Christopher Monckton is at it again, spreading climate disinformation. Today he's taking on Reuters and the World Meteorological Organisation and losing - badly (archived here, latest here). Anthony Watts had a brave headline accusing Reuters of fraud. It's not Reuters or the World Meteorological Organisation that is committing fraud. It's Anthony Watts and Christopher Monckton who are deliberately deceiving the public and publishing false information. They are the anti-science brigade who want the world to burn.
Just one example: the potty peer wrote:
Next, Reuters unquestioningly repeats that “The average temperature in the first six months of 2016 was 1.3° Celsius (2.4° Fahrenheit) warmer than the pre-industrial era of the late 19th Century, according to space agency NASA”.
Unh, no. Even if one relies upon the most tampered-with and prejudiced of all the global temperature datasets, that of “space agency NASA”, the rate of global warming since the dataset began in January 1880 has been less than 1 degree, equivalent to a mere 0.7 degrees per century. Not exactly scary. It’s well within natural variability.
Let's do a check. Using NASA's GISTemp, the average annual surface temperature for the thirty year period from 1881 to 1910 was -0.26 °C lower than the 1951-1980 average. The average for the first six months of this year was 1.09 °C above the 1951-1980 average. That makes the first six months of this year 1.36 °C higher.
What about his "mere 0.7 °C per century". Christopher's trick was to use a linear trend since 1880. However as you can see in Figure 1 above, since the mid 1990s, the temperature has been above the linear trend. In other words, the trend since 1880 has not been linear. Using change point analysis, it has been shown that the last time the trend changed was in the mid 1970s. Since then the trend has been 1.7 °C a century, far above Christopher's 0.7 °C a century.
As for being "well within natural variability" - no. The surface temperature today could not have been achieved without the added CO2 that we're putting in the air. Below is Figure TS9 (b) from the IPCC AR5 report. The black line is the observed temperature (to 2012 I think) and the red line surrounded by yellow is the modeled temperature with natural forcings only.
|Figure 3 | Modeled temperature with natural forcings only compared to observed temperature. Source: IPCC AR5 Figure TS.9 (b)|
I don't have time to pick apart all the other silly things in Christopher's article, including his woefully deceptive speedo diagram (which is plain wrong). I'll just say for now that it's wrong (and silly). I might write more about that another time.
The Reuter's article opened with this:
The earth is on track for its hottest year on record and warming at a faster rate than expected, the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) said on Thursday.I'm not in a position to question the World Meteorological Organisation, but I will say that with or without accounting for actual forcings, I'm not yet convinced that the earth is warming at a faster rate than expected. Below is a plot of the monthly observations compared to CMIP5, from January 1975. Remember, the CMIP5 forcings since 2005 are an overestimate, so the multi-model mean is warmer than would be expected with actual forcings. Even so, I think it will take a while longer before it can be said with any certainty that the world is warming faster than expected.
Temperatures recorded mainly in the northern hemisphere in the first six months of the year, coupled with an early and fast Arctic sea ice melt and “new highs” in heat-trapping carbon dioxide levels, point to quickening climate change, it said.
June marked the 14th straight month of record heat, the United Nations agency said. It called for speedy implementation of a global pact reached in Paris last December to limit climate change by shifting from fossil fuels to green energy by 2100.
As if Nature is mocking deniers and disinformers like Anthony Watts and Christopher Monckton, you've probably heard about the extraordinary weather in the Middle East:
I've never seen Celsius temps like these on a weather map before...— Michael E. Mann (@MichaelEMann) July 22, 2016
RT @ClimateSignals https://t.co/5yw13EukhE pic.twitter.com/7YO6iJTbGP
The terrible consequences of science denial - call out the peddlers of falsehoods
The only part where I agree with Christopher Monckton was where he wrote:
We should not only talk to each other here but also quietly let the outside world know the truth. The truth will prevail eventually, but the more we call out the peddlers of falsehoods the sooner it will prevail, and the fewer innocent people the terrible policy consequences of their falsehoods will kill.
From the WUWT comments
Is RHS a real person or a bot spamming blogs? His or her comment makes no sense.
July 22, 2016 at 7:02 pm
As long as they have a source they can throw under the bus, they will get away with almost anything.
chaamjamal is a greenhouse effect denier. He's wrong. The evidence is much more than a correlation. It's physics:
July 22, 2016 at 7:15 pm
Of course the crux of AGW is not that it is warming but that warming can be attributed to fossil fuel emissions. The only empirical evidence presented for that are (1) a high correlation between cumulative emissions and cumulative changes in atmospheric CO2 and (2) a high correlation between cumulative emissions and cumulative warming (i.e. surface temperature). Both of these correlations are spurious and therefore they do not serve as empirical evidence.
Pop Piasa builds a strawman, Telltale Technique No 2 of climate science denial.
July 22, 2016 at 7:35 pm
I think that the Reuters doomsday reporting only reflects the current market in the media. If you want the boss to promote you, you write something sensational. Reporting that climate change has not been particularly extraordinary since the turn of the century will not get you a raise, particularly if your employer has invested in renewables or is controlled by liberal “polititricksters” (to quote my Jamaican friends).
References and further reading
Earth on track for hottest year ever as warming speeds up - Article by Stephanie Nebehay at Reuters
Niamh Cahill, Stefan Rahmstorf and Andrew C Parnell. "Change points of global temperature". 2015 Environ. Res. Lett. 10 084002. doi:10.1088/1748-9326/10/8/084002 (open access)
- Change points in global surface temperature: and by what magic is earth warming? - December 2014
- Christopher Monckton lives in a fantasy future of science denial - July 2016
- Christopher Monckton passes Childish Bluster with Distinction (but fails Arithmetic) - September 2013
- Christopher Monckton's trend of disinformation continues at WUWT - without pause - February 2016
- Why Christopher Monckton is getting nervous about global temperature - September 2015
- Christopher Monckton mixes things up @wattsupwiththat - the carbon budget - July 2015
- Christopher Monckton urges WUWT deniers to play high stakes climate in Las Vegas - June 2014
- and many more...