Using the GISS dataset, when did the pause in global warming begin?

If you believe Dr. James Hansen, the "pause" began in 2002. He used the five year mean global temperature to determine the start point. It is in a (non-peer reviewed) he co-authored in January 2013.

According to GISS 1998 is .62, while .61 in 2013.

2000-2003 is .06 cooler than 2010-2013.

2010-2013 is the same temperature as 2003-2006. Since global warming started, you might find the same 4 year average six years apart, but not 7. Looking at the averages I would say 2001.

1977 -1 1978 2 1979 5 1980 14

1981 17 1982 18 1983 22 1984 19

1985 14 1986 16 1987 16 1988 22

1989 26 1990 32 1991 34 1992 30

1993 29 1994 27 1995 28 1996 32

1997 38 1998 46 1999 46 2000 48

2001 49 2002 49 2003 54 2004 57

2005 60 2006 60 2007 60 2008 60

2009 58 2010 60 2011 58 2012 60

2013 60

Scientists usually wait long enough for the trend in data over a longer time period to be greater than the short term variations. That's how you establish a trend. That's how you analyse real data. It's how scientists have done it for 300 years.

Now, if skeptics can take short term data and draw long term conclusions about the climate, as they're doing with 'the pause', then I'd have to ask why they waste their talents on Y/A rather than making billions by predicting stocks, shares, and bond markets based on short term variations?

You know how this works. You guys cherry pick some data to show the most amount of warming, they cherry pick to show the least.

It hardly matters, you are really arguing over 0.05 degrees.

Hey Dook,

Blocked me again, I see. Its alright. I understand that real debate should be avoided at all costs, when you don't understand science.

The only people talking about a pause (when they are not talking about cooling) are deniers.

One tried to quote Gavin Schmidt yesterday in a question but the word pause was not in the quote only the deniers own comment, this was also the case if you looked at the many references on other denier blogs.

Any rational look at the temperature record will show it fluctuates up and down with various cycles like the PDO and ENSO, these run to different cycles and sometimes they align, giving a cooler year, like 2008 or 2011 (years deniers still try to reference) the reality is as cool as 2008 was, it was still warmer than 1995 which at the time was the warmest year in the modern record.

Look a little further back and there was a double PDO event in the 1940's with a small break ~1960 it then continued to the 1970's this certainly override the then effects of AGW, but we are now much further down that road and have also been in a PDO cooling event since ~2005 but now it seems to be having much less of an effect temperatures have not dropped in the way they did in previous events.

Look also at what temperature did after these PDO events ended and deniers have little time left to play with their pet theories as when the current PDO ends temps are set to rise, probably sharply.

http://climate.nasa.gov/key_indicators#g...

When that happens, nobody is going to believe denier nonsense about impending ice ages and pauses.

The current stories making the news rounds concerning the Sun are also played up by deniers, although I'm not sure how they think a change in solar activity changes the facts on AGW, they are separate events, yes an extended decrease in solar activity would cool the planet, but if/when such an event takes place, if it is on roughly the same scale as the Maunder Minimum, then we know approximately how much the average temperature of the planet fell during that event and it is only about as much as we have already caused it to rise ~1c, so we have in effect already offset another solar minimum, all such an event would do now is delay AGW a few extra years.

I have to say it is interesting watching deniers make claims about the Sun claims it caused the warming seen in the last 50 years, even though solid data shows this is not the case.

Predictions about what the Sun may do next, when we have already outstripped the effects of the last minimum, when we don't know enough about the Sun to predict it's future activity (although deniers seem convinced we can) funny, these are the same deniers who say we can't trust predictions, considering they try to ignore not the predictions but the actual recorded data on solar activity showing the Sun was not responsible for the warming seen in the last 40 years.

As far as I can tell the "pause" is what deniers see in the NASA data i.e. the 5 year running average, it gives the appearance of a flat line, of cause look at the individual years and there is no flat line two cooler years dropped the average (08, 11) but 2013 has lifted it again (4th warmest year) and 2014 looks set to be a very warm year as well. But then these are the same deniers who seem to not notice what an anomaly 1998 was as they try to claim we have cooled since then, despite the fact 2005 & 2010 where warmer and if you take away the boost, the 100 year record ENSO gave 1998 most of the years since would have been warmer, but then this is what denial is about, ignoring the obvious.

1997

About three weeks ago when the first polar vortex came through. Sure is cold outside!

If you want the standard answer given by the denial industry marionettes, it will always be with the peak of the last warmest period. While it had been previously 1998 it is now having to be shifted to later dates to account for the upswings in the trend line. It may not be far into the future before the longest reference to a "pause" was last year was no warmer than this year.

Deniers are amazing

This explains how and why they are wrong