‘it’s been cooling for a decade’ etc climate change Denier meme. If you missed his earlier one Party like it’s 1998 here it is:
Both can be found at Climate Denial Crock of the Week. Of course you can (should?) subscribe to Peter’s Youtube Channel at YouTube – greenman3610 and get them hot off the editor.
Of course the underlying fraud (as has been discussed repeatedly) is that to detect climate trends requires a minimum 30 yr data sequence
- What cooling trend?
- How to decide climate trends
- Results on deciding trends
- El Nino, Global Warming, and Anomalous U.S. Winter Warmth
otherwise all you are looking at is short term fluctuations in weather.
If a Denier refuses to let go of the cherry picked shorter time period I have found it useful to just note that 2005 was hotter than 1999 through 2004 so obviously it was warming. So really the supposed “cooling” was only 2006 to 2008, and we know that was due to the solar minimum and La Nina. In fact if we plot the 1999 to 2008 trendline
it’s clearly warming … so what was your point again?
In my experience the overwhelming majority of Deniers are merely parroting something the got from Carter, Monckton or one of the other nutters, so they have absolutely no idea how to respond.
Some other useful links with regard to this meme:
- Has global warming really stopped?
- Claims of a Decade of Cooling Refuted By Analysis Showing It Warmest by Fair Margin
- Why the 1998-2008 Temperature Trend Doesn’t Mean a Whole Lot
- Global Cooling-Wanna Bet?
- Yes, Global Warming is Real and it’s Still Happening
- Earth to Jacoby: I Got Your Global Warming Right Here
- Myth “Global Cooling”
Plimergate
Brave New Climate tipped me off that Enting has released an updated debunking of Plimer’s book which may be found here. And yes, Plimer also claims ‘global warming stopped in 1998.’
Speaking of “distinguished journalists …” :lol:, Deep Climate reports that “ABC claims Ian Plimer is “a legitimate voice.” It is an interesting read, particularly showing how the Australian Broadcasting Corporation blatantly violated their own Code of Practice. There is also some following of threads down a maze of twisty little think tanks that is interesting.
“Many of America’s most important commercial crops require between 400 and 1800 hours each winter when the temperature is below 45 degrees Fahrenheit.” Earth Gauge
We give our consent every moment that we do not resist.
Denier “Challenge” aka Deathwatch Update: Day 315 … still no evidence.
Comment Policy
Comments that are not relevant to the post that they appear under or the evolving discussion will simply be deleted, as will links to Denier spam known to be scientific gibberish
- The “Mostly” Open Thread is for general climate discussion that is not relevant to a particular post. Spam and abuse rules still apply;
- The “Challenging the Core Science” Comment Thread is for comments that purport to challenge the core science of anthropogenic climate change.
Greenfyre's 
…Can Ian Enting’s work be inserted as a Corrigendum into “Heaven & Earth”?
—-
Some of them (e.g. Monckton) have already abandoned 1998 in favour of 2002.
This gets rid of the embarrassingly “cool” years of 1999 and 2000 and does show a cooling trend – provided that you are prepared to ignore significance tests.
With the developing El Niño, 2009 is likely to be warm despite the lingering La Niña at the start of the year and the extended solar minimum.
How long before the cry changes to “Global warming stopped in 2005”, I wonder? [1]
—-
Despite the squawking of the Anthony WashedUp crowd about the cold summer in the Midwest and Northeast U.S., 2009 isn’t such a slouch, either:
2nd warmest June
5th warmest July
The figures are still coming in for August, but early reports indicate the Southern Hemisphere may have something interesting to say about August, as well.
So what makes 30 years a trend in a system that has cycles that last thousands and hundreds of of thousands of years? Or is THAT just cherrypicking a convenient data set?
I do not think it is coincidence that in 1998, there had been a 30 year “trend” so that became a magic number, without any basis.[1]
If you look at the history from the NCDC/NOAA the time period from 1880-2000 shows 4 trends of 30 years each: 1880-1910 (decreasing)
1910-1940 (increasing – similar rate to 1970-2000)
1940-1970 (flat or decreasing)
1970-2000 (increasing – similar rate to 1910-1940)
This would indicate to me that a 30 year trend is meaningless. At the end of 30 years we would EXPECT temps to go flat or decrease for the next 30 years. So is a 30 year trend just cherry-picking? Or worse, when you know that historically 30 years is when a trend stops, is it being dishonest? In other words, based on the temp history we would expect 2000-2030 to be flat or cooling.
Also, there are actually 2 very similar trends of 30 years each from 1910-1940 and from 1970-2000. Each of these occurs before and after man began producing much CO2, and both of the 30 year increases have similar rates of increase.
So again, how is 30 years a trend we when we see overall warming for 130 years, with 4 subtrends that are about 30 years long? Maybe cherry picking and ingoring the inconvenient facts.
Pot, kettle, etc.
By the way, the temp spike in 1998 in conjunction with the hockry stick theory was the data used to say that temperatures were going to be increasing extremely and imminently. There were no AGW beleivers who thought that 1998 would remain the warmest or nearly warmest year for the next 11 years. All of them predicted that 1998 was showing an ACCELERATING trend and that the record would soon and often be eclipsed.
None of this says that carbon dioxide is not causing the earth to warm, but the temperature record is not an argument for it and indicates that the effect is minimal.
So regarding cherry picking, you are correct about many skeptics. But, trying not to sound juvenile, AGW beleivers started it, did it more, and are still doing it. Despite the fact that their predictions are wrong.
You would be better of empracing the history and pointing out that “we may have 20 more years of flat to cooling trend and then we will really get hot.” But only if you are trying to win without caring about the truth.
—-
You folks who cling to AGW are sounding pretty desperate. How much longer can you hold on in the face of all this record cold ?
[…] “Global warming stopped in 1998″ […]
It is arrogant of man to believe he can control the weather. God is in control.
Genesis 8:22 –
“While the earth remains, Seedtime and harvest, Cold and heat, Winter and summer, And day and night Shall not cease.”
Alternatively, you could consider how to apply the teachings of the Bible to a duty to care about millions of other people, the lives of non-human beings, and stewardship of the Earth we all share.
I would further encourage you to consider expanding your perceptions and attitudes so that you might recognize that women populate the planet with ‘man’.
If you’re still with me, I would urge you to then reach out and grab the rest of the low hanging fruit and bring your sense of knowledge up to 2010, where questions about climate change are addressed by science rather than by your personal beliefs.