Rebuttal By Anthony Cox
You have to pinch yourself to see if you are awake when you read the lengths believers in man made global warming (AGW) go to avoid accepting evidence against their belief.
Matthew England is an academic and fervent believer in AGW. He has written a new paper which supposedly shows that increasing trade winds are responsible for the hiatus in temperature increase.
According to England increased Trade wind speeds are causing the “missing heat” to be carried down to the ocean bottom. Apparently when the Trade winds resume their normal speed the heat will spring out of the ocean and AGW will continue with a vengeance.
Seriously, that’s what his paper says.
The hiatus in temperature, that is temperature has stopped, is a complete contradiction to AGW. Lord Monckton shows this in his usual elegant fashion:
Even Skeptical Science has warmed to the idea:
So there it is, temperature as measured by the most reliable of the temperature indices, the satellite RSS shows temperature flat for over 17 years which according to Ben Santer, a leading pro-AGW scientist, makes it climatically significant.
Santer says this:
Our results show that temperature records of at least 17 years in length are required for identifying human effects on global-mean tropospheric temperature
The converse of this of course is that 17 years is also sufficient to identify NO human effects on climate.
This 17 year threshold obviously explains why England 2 years ago denied there was a “pause” in the temperature trend.
But he’s now on board and he accepts that the temperature has stopped rising.
But like Trenberth before him he cannot face this fundamental contradiction of AGW. Trenberth in the infamous emails said:
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.
And like England now Trenberth also headed for the winds to explain how the pesky heat sunk to the bottom of the ocean. For Trenberth the “missing heat” was moved to the ocean bottom by “surface wind variability”.
In one of the AGW debate’s greatest ripostes Roy Spencer provided a graph showing that wind variability had actually declined:
Trenberth’s mechanism for the transfer of heat to the bottom of the ocean was contradicted by the reality of the data and that is as good a symbol of the AGW debate as possible: theory and assumptions defeated by reality.
This graph also defeats England’s paper, but there are further dimensions to how wrong his paper is.
In 2006 another of the leading AGW scientists, Gabriel Vecchi wrote a paper which concluded the Trade winds were not strengthening but weakening. Vecchi said:
The vast loop of winds that drives climate and ocean behavior across the tropical Pacific has weakened by 3.5% since the mid-1800s, and it may weaken another 10% by 2100.
This is a profound contradiction to England’s conclusions. In fact Vecchi concluded every aspect of the climate system was weakening including the Walker Circulation the World’s greatest energy movement system. Astoundingly, the ABC, just as they reported England as gospel this time, also reported Vecchi in 2006!
But even Vecchi’s conclusions, contrary though they may be to England, are not certain with other research showing the Walker is not weakening.
To complete this totally confusing picture about winds leading Australian researcher, Michael Roderick, has published research showing global winds are declining in a process termed “Stilling”.
The final nail in the coffin to England’s confusing paper is strong evidence that the radiation that both England and Trenberth claim to be wind-driven to the ocean bottom doesn’t exist. NOAA records show Outgoing Long-wave Radiation is increasing:
There it is. That heat which England and Trenberth and all the rest think is at the bottom of the ocean has left the planet. It’s a pity the climate scientists couldn’t leave too and leave the rest of us alone.