All the summers from 2000 to 2008 have been in the top 14 warmest on record

[feargach]

Paul Hudson of the BBC recently posted a climate skeptic piece seeking to convince readers against the reality of man-made global warming, and using selective quotes from various sources to paint a picture of a world steadily cooling down over the last decade.

Naturally, as we in the reality-friendly part of the world know, this is simple dishonesty. Look at the opening li(n)es of his piece:

This headline may come as a bit of a surprise, so too might that fact that the warmest year recorded globally was not in 2008 or 2007, but in 1998.

But it is true. For the last 11 years we have not observed any increase in global temperatures.

And our climate models did not forecast it, even though man-made carbon dioxide, the gas thought to be responsible for warming our planet, has continued to rise.

Strictly true, but hugely deceitful. The last decade has seen extremely high temperatures in almost every year. For eight consecutive years, temperatures have been in the top 14 of a series that goes back to 1937!

Shame on the BBC, they used to have a rigorous editorial policy.

[joel]

Paul Hudson of the BBC recently posted a climate skeptic piece seeking to convince readers against the reality of man-made global warming, and using selective quotes from various sources to paint a picture of a world steadily cooling down over the last decade.

Naturally, as we in the reality-friendly part of the world know, this is simple dishonesty. Look at the opening li(n)es of his piece:

This headline may come as a bit of a surprise, so too might that fact that the warmest year recorded globally was not in 2008 or 2007, but in 1998.

But it is true. For the last 11 years we have not observed any increase in global temperatures.

And our climate models did not forecast it, even though man-made carbon dioxide, the gas thought to be responsible for warming our planet, has continued to rise.

Strictly true, but hugely deceitful. The last decade has seen extremely high temperatures in almost every year. For eight consecutive years, temperatures have been in the top 14 of a series that goes back to 1937!

Shame on the BBC, they used to have a rigorous editorial policy.

They still have a rigorous editorial policy. Doesn't have to co-incide with truth.

[derm0t]

Don't you know - that all the world's scientists are part of a global conspiracy to
defraud the people of earth into surrendering all their money in Carbon taxes to
an international cartel of shape-shifting lizard alien overlords?

TELL THE PEOPLE!

Or, you could send them to RealClimate, for regular debunking
of the "CO2 is good for you" corporate disinformation campaign.

[Tombo]

Strictly true, but hugely deceitful. The last decade has seen extremely high temperatures in almost every year. For eight consecutive years, temperatures have been in the top 14 of a series that goes back to 1937!

Shame on the BBC, they used to have a rigorous editorial policy.

But the theory of dangerous human caused climate change implies that the temperature should indeed be continuing to display a trend increase. The BBC is factually accurate in describing the halt in the trend over the last decade approximately and the failure of models to anticipate this, even though CO2 forcing was claimed to be (and assumed to be in those models) the clear dominating factor.

The longer that trend is absent, the more difficult it is for AGW to be the explanation for observed climate change that is being attributed to it by some.

Already, there is a stistically significant difference between the measured trend in global temperatures and the IPCC projections.

In laymens' terms that means:

If the models based on the AGW hypothesis and whose projections are reported by the IPCC are correct, it is very unlikely that we would have witnessed the measured temperature changes that we have over the last decade.

[zakalwe1]

i hope its a global average temp as i'm pretty fcking sure our summer was colder and wetter than ones i remember in the 80s and 90s.

and how far do meaningful global average temperatures go? i mean, did the world outside of europe and america have advanced meterological stations with accurate instruments pre 1970s?

in all fairness, the statement at the top of the thread sounds damning but when you think about it, may not be.

[feargach]

But the theory of dangerous human caused climate change implies that the temperature should indeed be continuing to display a trend increase. The BBC is factually accurate in describing the halt in the trend over the last decade approximately and the failure of models to anticipate this, even though CO2 forcing was claimed to be (and assumed to be in those models) the clear dominating factor.

Oh don't be silly, the trend is real, but it doesn't mean that you can't have several consecutive years of lower temperatures. You always have natural variability within a larger trend. Like the stock market.

[feargach]

and how far do meaningful global average temperatures go? i mean, did the world outside of europe and america have advanced meterological stations with accurate instruments pre 1970s?

Well, the Royal Navy only has records relating to Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Singapore, India, various points all over Africa, the Caribbean, Hong Kong, the Falkland Islands, Diego Garcia and Gibraltar.

These tally with other nations such as data coming from French Guyana, the USA, the Philippines, Hawaii, Alaska, Greenland, the USSR.

Not to mention the fact that tree-ring analysis provides an excellent guide to average temperatures right back through the last 200 years.

So, if you're trying to establish reasonable doubt for the climate denial side, this really is not a helpful area to track, because the data hurts your team very badly.

[TradCat]

The AGW theory was that the rise in temperature was man-made and would therefore continue as we continue to pump carbon. Had that happened the debate would be well and truly over. But now we have this period in which the trend is down. Of course as has been pointed out that "doesn't mean that you can't have several consecutive years of lower temperatures."

But it certainly gives the average person reason to wonder how accurate these forecasts are. Because they stand or fall on their ability to predict and they have been wrong as soon as they start.

Of course if they are right then we need to get to work. But their has to be a standard by which to judge theses things. Taking 1998 as the record year is it reasonable to expect that record to be broken several times in the near future (say ten years)

Would sceptics agree that if that happened AGW is real?

Would believers accept that if it doesn't happen they are reasons to doubt the theory?

[feargach]

Taking 1998 as the record year is it reasonable to expect that record to be broken several times in the near future (say ten years)

No, it wouldn't. There is no statistical basis to that statement at all. It's just pure fiction.

[truthisfree]

I wish this Global warming would hurry up, it is getting cold here!