After going on, and on, and on about it non stop for 16 months, and advancing numerous potential explanations, including marine fuel aerosols (the disappearance thereof), solar activity, ‘weird’ El Ninos and ‘uncharted territory’ type manmade global warming, at the same time as dismissing Hunga Tonga as a possibility, ‘experts’ have finally come to the conclusion that the Great Global Warming Surge of 2023 is .
I don't think you read your abstract properly Jaime. It refers to the post 1970s warming increase as the 'recent' surge in question- so pre HT. What their study is investigating is what increase in the rate is needed to be detected by statistical methods. They conclude that an increase in the rate of warming of 55% (over half) is needed and that the post 1970s increase was below this. However there still could have been a surge post 70s - but it was not detectable by stats.
No, that's not correct Jo. They are referring to the sudden increase in GMST beginning in 2023 as a 'recent surge':
"Our results show limited evidence for a warming surge; in most surface temperature time series, no change in the warming rate beyond the 1970s is detected despite the breaking record temperatures observed in 2023."
They are claiming that there has been no statistically significant change in the underlying global warming rate since the 1970s.
" Implying that all the Alarmists are having to “eat crow” because the EEI appears to have fallen. There is a big difference between tracking the increasing impacts that climate change and habitat loss are having, and buying into a notion that everything is spiraling out of control and we no longer have agency, he said. “That (IMO) is not justified.””
FYI- Gavin Schmidt at NASA/GISS is the “Head” of the Agency. He is the guy who replaced James Hansen during the Bush II years. He is also the guy who started GISS using 1880 as the “preindustrial baseline” during the Trump years. Gavin Schmidt is a bureaucrat who’s “scientific position” changes with whoever is in charge of his Agency’s budget.'
In other words:the science and data can be downplayed as well as up.
Oh dear. Yes looking too closely at the data is misleading. El nino and la ninas make a big difference, so did HT- but pulling out from the small pauses and surges looking at the big piccie- there's an undeniable trend.
The Criminal Financial Syndicate doesn't care what the consensus science narrative is as long as modeling doesn't shrink the $100T CO2 derivative market that can create, apply, leverage and extract value via all natural assets and processes involving them. 'Carbon' market is the reduction or seed or corrupt monopoly model of 'accounting rules' that is cancerous replicating into tokenised value-claims of every soil, mineral, plant, animal and human that can be surveilled and AI integrated into blockchain Natural Asset PPPs.
The professional liars of the establishment climate cabal will fail in their desperate attempts to persuade us that alleged man-made CO2 global warming is an ongoing bogeyman.
The "pause" they tried to hide was actually the plateau warm phase of the AMO cycle (Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation). Disregard the natural ENSO events since 2016 and the ongoing Hunga Tonga warm spike and by 2024 we have now been through the waning warm phase of the AMO and have possibly dipped into its cooling phase.
Pointless and futile Net Zero is certain to fall apart long before then, hopefully within the current Westminster electoral session led by the climate zealots of the Labour Party.
Except that the narrrative of the mainstream climate professionals is that everything is not spiralling out of control and warming can be explained away as natural variation or HT.
(This is not in fact what the data shows.)
So now you're on the same side as your 'climate cabal'!! which is the side of Big Oil.
Their own pseudo-science says that alleged man-made CO2 global warming is slow and steady at around 0.2C per decade, not around 1C in 10 months as with HT.
This all would be freaking hilarious if it weren't so scary. These people have lost their minds, lost their ability to think logically. And they are the "experts" we're all supposed to take seriously and get on board with giving up automobiles and eating bugs and moving to 15 minute cities. It's terrifying really.
No, the model is right and the observations are right- the mainstream scientific moderates are now fudging to conclude that things aint' so bad- this is what their political funders want them to say.
The alarmists win hands down this way. Having produced loads of scary headlines saying the accelerated warming is unprecedented, very worrying, off the scale etc, thereby continuing to indoctrinate the masses in the urgent need for net zero, now they don't have to explain why their models didn't predict it. Heads they win, tails we lose.
That is actually the opposite of what is happening. It is, obviously, scarily hotter and unprecedented and very worrying . Politicians, funded by Big OIl, don't actually want us scared, they want business as usual (with procrastination scams like net zero). They tell their scientists to downplay and fudge and say everything is not spiralling out of control -though their models are right on track.
You are so inexact in your language Jaime. GHGs 'alone' could not explain it.
I don't think you read your abstract properly Jaime. It refers to the post 1970s warming increase as the 'recent' surge in question- so pre HT. What their study is investigating is what increase in the rate is needed to be detected by statistical methods. They conclude that an increase in the rate of warming of 55% (over half) is needed and that the post 1970s increase was below this. However there still could have been a surge post 70s - but it was not detectable by stats.
No, that's not correct Jo. They are referring to the sudden increase in GMST beginning in 2023 as a 'recent surge':
"Our results show limited evidence for a warming surge; in most surface temperature time series, no change in the warming rate beyond the 1970s is detected despite the breaking record temperatures observed in 2023."
They are claiming that there has been no statistically significant change in the underlying global warming rate since the 1970s.
Yes the 'experts' are political too.
" Implying that all the Alarmists are having to “eat crow” because the EEI appears to have fallen. There is a big difference between tracking the increasing impacts that climate change and habitat loss are having, and buying into a notion that everything is spiraling out of control and we no longer have agency, he said. “That (IMO) is not justified.””
FYI- Gavin Schmidt at NASA/GISS is the “Head” of the Agency. He is the guy who replaced James Hansen during the Bush II years. He is also the guy who started GISS using 1880 as the “preindustrial baseline” during the Trump years. Gavin Schmidt is a bureaucrat who’s “scientific position” changes with whoever is in charge of his Agency’s budget.'
In other words:the science and data can be downplayed as well as up.
https://richardcrim.substack.com/p/the-crisis-report-95
Oh dear. Yes looking too closely at the data is misleading. El nino and la ninas make a big difference, so did HT- but pulling out from the small pauses and surges looking at the big piccie- there's an undeniable trend.
The Criminal Financial Syndicate doesn't care what the consensus science narrative is as long as modeling doesn't shrink the $100T CO2 derivative market that can create, apply, leverage and extract value via all natural assets and processes involving them. 'Carbon' market is the reduction or seed or corrupt monopoly model of 'accounting rules' that is cancerous replicating into tokenised value-claims of every soil, mineral, plant, animal and human that can be surveilled and AI integrated into blockchain Natural Asset PPPs.
The professional liars of the establishment climate cabal will fail in their desperate attempts to persuade us that alleged man-made CO2 global warming is an ongoing bogeyman.
The "pause" they tried to hide was actually the plateau warm phase of the AMO cycle (Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation). Disregard the natural ENSO events since 2016 and the ongoing Hunga Tonga warm spike and by 2024 we have now been through the waning warm phase of the AMO and have possibly dipped into its cooling phase.
I predict that once HT dissipates, for the next 20-30 years it will be downhill all the way for global temperatures into the AMO cold phase (as in the 1960s-75): https://edmhdotme.wpcomstaging.com/uk-temperature-analysis-from-1659-to-2019/.
Pointless and futile Net Zero is certain to fall apart long before then, hopefully within the current Westminster electoral session led by the climate zealots of the Labour Party.
Except that the narrrative of the mainstream climate professionals is that everything is not spiralling out of control and warming can be explained away as natural variation or HT.
(This is not in fact what the data shows.)
So now you're on the same side as your 'climate cabal'!! which is the side of Big Oil.
Their own pseudo-science says that alleged man-made CO2 global warming is slow and steady at around 0.2C per decade, not around 1C in 10 months as with HT.
I wish you'd stop calling it man-made- it's so 70s.
Attempting to evaluate non-linear phenomena using linear thought processes is always going to be a problem!
This all would be freaking hilarious if it weren't so scary. These people have lost their minds, lost their ability to think logically. And they are the "experts" we're all supposed to take seriously and get on board with giving up automobiles and eating bugs and moving to 15 minute cities. It's terrifying really.
"A recent surge in global warming has not been detected yet..."
Uh? You what? That quote is insane.
The Modern Science of "When the theory/model doesn't match/predict the observations, the observations must be wrong!"
No, the model is right and the observations are right- the mainstream scientific moderates are now fudging to conclude that things aint' so bad- this is what their political funders want them to say.
And ergo the observations must be Hausfathered until they conform
The alarmists win hands down this way. Having produced loads of scary headlines saying the accelerated warming is unprecedented, very worrying, off the scale etc, thereby continuing to indoctrinate the masses in the urgent need for net zero, now they don't have to explain why their models didn't predict it. Heads they win, tails we lose.
That is actually the opposite of what is happening. It is, obviously, scarily hotter and unprecedented and very worrying . Politicians, funded by Big OIl, don't actually want us scared, they want business as usual (with procrastination scams like net zero). They tell their scientists to downplay and fudge and say everything is not spiralling out of control -though their models are right on track.
https://richardcrim.substack.com/p/the-crisis-report-95
Yes, astute observation Mark.