Christopher Monckton bemoans the fact that except on a few raggedy science denying blogs, there are no headlines screaming that the lower troposphere "hasn't warmed" in 17 years and five months. He can't manage to get his charts to show cooling but he's managed to show "no warming" since September 1996. (Archived here.)
Christopher put up one of his favourite familiar looking charts:
Christopher carefully explained to his readers what it all means, especially the significance of the "bright blue horizontal line", in case they missed it:
Taking the least-squares linear-regression trend on this dataset (the bright blue horizontal line through the dark blue data), there has now been no global warming – at all – for 17 years 5 months.
For all the RSS watchers out there, here is an animation of the monthly RSS chart starting with the same period that Christopher used and stepping back 12 months at a time to when the satellite record began. Note the heading should read RSS Lower Troposphere Temperature. (It took too long to prepare so I'll not bother changing it just to fix the chart title).
|Data Source: RSS|
And here is a comparison of RSS and UAH annual temperature anomalies from the 1981-2010 baseline - over the full period of lower troposphere temperatures.
|Data Sources: RSS and UAH|
You might be interested to know that from 1998 to 2013 (inclusive), with both UAH and RSS there were seven years where the annual temperatures were below their respective rising trend lines and nine years where the annual temperature was above the rising trend lines.
I'm not trying to make any particular point here. Just figured you'd like to see what is occupying the collective mind of the denialati at WUWT. Just the same, for anyone who thinks that the rise in global temperatures has stalled, I suggest you read this article by Tamino and check out the updated Cowtan and Way analysis.
From the WUWT comments
Bill H adopts imagery (and spelling) much in vogue at WUWT and says:
February 6, 2014 at 6:15 pm
When one’s group is shown deficient because the facts do not support them the only recourse left is to deny a voice to those exposing the lie. The Liberal Main Stream Media following the emperor and his new cloths blindly.
Is Latitude saying he doesn't believe Christopher?
February 6, 2014 at 6:21 pm
17 years 5 months of lying……..
Ted Clayton is being very mysterious when he says:
February 6, 2014 at 6:27 pm
A gamble at which we will modulate the pleasure of being proven wrong.
Times they are a-changing, and perhaps a bit quicker with the British media.
I will predict 2 independent publishers, within 10 days, one in England, and another – notable – elsewhere.
Gary Pearse is frustrated that it hasn't yet started cooling as he expects and believes there is a climate conspiracy that's fooled all the world but him and says:
February 6, 2014 at 6:27 pm
And on top of this, they have levered the pre-satellite record downwards to get rid of the pesky 1930s/early 40s record temps, believing, apparently correctly, that the big El Nino of 1998 may be the last chance to get a new world record for some time. I have to admit that I’m frustrated the temp isn’t declining a little bit in retribution for all the augmentations to warming that were done in the 1990s. How much discretion is there in “validating” the satellite record. If there is any, it will be to jack up the right end of graph.
I hope for her sake, A.D. Everard isn't holding her breath when she says:
February 6, 2014 at 6:43 pm
That’s an impressive graph.
Individuals are waking up and stepping across to the Questioner and Realist side. As the numbers increase, the wake-up accelerates – more people are talking, more people are listening and raising their own questions. The murmur is rippling through the crowd. Eventually (potentially quite soon), the change will swing the balance fully the other way… Now there’s a tipping point I’m looking forward to. :)
jones asks innocently:
February 6, 2014 at 6:44 pm
Is that the same as saying the warmest 17 years on record have occurred in the last 17 years?
But feels the need to explain later on that he's as committed to denying science as the best of them at WUWT, jones says:
February 7, 2014 at 1:25 am
I’m detecting that folk feel I’m supporting the warmist agenda.. I’m not, my use of words was an attempt to convey the stupidity of the line Yeo took with Lindzen. I should have clarified my meaning.
It IS how they will portray it…..
William Yarber can't believe the Pacific ocean can hold so much heat and says it must be gamma rays:
February 6, 2014 at 6:45 pm
The spike in Earth’s computed mean temperature from approximately 03/31/97 to 03/31/98 is 1C. This is 30% greater than any other spike I can find in the satellite or land based temperature records going back to 1880. I don’t believe the El Nin~a in ’98 was strong enough to account for this anomalous spike. And NASA/NOAA TOD adjustment had not been injected into the US land base records.
Where did all this extra energy come from? I think the Earth received a glancing blow from a gamma ray burst. Any other plausible sources, explanations?
Matt upset the mods with his comment. Rationality is frowned upon at WUWT:
February 6, 2014 at 10:45 pm
[snip and it's really hard to stomach a website full of made up stuff like your citation of "rationalwiki" take it elsewhere -mod]
AlecM has the physics all figured out and says "those physicists don't know nuffin'":
February 6, 2014 at 11:51 pm
Visiting Physicist is correct. He and I have clearly been working independently in the same area.
Moreover, the effect of CO2 is such as to have a de facto climate sensitivity of <0.1 K. This is because it is a minor part of the radiative heat transport that pushes lapse rate to the moist level.
Also, the Earth's surface emits zero net IR energy in all the self-absorbed IR bands, including CO2 and H2O.
I'll let the Village Idiot have the last word:
February 7, 2014 at 12:39 am
I know, Sir Christopher, that you are a self-confessed “scientific non-scientist” ,that RSS is your preferred data set and you’ve constructed a graph that points down.
But I’m a simple bloke. I look at the “simple running 37 month average” on the 5 data sets on climate4you ( http://www.climate4you.com/ ) and what do I see?
UAH peaked in 2010, RSS in 2003, HadCRUT4 in 2006, NCDC 2006, and GISS in 2006.
The “superimposed plot of all five global monthly temperature estimates” comes out at 2006.
All this while you say that for the 9 years since 1/1-2001 there has been “statistically significant and rapid cooling”, and that in “1995..all global warming stopped”