Last year, Kevin Trenberth famously asked the hockey team “where the heck is global warming?” “The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t.”
They obviously know things are not going as planned, but they keep hanging on based on the idea that at some point something magical will happen and the climate will collapse. Temperatures will start shooting up, sea level will rise more than 8 inches (we have all told that story before) Polar Bears will actually start getting skinny, Cheetahs and Giraffes will move to Finland, etc.
At some point, they are just going to have to give it up and move on.
BTW – what kind of guy tells the 3-6 metre story? That seems a bit over the top.
I thought this post was a response to the previous Chelsea/Arsenal one.
Just kidding!
How many more Joules will Kevin be looking for once a decrease to the oceans historical record of heat expansion is made to accommodate Roger Pielke Sr’s new eustatic inflow from undercharging aquifers?
Kevin has more accounting problems than Bernie Madoff.
Wow. Anyone who interprets that statement from the stolen email as meaning “there is no global warming” or anything similar simply hasn’t read the paper he was talking about. Because anyone who has read the paper knows that that is not what he meant. Hell, anyone who’s read the abstract of the paper knows that that is not what he meant.
I live in Colorado and I understand exactly what Trenberth was talking about. Winters have been getting longer, colder, snowier and harsher. I was off my bike for three months last winter due to ice.
OK, so you didn’t read the paper.
If Trenberth published a paper questioning global warming, his career would undoubtedly be over.
This article is about what he wrote to the hockey team. I added another sentence from the e-mail to the article
“The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t.”
Thanks, but I can read cherry-picked quotes myself.
The paper was about the lack of systems to track the movement of heat energy in the environment. It was not about “global warming has stopped and we don’t know why.”
There are only three explanations for your statements here.
1. You didn’t read the paper.
2. You read the paper, but you didn’t understand it.
3. You read and understood the paper, and you’re being intentionally misleading.
Which one is it?
Nice! So all the claims of warming are based on incorrect data.
Nope. Try reading the paper. Really. It’ll do you no harm.