We had a cool change
Now only 30 inside hot wind out side scud clouds maybe it will cool soon
And maybe the extreme cold winters of late will be that little bit colder

Lets wrap it up, we will talk about it often and fully think I know future governments of all sides will act on climate change
Just firmly hold the view future historians will one day look back and ask how did we let it being a left v right thing
Not a protect the planet one
My mind sees a day some researcher may have fun, reading our words and posts still filed away
And that future day if not next week, will show clearly one side has used comic book like logic to defend the indefensible

Dear mhaze,

I challenged you to “please show me a single reputable climate scientist who believes there was a “hiatus in temperatures that occurred in two decades up to 2013”.

You first like spoke of 10 year 'hiatus'. You second speaks of a 14 year 'slow down' in the rate of increase and your third which you pasted speaks of 15 years and doesn't use the word hiatus at all.

None speak of 20 years or 2 decades as you claimed.

Have you got anything which will substantiate your claim or was it yet again a bit of exaggerated nonsense?

SR,

Well we've gone from "that balloon got popped" (ie no hiatus) to some sort of grudging acceptance that a pause of indeterminate years occurred. Some progress at least.

But now you want to try to redirect to some issue over exactitude so as to not look completely wrong.

When I said 'two decades' I was being deliberately vague. If I meant 20 years, I'd have said 20 years.

Its not possible to be exact on this issue. Last time we talked about this you ridiculed the idea that there could be multiple starts and ends for the pause. I thought I'd educated you on that point.... but clearly not.

There are literally 10s of 1000s of potential pause start and end dates. Just taking 1995 for example, there are over 12000 potential trend lines that could be drawn from 2005 through to 2018 just using the 6 most accepted climate records.

Similarly for 1996 etc.

Each scientist will prefer to use their own favoured record set and determine their own start end dates. But most now accept that a pause of some period happened which started at some time in the 90s and ended at some time in the years around 2013.
Sure there are some who continue to dispute it (the whole so-called Pausebuster data set was developed to give them some cover).

You do this every time that you realise you're headed down the garden path - try to redirect to specifics to hide the fact that you got the general issue all wrong.

I'm not playing.

But if I were ( grin!) I'd suggest you look at the period Sept 1994 to Sept 2017 using UAHv6.0 as a primer.

Dear mhaze,

You write;

“Well we've gone from "that balloon got popped" (ie no hiatus) to some sort of grudging acceptance that a pause of indeterminate years occurred. Some progress at least.”

Nope. Where have you dragged that idea from?

Next you say;

“When I said 'two decades' I was being deliberately vague. If I meant 20 years, I'd have said 20 years.”

Yet in our earlier exchanges which you keep referring to you said this.

“The climate models don't predict a pause. A mere 2% of climate simulations predict a 15yr pause at any time. None predict a 20yr pause.”

I think you very much said and meant 2 decades as in 20 years.

As for the trend line over the dates you mentioned here it is.

http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/uah6/from:Sept%201994/to:Sept%202017/trend

Hardly flatlining is it.

SR,

"Nope. Where have you dragged that idea from?"

From your posts.

"I think you very much said and meant 2 decades as in 20 years."

So let me get this straight. A couple of years ago I said that their hadn't been a 20 year hiatus. And from that you deduce that I'm now saying there has been a 20 year hiatus even though I didn't mention 20 years??
I'm constantly fascinated with your willingness to beclown yourself rather than just accept you got it wrong.

As to the graph you link, might I point out that it graphs all the way back to 1975.

I think this is what you tried to show...

http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/uah6/from:1994.75/to:2017.75/trend

If you look at the data behind the trend line it shows the trend to be 0.0940739 per decade. If you do the confidence intervals for that (no that's way to complicated for this class!!) you'll see that its ±0.133 °C/decade (2 sigma) (Editor won't reproduce the sigma symbol). As I explained way back, and above, that means there's no statistically significant trend and therefore a pause.

BTW 0.0940739 per decade means less than 1c warming per century. Hardly reason to go into chicken little mode.

In case you misunderstand, I'm not saying that proves a pause. Its just one data point in many thousands. But when you have many thousands of such data points, you get evidence that most of the climate community accepts.