Earth's temperature hasn't risen in 15 years.

[Aggie]

World's top climate scientists told to 'cover up' the fact that the Earth's temperature hasn't risen for the last 15 years.

• Leaked United Nations report reveals the world's temperature hasn't risen for the last 15 years.
  
• Politicians have raised concerns about the final draft.
  
• Fears that the findings will encourage deniers of man-made climate change.
  

Scientists working on the most authoritative study on climate change were urged to cover up the fact that the world’s temperature hasn’t risen for the last 15 years, it is claimed. A leaked copy of a United Nations report, compiled by hundreds of scientists, shows politicians in Belgium, Germany, Hungary and the United States raised concerns about the final draft.

Published next week, it is expected to address the fact that 1998 was the hottest year on record and world temperatures have not yet exceeded it, which scientists have so far struggled to explain.

Read more:

http://www.dailymail...l#ixzz2fQPNWDwr

Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

How do they account for the fact every year we're told it's "the hottest summer on record" then?

[Guest]

How do they account for the fact every year we're told it's "the hottest summer on record" then?

The last decade has recorded the hottest four years on record. Not bad for a flat temperature rise.

Where's that evidence for a UN cover up - more hollow gossip I suspect. All of the comments made by the Governments are genuine and appropriate to the data as it is, there is no urge to cover up the slow down in warming - just to place it in an appropriate context. Hunting for controversy and conspiracy where none exists. Such is the reporting from the Daily Mail.

Br Cornelius

Edited September 20, 2013 by Guest

[Aggie]

Where's that evidence for a UN cover up - more hollow gossip I suspect.

That's what I thought too, where is the evidence? All the article says is:

But leaked documents seen by the Associated Press, yesterday revealed deep concerns among politicians about a lack of global warming over the past few years.

Germany called for the references to the slowdown in warming to be deleted, saying looking at a time span of just 10 or 15 years was ‘misleading’ and they should focus on decades or centuries.

http://www.dailymail...l#ixzz2fQPNWDwr

Edited September 20, 2013 by Aggie

[danielost]

The last summer was very hot. But last winter was very cold. Further, when you have hot short summers which we had last year and this year and cold long winters, last winter. Your headed for an ice age. Snow is not needed for this to happen. The biggest desert on the planetbalso has the largest amount of ice.

[danielost]

The last decade has recorded the hottest four years on record. Not bad for a flat temperature rise.

Where's that evidence for a UN cover up - more hollow gossip I suspect. All of the comments made by the Governments are genuine and appropriate to the data as it is, there is no urge to cover up the slow down in warming - just to place it in an appropriate context. Hunting for controversy and conspiracy where none exists. Such is the reporting from the Daily Mail.

Br Cornelius

But, this is second such report. True the last one only went backten years. But, two reports from different sources, with the same results.

But, it is always the same with liberals. If a report says something they don't like then it must be a lie.

[Guest]

But, this is second such report. True the last one only went backten years. But, two reports from different sources, with the same results.

But, it is always the same with liberals. If a report says something they don't like then it must be a lie.

No one is denying the Surface temperature record - but its not telling the story the Right Wing is wanting to hear so they are fluffing it up into something it isn't.

The hottest decade in the instrumental record has just passed and doesn't presage a new ice age - quite the opposite.

You should try to read a chart before announcing the new ice age daniel.

Br Cornelius

Edited September 20, 2013 by Guest

[CRYSiiSx2]

Didn't the Earth used to be hotter way back? Didn't we have an ice age once? Earth goes through cycles. Unless we find evidence the Earth warmed up because Mammoths sat around fires lighting their farts... I just believe the Earth goes through cycles.

[Guest]

Didn't the Earth used to be hotter way back? Didn't we have an ice age once? Earth goes through cycles. Unless we find evidence the Earth warmed up because Mammoths sat around fires lighting their farts... I just believe the Earth goes through cycles.

Cycles have causes - what is the natural cause of the current warming ?

It really simple - if you want to believe in cycles been the cause of the current warming - identify them or accept that your belief is as factual as belief in Father Christmas.

Br Cornelius

[Gary Meadows]

But, this is second such report. True the last one only went backten years. But, two reports from different sources, with the same results.

But, it is always the same with liberals. If a report says something they don't like then it must be a lie.

And it's always the same with republicans, if there is no evidence, insult a liberal.

[CRYSiiSx2]

Cycles have causes - what is the natural cause of the current warming ?

It really simple - if you want to believe in cycles been the cause of the current warming - identify them or accept that your belief is as factual as belief in Father Christmas.

Br Cornelius

Well instead of mammoths of course there are 7 billion people lighting their farts now. Jeez some people...

Edited September 20, 2013 by CRYSiiSx2

[Guest]

Well instead of mammoths of course there are 7 billion people lighting their farts now. Jeez some people...

So not a clue then ....

Br Cornelius

[Doug1029]

World's top climate scientists told to 'cover up' the fact that the Earth's temperature hasn't risen for the last 15 years.

That is just plain BS. I have the temperature records right here on my desk. Only by using the 1998 outlier to distort the figures can you reach that conclusion.

There are at least three natural cycles on which the warming curve is superimposed: they have a seven-year period, a nine-year period and a sixteen-year period. When these come into phase, they can hold temps down for seven or eight years. But as surely as they come into phase, they also go out of phase. If you're wondering why climate scientists don't buy the hype that warming has stopped, it is because "global warming" refers only human-caused warming. Natural effects are subtracted out of the equation before the human-caused part is estimated. And it hasn't slowed.

Temperatures have been rising since 2005. That is the expected result of two (or more) cycles coming out of phase.

This whole "incident" smells like denialist hype.

Doug

[danielost]

Cycles have causes - what is the natural cause of the current warming ?

It really simple - if you want to believe in cycles been the cause of the current warming - identify them or accept that your belief is as factual as belief in Father Christmas.

Br Cornelius

This warming cycle began about ten thousand years ago. However the ump we're on started at the end of the 1800s. After the world wide temp dropped in 1700s, the little ice age, and the 1800s, due to a valcanic eruption.

[Doug1029]

This warming cycle began about ten thousand years ago. However the ump we're on started at the end of the 1800s. After the world wide temp dropped in 1700s, the little ice age, and the 1800s, due to a valcanic eruption.

Daniel:

There are probably dozens of cycles that affect climate. The Chandler Wobble, the Bond Cycle, the solar cycle. The NAO is cyclic; so is the PDO. There is an unidentified sixteen-year cycle. The Milankovitch cycles (There are three of them.) aren't the only ones the affect climate. And like you say, volcanos add a random element (non-cyclic decay curve).

All you have to do is find the amplitude, period and offset for each of them, then subtract them out of your data. Temperature rise is what is left over. It's pretty straight-forward stuff. These have all been quantified. If you can't do the math yourself and/or lack access to the data, you can read up on it in climatology publications.

BTW: Want to get paid to play in the mud? I have a little project just getting started. We have recovered 24 sawlogs from an old sawmill pond. The mill went out of business in 1910, so the logs have been underwater for a hundred years. Most of the trees were cut just as global temperatures reached a minimum, before the 20th-century warming got started. I can get pith dates on 21 of them (The other three are hollow.). This gives me an opportunity to develop a regionally standardized curve from the nineteenth century, before there was significant warming. I can then compare that to current trees and develop a warming curve from the differences. I already have 482 cores from 2007, 42 from 2009 and about 150 from 1980, so most of the collection work has already been done. I'd like to recover a few more logs, though, and there are at least half of them still down there. One tree dates to 1795 and two more to 1810. Most are from about 1854. I have a stack of fifteen "cookies" sitting in my office. Getting crowded around here.

Doug

[Guest]

This warming cycle began about ten thousand years ago. However the ump we're on started at the end of the 1800s. After the world wide temp dropped in 1700s, the little ice age, and the 1800s, due to a valcanic eruption.

The overall temperature trend has been downwards for 8 thousand years. It reversed in the last 150yrs. Your belief is wrong.

The LIA was mainly due to volcanic eruptions but the temp quickly rebounded to pre LIA levels and continued rising. The current warming doesn't fit the pattern - it is in excess of volcanic influences.

Br Cornelius

[Doug1029]

But, this is second such report. True the last one only went backten years. But, two reports from different sources, with the same results.

But, it is always the same with liberals. If a report says something they don't like then it must be a lie.

There are several lists of globally averaged temperatures. NASA's (Hansen's) list goes back to 1880. Others go back about to about the same time. So why are you limiting yourself to the last ten or 15 years, when you have 130 year's worth of data available?

Don't trust any one report. Even if the author is trying his best to be fair and impartial, he might have made an unintentional mistake. Check the work before you claim it as your own.

Doug

[danielost]

I have not limited myself to ten or fifteen years.

In the 1700s we had the little ice age. In which world wide temp dropped one degree. Then in the 1800s there was a valcanic eruption that dropped world wide temps one degree. In the 1900s the world wide temp rose one degree. Seems to me we are one degree below where we should be.

As for the trend of it getting colderd for eight thousand years that is a lie. If it were true we hold be in a real ice age. The temp for the last ten thousand years has been going up, since that is when the last ice age ended.

Also for last ten thousand years, our climate has been the most stable ithe earth's history.

There are several lists of globally averaged temperatures. NASA's (Hansen's) list goes back to 1880. Others go back about to about the same time. So why are you limiting yourself to the last ten or 15 years, when you have 130 year's worth of data available?

Don't trust any one report. Even if the author is trying his best to be fair and impartial, he might have made an unintentional mistake. Check the work before you claim it as your own.

Doug

[MonkeyLove]

"Human activity continues to warm the planet over the past 16 years"

http://www.skepticalscience.com/no-warming-in-16-years.htm

[Guest]

I have not limited myself to ten or fifteen years.

In the 1700s we had the little ice age. In which world wide temp dropped one degree. Then in the 1800s there was a valcanic eruption that dropped world wide temps one degree. In the 1900s the world wide temp rose one degree. Seems to me we are one degree below where we should be.

As for the trend of it getting colderd for eight thousand years that is a lie. If it were true we hold be in a real ice age. The temp for the last ten thousand years has been going up, since that is when the last ice age ended.

Also for last ten thousand years, our climate has been the most stable ithe earth's history.

Its is not a lie, it has been apparent in almost all datasets for quite some time now.

What you have to understand is why it has been declining and why it was so relatively high post glaciation.

post glaciation saw vast amounts of CO2 released by the ice melt which caused a strong positive feedback mechanism which warmed the planet to much higher levels than it currently is at. Long term sequestation of this carbon in sea sediments and soil mean't that there was a gradual decline in atmospheric CO2 levels as more was sucked out of the system on a long term basis (millions of years).

The Milankovich cycles placed us on a trajectory which would have placed us back in an ice age in about 20Kyrs and this is the primary explanation for why there has been a long steady cooling trend for the last 8Kyrs.

I can point you to studies if you would read them.

Br Cornelius

[Beany]

But, this is second such report. True the last one only went backten years. But, two reports from different sources, with the same results.

But, it is always the same with liberals. If a report says something they don't like then it must be a lie.

Daniel, I am not only a liberal, but liberal as well. You can't possibly be serious in condemning a group of people with whom you have differences of opinion as liars. No only is that comment insulting, it's non-productive, as well, contributing nothing to the conversation except informing us of your own biases. Do we need these kinds of remarks that only serve to further divide us when the thing we need most is unity?

[danielost]

The overall temperature trend has been downwards for 8 thousand years. It reversed in the last 150yrs. Your belief is wrong.

The LIA was mainly due to volcanic eruptions but the temp quickly rebounded to pre LIA levels and continued rising. The current warming doesn't fit the pattern - it is in excess of volcanic influences.

Br Cornelius

Remember, you did this too yourself.

If we left an ice age ten thousand years ago, and the temp has been dropping for eight thousand years. That means we are in an ice age now, and the earth needs to warm up for us.

The great lakes have been moving south for ten thousand years as the ice pack up north melts. Melting ice means no ice age.

[danielost]

Daniel, I am not only a liberal, but liberal as well. You can't possibly be serious in condemning a group of people with whom you have differences of opinion as liars. No only is that comment insulting, it's non-productive, as well, contributing nothing to the conversation except informing us of your own biases. Do we need these kinds of remarks that only serve to further divide us when the thing we need most is unity?

I suggest you pay attention to whatis going to happen over the newet obama care. The democrats wil clim the repubicans want to tarve childern, which isn't true.

[Guest]

Remember, you did this too yourself.

If we left an ice age ten thousand years ago, and the temp has been dropping for eight thousand years. That means we are in an ice age now, and the earth needs to warm up for us.

The great lakes have been moving south for ten thousand years as the ice pack up north melts. Melting ice means no ice age.

Not really daniel, it doesn't have to drop much each year for a trend to develop. We are not in an ice age otherwise you would be living under an ice pack which you clearly are not.

Br Cornelius

[danielost]

Its is not a lie, it has been apparent in almost all datasets for quite some time now.

What you have to understand is why it has been declining and why it was so relatively high post glaciation.

post glaciation saw vast amounts of CO2 released by the ice melt which caused a strong positive feedback mechanism which warmed the planet to much higher levels than it currently is at. Long term sequestation of this carbon in sea sediments and soil mean't that there was a gradual decline in atmospheric CO2 levels as more was sucked out of the system on a long term basis (millions of years).

The Milankovich cycles placed us on a trajectory which would have placed us back in an ice age in about 20Kyrs and this is the primary explanation for why there has been a long steady cooling trend for the last 8Kyrs.

I can point you to studies if you would read them.

Br Cornelius

Wait a second, I thought you blamed humans for co2 in the air. Ten thousand years ago we were using small camp fires.

If the melting ice released co2 ten thousand years ago. And, it got stuck in the ice again. Couldn't the ice be releasing tgat co2 again.

By the you cannot facter all of the naturel process out of temp grow because we don't know them all