From time to time the boys at WUWT and elsewhere, rather than dole nonsense in bite-size morsels, are so kind as to serve up a compendium, a cornucopia if you will. I know they truly want to persuade people that man-made global warming is no problemo, but I wonder whether they’re quite aware of what they’re doing; this kind of bounty doesn’t do their image much good.
In a recent post, Jean-Pierre Bardinet outlines what he refers to as “22 Very Inconvenient Climate Truths,” which he subtitles “Here are 22 good reasons not to believe the statements made by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).”
1. The Mean Global Temperature has been stable since 1997, despite a continuous increase of the CO2 content of the air: how could one say that the increase of the CO2 content of the air is the cause of the increase of the temperature?
Seriously? Do you have to lead with something so wrong?
For those at home, let me explain what “stable since 1997” really means. It means that if you look at the trend of global temperature, but you don’t start looking until just the right moment, then it might look like it might be “stable” maybe.
Here are yearly average global temperature anomalies since 1970, all the way up to the latest full calendar year, 2014 (yeah, the hottest year on record):
There certainly is a warming trend there.
Did you pick some moment when things got really hot so you could psych yourself into believing that today’s trend, the real trend, doesn’ start until then? Like maybe, after 1997?
If the warming trend did change at that time, did you compute what it would look like? ‘Cause if we use least squares regression to compute a trend which is allowed to change its warming rate at that very moment, well by golly it looks like this:
Is that what you call “stable since 1997”?
Or do you think the trend didn’t just change at that time, earth’s temperature just suddenly jumped up? (That really doesn’t make sense, but that’s hardly an impediment to nonsense.) If so, did you compute what the trend would look like? ‘Cause it looks like this:
Gosh darn it, even allowing a rather crazy “trend” which jumps around when you want it to (so you can start your trend when you want to), it’s still going up. Is that “stable since 1997”?
Seriously, is this the best you can do? I mean, do you have to lead with something so wrong?
For those at home who are wondering what has happened since 2014 ended, even though we’re only three months into the year with data, well it looks like this: