What did you mean by this?
“The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming, and it is a travesty that we can’t”
– Kevin Trenberth
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Mission Accomplished
- Both High And Low Sea Ice Extent Caused By Global Warming
- Record Sea Ice Caused By Global Warming
- “Rapid Antarctic sea ice loss is causing severe storms”
- “pushing nature past its limits”
- Compassion For Terrorists
- Fifteen Days To Slow The Spread
- Maldives Underwater By 2050
- Woke Grok
- Grok Explains Gender
- Humans Like Warmer Climates
- Homophobic Greenhouse Gases
- Grok Explains The Effects Of CO2
- Ice-Free Arctic By 2027
- Red Hot Australia
- EPA : 17.5 Degrees Warming By 2050
- “Winter temperatures colder than last ice age
- Big Oil Saved The Whales
- Guardian 100% Inheritance Tax
- Kerry, Blinken, Hillary And Jefferson
- “Climate Change Indicators: Heat Waves”
- Combating Bad Weather With Green Energy
- Flooding Mar-a-Lago
- Ice-Free Arctic By 2020
- Colorless, Odorless CO2
Recent Comments
- James Snook on Both High And Low Sea Ice Extent Caused By Global Warming
- czechlist on Mission Accomplished
- arn on Record Sea Ice Caused By Global Warming
- Disillusioned on Record Sea Ice Caused By Global Warming
- Gamecock on “Rapid Antarctic sea ice loss is causing severe storms”
- Disillusioned on “pushing nature past its limits”
- Disillusioned on “pushing nature past its limits”
- czechlist on “Rapid Antarctic sea ice loss is causing severe storms”
- Jehzsa on “pushing nature past its limits”
- arn on Fifteen Days To Slow The Spread
Hi Steve, Kev here. Umm you see we predicted that CO2 would keep rising and take temperatures with it and uh, it hasn’t. CO2 is up 8-10% over the last 14-18 years but depending on which dataset you look at temps have been flat for those 14-18 years.
So you see none of our models predicted this, well to be honest a couple of them are fairly close but still running a bit warm. Problem is we can’t just defund all the models that are crap and keep working on the ones that are close because our projections would be matching Dr Easterbrook and we’d look like idiots.
So we’ve got to keep finding the heat in places that aren’t measured directly so that we can extrapolate warmer temps there to keep our funding going.
I hope that explains it. Cheers
KT
That wasn’t me, this is me. It’s as travesty because we predicted catastrophe and there was no catastrophe. It’s a travesty that there was no catastrophe.
However, we didn’t predict travesty. We predicted catastrophe. It’s a tragedy, a total disaster, that we got travesty instead of catastrophe.
Signed,
Kevin
‘The MSM misquoted what I said!’
‘oh….. wait.’
Indeed Kevin it is a travesty, something wrong with your ‘settled’ science?
Interesting post at WUWT on the topic of where the heat went. !!
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/11/08/an-empirical-review-of-recent-trends-in-the-greenhouse-effect/
The money quotes.. (period is the satellite data, post 1979)
“· Outgoing radiation has not declined over this period as expected by IPCC models. In fact it has increased. The missing heat has gone back to space – as usual and in the quantity as per Stefan Boltzmann’s law, via OLWIR, and
· The increasing greenhouse effect expected by IPCC models, is not evident in the measurements. It appears there has been no increased greenhouse effect over this period.”
Dear Tony,
I meant to say it is a ‘tragedy’ that we can’t.
Your buddy, Special K!
Dear Kevin: The truth is that my dog ate all the heat. She has supposedly been in heat now for ~18 years. I’m beginning to suspect there ain’t nothin’ good cookin’ in there. But Rosemary (that’s her name) is having a devil of a time trying to splain’ why there ain’t no baby yet. Its almost supernatural. Nah! Can’t science explain it. Oh, wait!
Be nice if you kept up with times. That’s at least a 5 year old quote, which has been explained and dissected many times since then.
It means exactly what it says. Five years of spin is five years of BS.
Be nice if you could be honest with yourself. Five years of ducking and diving has changed nothing but reinforced the bankruptcy of ‘warmista science’ ®
That you ignore 5 years of publications and discussion doesn’t mean that it doesn’t exist. You choosing to label as ‘spin’ or ‘warmista science’ explanations that you don’t like doesn’t mean much either. As illustrated here many times a day, any result that you don’t like is labelled ‘fraud’, ‘ducking’, (the word is ‘jiving’, not ‘diving’), etc.
Please show your work. Surely you can explain just one more time for us slow kids…..
The phrase is ‘ducking and diving’ according to Google Ngram viewer and all the dictionaries, and it has been part of English to say it that way for at least 200 years. Though it might not be in use in the states at all according to some sources, Google Ngram has not heard of ducking and jiving. The fact that there are in fact MANY more Google search results for jiving than diving might have something to do with the Blackened Mirror. It would not be unusual for Americans to change the English language, and that’s fine.
What I really meant to say was, “It’s a disaster, Faye!”.
Dear Tony,
What I meant is that the models were failing to predict what’s happening. (Shhhh, don’t tell anyone, but they’re still failing, after 5 years.) But about a year after I cried to Phil and the Team, I covered my ass when I came up with this crazy deep sea diving hype-othesis. I know it is weak. But people bought it! The MSM are great; they’re a bunch of useful idiots that can be led around by the nose. Gotta love the MSM.
Love, Kev
Most rational people would not want any predictions of CAGW to come to fruition. It just shows that the warmists have a perverted and warped moral compass. They want it to happen.
Look, Kevin, you know as well as we do that your little pixies chucked their little heat boxes in the wrong part of the ocean, and can’t find them again, thus denying you the opportunity of releasing a little of your, er “hidden heat” when it suits you. You just can’t get the staff.