Congratulations to Nature Magazine for Catching up to Bloggers

The journal Nature has finally caught up to the fact that ocean cycles may influence global surface temperature trends.  Climate alarmists refused to acknowledge this when temperatures were rising and the cycles were in their warm phase, but now are grasping at these cycles for an explanation of the 15+ year hiatus in warming as a way to avoid abandoning high climate sensitivity assumptions  (ie the sensitivity of global temperatures to CO2 concentrations, which IMO are exaggerated by implausible assumptions of positive feedback).

Here is the chart from Nature:


I cannot find my first use of this chart, but here is a version I was using over 5 years ago.  I know I was using it long before that


It will be interesting to see if they find a way to blame cycles for cooling in the last 10-15 years but not for the warming in the 80's and 90's.

Next step -- alarmists have the same epiphany about the sun, and blame non-warming on a low solar cycle without simultaneously giving previous high solar cycles any credit for warming.  For Nature's benefit, here is another chart they might use (from the same 2008 blog post).  The number 50 below is selected arbitrarily, but does a good job of highlighting solar activity in the second half of the 20th century vs. the first half.


One Comment

  1. Mercury:

    When exactly was there ever climate STASIS?

    Also, it’s unlikely that the Earth’s ice age (or any other) cycles will be suspended simply because enough humans become sufficiently evolved and enlightened or achieve a certain state of grace in regard to The Environment.

    If we are actually overdue for the next ice age we would probably all benefit from all the anthropogenic GW we can muster.

    Here’s a very interesting theory/phenomenon that doesn’t get a lot of attention and may explain a lot: