Monday, 7 September 2015

Monckton pauses again and again - but when did the non-pause begin?

[MONTHLY UPDATE FOR OCTOBER 2015 - Monckton changes the start date again - now its February 2015.]
[Updated to credit Humma Kavula for the original observation.  If I have trodden on a similar exploration by Humma then I apologise.]
[Second update - see this at Daily Kos covering similar ground but in better detail]
We all know that a good story is worth telling.  So, it would appear, it a blatant lie.  Lord Christopher Monckton, the mendacious Monckton of Brenchley, the potty peer (TM Sou), likes to remind the faithful at Anthony Watts site for hypocrites and deniers, WattsUpWithThat, of the length of time that has passed since the beginning of the so-called pause.

Since this man is the acknowledged world expert on climate bull, and since it was pointed out by Humma Kavula over at HotWhopper, it would appear that the beginning of Monckton's obsession with measuring the length of the "pause" is a moveable feast. 

Start date January 1996
No significant warming for seventeen years 4 months (June 13 2013)

Start date August 1996
No global warming for 17 years 8 months (April 5 2014)

Start date September 1996
Whither Went The Warmer Weather (December 16 2013)
Satellites show no global warming for 17 years 5 months (February 6 2014)
The pause continues – Still no global warming for 17 years 9 months (June 4 2014)
RSS shows no global warming for 17 years 10 months (July 3 2014)
It’s official: no global warming for 18 years 1 month (October 2 2014)

Start date October 1996
Global Temperature Update – Still no global warming for 17 years 10 months (August 2 2014)
Global Temperature Update – No global warming for 17 years 11 months (September 4 2014)
On climate, the Right is right – Global temperature update: the Pause is still 18 years 1 month (November 7 2014)

Start date November 1996
RSS global temperature data: No global warming at all for 202 months (September 11 2013)

Start date December 1996
The 200 months of ‘the pause’ (August 27 2013)
Warming stays on the Great Shelf (February 9 2015)
El Niño or ñot, the Pause lengthens again (April 6 2015)

January 1997
El Niño begins to curtail the Pause (July 2 2015)
The Pause lengthens yet again (September 3 2015)

Start date February 1997
There's Life In The Old Pause Yet (8 October 2015)]

Start date March 2001
Temperature analysis of 5 datasets shows the ‘Great Pause’ has endured for 13 years, 4 months (July 29 2014)

This is an odd jumble of dates to be sure.  If Monckton had been consistent, he could have added 12 extra months to his non-existent "pause" but he isn't and I cannot see why.  After all, if the hiatus were a real thing, then the starting point would be the same each time.  He could just change the length of time and reprint the article.  But he doesn't.  The outlier, the most recent one, is a bit weird, being one of the two times Monckton cherry picked more than the single data set to "prove" his point.

And I should add that I haven't put in all the references, just given a sample that covers the range of dates I could find.

Furthermore, there is a bit of a problem working out the start dates in some of Monckton's articles (because of a lack of fingers and a certain level of boredom with the tedious peer's obsession).  Where he gives a date for the start point of his graph or his calculation then that is the one I have gone with and no doubt that is the one his readers at WUWT took.  That no one seems to have picked up on the jumping dates at WUWT suggests that no one is actually reading.

Now if even the world's biggest liar expert cannot agree with himself on the beginning of the non-existent pause, then why should anyone else?


  1. I need a proxy to see this blog entry in its entirety. The reason:

  2. Thanks for writing this! It really needed addressing once and for all.

    It is clear what Monckton does: he scans the RSS data in search of the longest non-warming period he can find, creates an appealing graph and then wrongly claims 'the warming has paused' even longer.

    Tracking his 'no warming' graphs over the past couple of years, he has changed the start date 10 times using 6 different start dates jumping back and forth as he sees fit. Had he consistently used the earliest start date he has used (August 1996) he soon would have found his argument no longer was supported by his preferred RSS dataset. So he simply changed the start date as any cherry-picker would do knowing very well that his hard-core followers either would not notice, would not mind or both.

  3. I think Mockton is an old fraud. But this article neglects to point out that he specifically does not fix a starting date for the pause. Quoting "the least-squares linear-regression trend on the RSS satellite monthly global mean lower-troposphere dataset for as far back as it is possible to go and still find a zero trend". My maths isn't good enough to check if he's doing the analysis correctly. But to imply in this article that he's changing the start date of the pause without acknowledgement is completely dishonest and deliberately misleading.

    Don't get me wrong, his analysis is obviously misleading and ignored data sets he doesn't like by calling them unreliable. But please don't unnecessarily misrepresent his argument.

    1. Monckton conveniently doesn't mention that he's changed the starting point when he changes it. But you're right, he's an old fraud.