Death Knell Ringing for Climate Sensitivity?
Oh! Carbon, where is thy sting-a-ling-a-ling?
Oh! Gore, thy victory?
The Bells of Hell go ting-a-ling-a-ling
For you but not for me.
I must confess, I take personal glee in the idea of the climate alarmists eating climate crow:
The article then went on to survey emerging research (U.S. government funded!) casting doubt on high estimates of climate sensitivity, along with alternative explanations on some climate factors, such as “black carbon.” The question in my mind at the time was how long this would take to begin to break out into the “mainstream” scientific and media world.
That day appears to have arrived. The new issue of The Economist has a long feature on the declining confidence in the high estimates of climate sensitivity. That this appears in The Economist is significant, because this august British news organ has been fully on board with climate alarmism for years now. A Washington-based Economist correspondent admitted to me privately several years ago that the senior editors in London had mandated consistent and regular alarmist climate coverage in its pages.
The problem for the climateers is increasingly dire. As The Economist shows in its first chart (Figure 1 here), the recent temperature record is now falling distinctly to the very low end of its predicted range and may soon fall out of it, which means the models are wrong, or, at the very least, that there’s something going on that supposedly “settled” science hasn’t been able to settle. Equally problematic for the theory, one place where the warmth might be hiding—the oceans—is not cooperating with the story line. Recent data show that ocean warming has noticeably slowed, too, as shown in Figure 2 here.
And before you feel bad for them, remember all the vile things they’ve said about you (Denier!) and all the freedom and money they’ve tried to take—and have already taken—from you to pay for their alarmism based on “consensus” and “settled” science.