Foreign Policy Blogs
Foreign Policy Blogs

Your Own Facts

Climate Change

by  |  on February 6th, 2012  |  8 comments

Leave it to Gary Trudeau to distill something to its basics.  God love him.  As Daniel Patrick Moynihan noted some time back, “Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.”  The science is settled.  And no, my Denialist friends, I am not going to enter into yet-another long hassle.  You can take that elsewhere.  I’m here to confront the reality of the climate crisis, to shine some light where I can (as best I can) on the lies and the political chicanery that are so persistent, and to highlight and promote best practices that are fostering our progress toward sustainability.  If you want to debate the science, I’m happy, yet again, for you to splatter your biases and ignorance at the folks who deal with this every day at Skeptical Science and RealClimate.  Also, pick up Merchants of Doubt to see how and why the attempts to deny science take place in the first place.  (Hint:  It’s about the money.)

 

 

 

 
  • njcons

    Let’s start with this one simple fact:

    There has been no statistically significant warming over the past 16 years.

    http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/temperature/hadcrut3gl.txt

  • Njcons

    It would appear that my earlier comment in fact “distilled

    global warming to its basics”.

  • Irwin Seltzer

    This was efficiently explained and dealt with on Skeptical Science
    http://www.skepticalscience.com/Phil-Jones-says-no-global-warming-since-1995.htm
    and elsewhere a long time ago.

    To summarize:
    Even if factually correct with respect to an arbitrary time interval from a specific dataset, a 16 year time period is too short to exclude noise in the climate signal introduced by factors such as solar cycles. Over longer time intervals, looking at datasets that include more of the earth’s surface as well as data that look at ocean temperatures and melting ice, global warming is still happening.

    There is no need to spend more energy rebutting this old non-issue.

  • njcons

    But it wasn’t answered by Skeptical Science. The link you posted answers a different question. I didn’t say there was “no warming” during the period. I (rather the data) say there is no “statistically significant warming” during the period. Yours is a straw-man argument.

    From your own link Dr Jones confirms my assertion. It says: “Phil Jones is saying there is a warming trend but it’s not statistically significant”.

    If it’s not statistically significant, then the observed trend cannot be attributed to anything but random chance. It’s noise. That’s the distilled fact here. And Skeptical Science doesn’t dispute it.

    And the time period is not insignificant. It is longer (16 years) than the infamous “hockey stick” period (15 years). So if this time period is not meaningful, than the 1981-1995 period must be dismissed as well. Is that what you are suggesting?

    So with that said…the fact remains. Every single climate model predicted that with billions of tons of CO2 being emitted by man over the past 16 years, the earth would warm significantly. And it didn’t happen. I know it’s an inconvenient fact, but as the scientists themselves say:

    “The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t.”

    http://foia2011.org/index.php?id=198

    A travesty indeed.

  • Irwin Seltzer

    It is your opinion that a 16 year time period “not insgnificant”. Why? Scientists believe that they must look at longer periods to see trends because of the noise in the climate data with lots of short term variability. That is the reason for looking at data for longer time frames. Hey, why not choose an even shorter period – five years, 1 year? That would make it even easier to find intervals to back up any point of view you might have about global climate change. By the way, there is an update to the Jones story which would seem to reinforce this point: one additional year’s data for 2010 pushed the climate trend to statistical significance http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-13719510

    • njcons

      To your first point (that 16 years is too short a period) you fail to answer why it is that the key period of the iconic “hockey stick graph” ….only 15 years (1981-1995) … is considered adequate to draw significant judgments. It was this graph that served as the cornerstone of IPCC reporting, SPM reports, and virtually every UN call for urgent action. Why is it that this current measurement of the past 16 years is “too short” while the 1981-1995 period has some special importance. If you can’t answer this question your argument is moot.

      Regarding your second point (that adding the 2010 temps made the trend significant) is also a moot point. Why would you not add the most recent 2011 record? This is the record I provided in my original post. The cooling in 2011 renders the trend statistically insignificant. In fact, the 2011 trend is not even significant at a 90% confidence level.

      So the fact remains. There has been no statistically significant warming over the past 16 years…and not a single model allows for this. Facts can be stubborn things.

      • http://www.HewittComm.com Bill Hewitt

        I said I wasn’t going to jump back in on this but, sad to say, I’m not observing my own better judgement. Let’s try this excellent narrated slide show, and particularly starting at slide #26 at 13:30 in the presentation. It shows why the trend has been, inexorably, warming. Or see the latest update on temperature from NASA, including the animation showing the warming trend. Or, if you give up and want to deny the obvious, then you should sing along with Mr. Pipik.

        • njcons

          Again we have the warmists responding to an issue that wasn’t raised. This commentary started with a mocking of skeptics for apparently contriving facts or otherwise distorting the record.

          My commentary started then with a set of data (temp records) assembled by the warmists (HadCrut). This cannot be disputed. These data show a trend of warming over the past 16 years that is not statistically significant. This too is not in dispute. So when asked to explain this fact what do we get from the warmists? We get a “but Phil Jones never said there wasn’t warming since 1995” (a straw-man) and well that’s too short a period (even though shorter periods have been advanced by the warmists as meaningful). Now we get “well you’re cherry-picking 1998, an el-nino year, as your starting point”. No I’m not. The beginning point is 1995. 1995 is a year not influenced by either el-nino or la nina. Why can’t the warmists just stick to the facts? Let’s deal with this one indisputable fact…without the smoke and mirrors …without the straw-men and mis-direction. Dr. Kevin Trenberth of warmist fame says it’s a travesty that this lack of warming can’t be explained…is he wrong?

Author

Bill Hewitt
Bill Hewitt

Bill Hewitt has been an environmental activist and professional for nearly 25 years. He was deeply involved in the battle to curtail acid rain, and was also a Sierra Club leader in New York City. He spent 11 years in public affairs for the NY State Department of Environmental Conservation, and worked on environmental issues for two NYC mayoral campaigns and a presidential campaign. He is a writer and editor and is the principal of Hewitt Communications. He has an M.S. in international affairs, has taught political science at Pace University, and has graduate and continuing education classes on climate change, sustainability, and energy and the environment at The Center for Global Affairs at NYU. His book, "A Newer World - Politics, Money, Technology, and What’s Really Being Done to Solve the Climate Crisis," will be out from the University Press of New England in December.



Areas of Focus:
the policy, politics, science and economics of environmental protection, sustainability, energy and climate change

Contact

China_blog_ad


©2011 Foreign Policy Blogs – Blogger? Log In Here!

FPA Home | Bookstore | Global Jobs | Events | Great Decisions

Contact us | Become a Blogger | Advertise