2

Some of the rhetoric around AGW denial/skepticism is that the Earth hasn't warmed in 10/16/17 years.

For example:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2013/09/26/as-its-global-warming-narrative-unravels-the-ipcc-is-in-damage-control-mode/

http://www.whaleoil.co.nz/2014/05/cognitive-dissonance-media-climate-change/

enter image description here

While this might be misleading the context of the larger trend etc, I'm wondering specifically about this claim, and what it relates to.

dwjohnston
  • 3,013
  • 4
  • 19
  • 45
  • 2
    It's worth mentioning in addition to the linked duplicate that the "No warming" claim only refers to surface temperatures which represent roughly 2% of the heat being accumulated on Earth. [There has been no slow down in the oceans where 90% of the heat ends up](http://skepticalscience.com/global-warming-stopped-in-1998.htm). It also ignores the melting of ice, which represents a significant amount of heat with no temperature change. There has been some suspicion raised regarding this particular graph, which shows *precisely* a 0.00°C trend, that maybe some of the data has been fudged. – Ladadadada Jul 08 '14 at 11:27
  • Just to add, the chart above, while accurate for RSS, is selectively chosen to show little warming. RSS chart from Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Satellite_Temperatures.png and direct from the RSS website, remss.com http://images.remss.com/msu/msu_time_series.html RSS incorporates higher atmosphere temperatures into their models, not just surface temperatures. That's the main difference. – userLTK Oct 10 '15 at 23:40
  • 2
    1998 was freakishly hot year. If graph started just few years before that, trend would be substantially more obvious. That is exactly the reason why climate deniers start with 1998. – Peter M. - stands for Monica Jun 27 '16 at 20:31

0 Answers0