Study: ‘No Warming’ For Past 30 Years Over Most of Our Planet

A new study documents the dominance of internal variability in decadal-scale global temperature changes and suggests we may experience a global cooling trend during the next 15 or even 30 years despite rising greenhouse gases.

Maher et al. (2020) acknowledge that internal variability in global surface temperature variations is “a difficult concept to communicate” because we have very few observations of its impact and so we must rely on assumptions about how the climate system might work.

Those who try to explain how internal variability affects global surface temperature often use the “Butterfly Effect” paradigm; they assume that small changes now can lead to larger changes decades from now.

Because global temperature trends are “largely determined by internal variability”, global cooling or another warming hiatus could very well be observed over the next decade.

Actually, as Maher and colleagues explain, “even out to thirty years large parts of the globe (or most of the globe in MPI-GE and CMIP5) could still experience no-warming due to internal variability.”

Read more at No Tricks Zone


PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX. 

Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method.

Trackback from your site.

Comments (11)

  • Avatar

    tom0mason

    |

    Hahahah, “internal variability”!
    No. What you mean natural chaotic variability! And it is something you can’t accurately quantify or model, so instead try to squeeze it into some sort of ‘known-unknowns’ box.
    CO2 warming ain’t making it (still in 20+years of temperature ‘hiatus’), so the modeling maniacs resort to mere sophistry to try and say they do understand ‘climate change’ but don’t know about the operation of all it’s specifics.

    Model uncertainty is found to be the main driver of mid-term trends when we take a low estimate of internal variability, while with a high estimate, internal variability instead dominates. This result highlights the importance of using multiple SMILEs, with a range of estimates of internal variability in future studies investigating mid-term time-scales and underscores the importance of evaluating not just a model’s mean state or forced trend, but also its internal variability.

    IMO all that Maher et al. paper show is that climate models are as useful as chocolate rocking-horse excrement.

    Nature controls the climate (and atmospheric CO2 levels), not humans.

    Reply

  • Avatar

    Jerry Krause

    |

    Hi TomO and James,

    Take a look at Sea Ice and Icebergs: Polar Portal (PP) and Fluid Earth Viewer (FEV). PP is a project of The Danish arctic research institute which models daily satellite data to create a daily visual figures of the Arctic sea ice extent and its variable thicknesses from which the daily volume of sea ice is calculated as the ice freezes and melts. So, there is now an almost 10 year daily record so this daily ‘data’ for consecutive days can be compared and it be seen how much, or how little, change occurs from one day to the next during a single year. Equally important is that the data of a given day of a year can be compared with that of the same day of another year to see how variable, or not, the extent and thickness of the sea ice can be from year and thereby to see possible trends.

    The FEV is a project of Ohio State University scientists and computer modelers who use (my assumption) a multitude the daily meteorological observations (measurements) to produce animated images of the atmosphere’s temperatures and wind intensities and directions (every six hours) over the entire earth’s surface. You must see it to believe it and to compare what is reported for where you live with the atmospheric temperatures and winds you know have occurred during the past several days.

    Hence, these computer modeling projects are completely different from the ones which, I assume, use the same basic data to make predictions which one has to wait years to see if the predictions have any validity.

    However, world-wide atmospheric soundings are measuring and reporting the atmospheric temperatures and wind directions and speeds near the surface before the sounding balloon is launched. And I also know that conventional meteorological data is being continuously measured and reported for any commercial airport.

    So, I urge you two to check the daily reports of these two projects out. For the more comparisons are made, the better we can conclude what the validity of these results actually are.

    Have a good day, Jerry

    Reply

    • Avatar

      Jerry Krause

      |

      Hi TomO and James,

      Today’s report of Follow MOSAiC shows that the Polarstern and its ice floe drifted 20+km (I forget the exact distance) during 24hrs. I looked at the wind data of FEV and it seems to report that a stronger northeast wind is acting together with the centrifugal effect during the past 24hrs. I am writing this, before looking at the PP data because I reason that the movement of the south edge of the sea ice should be noticeable. Which would support the validity of the PP and FEV computer modeled data made from whatever actual data. Plus also it would support my understanding that the centrifugal effect and wind are the principal movers of the ice sheet or ice floes.

      But I will not report what I find because if you are not interested enough to look at these three sites to see what can be seen, it would seem my efforts to inform you are a waste of my time.

      Have a good day, Jerry

      Reply

      • Avatar

        Jerry Krause

        |

        I find the PP data for 7/19/2020 is not yet available. Which is good because I could not have peeked at could be seen before I wrote the previous.

        Reply

      • Avatar

        Jerry Krause

        |

        I find the PP data for 7/19/2020 is not yet available. Which is good because I could not have peeked at could be seen before I wrote the previous.

        Reply

  • Avatar

    James McGinn

    |

    I don’t need to look at the data, Jerry, to know that meteorologist are just pretending to understand the physics of the atmosphere. All you have to do, Jerry, to realize this is attempt to engage a meteorologists (or, one of its faithful adherents) in a discussion on the physics of the storms or streaming that occurs in the atmosphere.. You will find that they absolutely refuse to provide much of any detail, relying heavily on the imagination of their audience to fill in the details of their pseudo-physical models.

    Your problem, Jerry, is that you lack the independence of mind to come out and say what down deep know is true, that meteorology is just pretending to understand the physics of the atmosphere.

    The Plumbing of the Atmosphere
    https://anchor.fm/james-mcginn/episodes/The-Plumbing-of-the-Atmosphere-ef3f7n

    James McGinn / Genius

    Reply

    • Avatar

      Jerry Krause

      |

      Hi James,

      Are you a human? If you are, how does it seem that everything you claim about others, such as myself, does not apply to you?

      Have a good day, Jerry

      Reply

      • Avatar

        Jerry Krause

        |

        Hi James,

        I often forget but sometimes I remember. And I just remembered there is a saying: To Error Is Human.

        Have a good day Jerry

        Reply

  • Avatar

    James McGinn

    |

    ToM:
    And that is the point. This is not just about this last 4 months — this is a process about control, mind control!

    JMcG:
    Tom, all of human history is a process of mind control. The main purpose of the bible is mind control. The main purpose of the American constitution is mind control. In america we choose our leaders based on who is best at mind control. It is referred to as an election. And the people doing the voting act under the delusion that we are rational when actually we are just responding to the mind control tactics of the candidates.

    All humans–without exception–suffer the delusion that we make up our own minds.

    Take a class in anthropology.

    ToM:
    Change history, change the language, change scientific methods, teach the kids the new version, get generational animosity so that the state, not parents or religion, are seen and believed to be the saviors. Keep the populous uneasy, keep the hysteria going. And always keep repeating the lies.

    Again, this has been true throughout human history.

    Truth Monkeys sucking on the thumb of consensus
    https://anchor.fm/james-mcginn/episodes/Truth-Monkeys-sucking-on-the-thumb-of-consensus-eglt2k

    James McGinn / Genius

    Reply

  • Avatar

    Jerry Krause

    |

    Hi TomO and James,

    Take a look at the latest from Follow MOSAiC (FM) and FEV and it seems that the next days report from FM will show a completely drift than that of the two previous days. We will see what we will see. This is SCIENCE.

    And this is a test to see if this comment has been submitted before I submit like my last two comments have been.

    Have a good day, Jerry

    Reply

Leave a comment

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.
Share via