Skip to main content

Secondary menu

User menu

  • Join
  • OR
  • Log In

MNN - Mother Nature Network

Saturday, May 18, 2013
SPECIAL FEATURES:
  • Leaderboard
  • Nest
  • TreeHugger
  • Photos
  • Blogs
  • SB 2013
  • Joy of Less

Search form

Social links

Main menu

  • Earth Matters
    • Browse all »
    • Animals
    • Weather
    • Energy
    • Politics
    • Space
    • Translating Uncle Sam
    • Wilderness & Resources
  • Health
    • Browse all »
    • Allergies
    • Fitness & Well-Being
    • Healthy Spaces
  • Lifestyle
    • Browse all »
    • Arts & Culture
    • Travel
    • Natural Beauty & Fashion
    • Recycling
    • Responsible Living
  • Green Tech
    • Browse all »
    • Computers
    • Gadgets & Electronics
    • Research & Innovations
    • Transportation
  • Eco-Biz & Money
    • Browse all »
    • Green Workplace
    • Personal Finance
    • Sustainable Business Practices
  • Food & Drink
    • Browse all »
    • Beverages
    • Healthy Eating
    • Recipes
  • Your Home
    • Browse all »
    • At Home
    • Organic Farming & Gardening
    • Remodeling & Design
  • Family
    • Browse all »
    • Babies & Pregnancy
    • Family Activities
    • Pets
    • Protection & Safety

Breadcrumb Navigation

MNN.COM › Earth Matters › Climate & Weather
    x
  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Bookmark and ShareShare
  • Earn Points
    What's this?
Did global warming really stop in 1997?
Scientists assert that British news article 'cherry-picked' data from different datasets, and that climate data must be viewed longitudinally to see changes.

By

Wynne Parry, LiveScience
Wed, Oct 17 2012 at 11:16 AM

Related Topics:

Global Warming
Global warming concept

Photo: Shutterstock

Claims global warming stopped 15 years ago are based on "cherry-picked" data and don't account for natural fluctuations in climate, according to climate scientists responding to an article that appeared Saturday (Oct. 13) in the British newspaper, The Daily Mail.
 
The article cites combined global land and sea-temperature data compiled by British climate researchers, claiming that between August 1997 and August 2012, "there was no discernable rise in aggregate global temperatures." 
 
The implication, writes the article's author David Rose, is that computer models, including those used by UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, are flawed and have made overly dire predictions.
 
The article appears to be based on an update to a global temperature dataset called HadCRUT4, which is compiled by the U.K.'s national weather service, known as The Met Office, and the University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit. 
 
The Met Office has issued a response to the article. It does not dispute the trend Rose identifies, but says Rose's article contains "some misleading information."
 
Michael Mann, a climate scientist at Pennsylvania State University, called the latest story "just more dishonest cherry-picking and sleight of hand by Rose" and his go-to sources.
 
"This is just one in a continuing series of hit pieces by David Rose in The Daily Mail that completely misrepresents climate science and climate scientists. Global warming hasn't stopped by any objective measure; it is proceeding right on schedule. In many respects (e.g. the dramatic loss of Arctic sea ice this summer), it is well ahead of schedule," Mann told LiveScience in an email.
 
In the Met's response to the article, they state the answers they provided to Rose's questions before he wrote the article.In them, The Met states that the data show an increase in global temperatures of 0.09 degrees Fahrenheit (0.05 degrees Celsius) between August 1997 and August 2012, adding that calculating the trend beginning in 1999 would show a more substantial warming.
 
In other words, the trend you see will vary depending on the start and end dates chosen.
 
"Climate change can only be detected from multi-decadal timescales due to the inherent variability in the climate system," reads The Met's response. 
 
At the core of the debate are natural fluctuations in climate and the role they play in climate change. Natural patterns — such as cycles in ocean surface temperatures — can play out over multiple decades, augmenting or counteracting the effects of man-made changes. 
 
As a result, only over longer time periods do the effects of human-caused climate change become clear.
 
"Over the last 140 years global [sea] surface temperatures have risen by about 0.8 degrees C [1.44 degrees Fahrenheit]," responds The Met. "However, within this record there have been several periods lasting a decade or more during which temperatures have risen very slowly or cooled. The current period of reduced warming is not unprecedented and 15 year long periods are not unusual."
 
An earlier article Rose wrote for The Daily Mail invoked the global temperature plateau to question man-made global warming and pointed to cycles in the sun's activity as having an important influence in climate. Recent research suggests that while the sun's lulls and flare-ups may impact Earth's temperature, man-made greenhouse gases are the main drivers of global warming.
 
A spokesman for the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) declined to comment, but noted that NOAA's monthly climate report, released on Monday (Oct. 15) showed September 2012 as one of a long line of consecutive months with global temperatures above the 20th-century average. Last month tied with September 2005 for the warmest September on record globally, the report stated.
 
 
Follow LiveScience on Twitter@livescience. We're also on Facebook & Google+.
 
Related on MNN.com:
  • Scaling down: Global warming will make fish smaller
  • Global warming slows down world economy
  • 6 island nations threatened by climate change
     
This story was originally written for LiveScience and is reprinted with permission here. Copyright 2012 LiveScience, a TechMediaNetwork company.

You might also like:

Join the conversation

Comments: 2
Sign in with one of these accounts to add your comment.
Log in or
create an account
  • Sign in using this account:
starbuck
Starbuck Oct 18 2012 at 8:29 PM
I think that arguing over greenhouse gases is pointless. Arguing over whether human activity or solar activity is to be blamed for climate changes, whether cooling or warming, is pointless. It's worth pointing out that there has been discussion among scientists who believe the trend is toward global warming about the possible paradoxical effects. But the thing that really does matter is that we be able to take stock of our situation and respond in ways that are useful to our survival. The long running
.... More
arguments over whose fault it might be that glaciers and permafrost are melting and seas are rising simply doesn't do one single solitary thing in the practical realm of how to cope with climate changes. This battle doesn't make any sense to me at all.
|
  • Log in or register to post comments
  • Report This Post 
hayduke2000's picture
hayduke2000 Oct 17 2012 at 11:23 PM

It's all cherry-picking! Every trend graph starts at some date and ends at some date, depending on the intent of the researcher.

If we look back far enough, we can see that the exact same pattern of temperature and CO2 fluctuation has occurred four times in the past 500,000 years.

What this tells us is that temperature and CO2 rise presage the ice age to follow.

How's that for cherry-picking?

|
  • Log in or register to post comments
  • Report This Post 

EDITORS' PICKS

tease early bird

line

tease energy sources

line

tease dog tricks

Advertisement

TODAY'S MOST POPULAR ON

  1. 15 famous people who mysteriously disappeared
  2. Stone Age people may have battled against a zombie apocalypse
  3. 9 habits that may do more harm than good
  4. 10 false facts most people think are true
  5. A day in the life of the human hand
  6. Tattoos for the edgy environmentalist
  7. How to bike to work (or anywhere else)
  8. Best air-filtering houseplants, according to NASA
  9. 15 houseplants to improve indoor air quality
  10. Jon Stewart explains the ‘Monsanto Protection Act’
+ Add this to my site

NEWSLETTER

Mother Nature. Delivered
Advertisement
Advertisement

Footer menu

  • Quick Links
    • Joy of Less
    • About Us
    • Advisory Board
    • Editors' Blog
    • Press
    • Privacy
    • Sitemap
    • Terms of Service
  • MNN Tools
    • Advice
    • Blogs
    • Day in History
    • Eco-glossary
    • Infographics
    • Lists
    • Photos
    • Videos
  • Connect
    • The Nest
    • Contact Us
    • Mixed Greens
    • Newsletters
    • RSS
    • Social
    • TreeHugger
    • Mobile
  • Channels
    • Earth Matters
    • Health
    • Lifestyle
    • Green Tech
    • Eco-Biz & Money
    • Your Home
    • Family
    • State Reports
  • Follow MNN
    • Facebook
    • Twitter
    • Pinterest
    • Tumblr
    • Google+
    • StumbleUpon

Copyright © 2013 MNN Holdings, LLC. All Rights Reserved. Website by GLICK INTERACTIVE | Powered by CIRRACORE

SPONSORS