Why did global warming stop in 1998?

Question

ive seen a few people say that global warming has stoped since 98, why then was 05 hotter and 07 equal 2ed?

Answer 1

Well to be fair, that's just the NASA data.  I believe all of the other temperature datasets have 1998 as the hottest on record, albeit by some thousandths of a degree C.

Nevertheless, one thing all the temperature datasets agree on is that the global temperature trend continues upward:

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs...

The argument that global warming stopped in 1998 simply displays a lack of understanding of the difference between weather and climate, signal and noise.

Answer 2

the earth is begining to enter the cooling period in a few years

Answer 3

OOH! OOH! OOH!  I think we have a headline here!

Answer 4

it hasnt really stopped the problem just slowed down but the earth is still geting hotter. and if im correct i think its gettin hotter by one degree each year

Answer 5

Because that's what all but one of the studies say.  

James Hanson has a history of getting the figures wrong, grabbing the headlines and publishing a retraction later.

Most warmists accept his data as being gospel because it happens to support their beilefs.

Answer 6

It didn't, the link below is just one click further into the link you posted

A quote from the second paragraph

"The eight warmest years in the GISS record have all occurred since 1998"

The 'stopped in 98' argument has no ground in fact and is the product of blogs etc as are much of the denier camps 'facts'

p.s. Natalie T, the temp rise for the last century was ~0.7c with 1.1 to 6.4 °C more (IPCC estimate) over the next century. 1c per year would have both poles gone in less than 10 years and I don't think anyone (who is sane) is prodicting that

Answer 7

It didn't.  The so-called "skeptics" are just showing their ignorance again.

The average temperatures vary a bit up or down year by year--but the overall trend is still upward -- and accelerating.  The warmest year on record isn't 1998--its 2005.  Figures for 206-7 aren't available yet.

Answer 8

Ben O - Are these guys "warmists"?  Do they have a long history of misinterpreting data?  They all say global warming is real, and mostly caused by us.

The National Academy of Sciences, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the American Institute of Physics, the American Chemical Society, the American Meteorological Association, etc.

"Former Republican House Speaker Newt Gingrich challenged fellow conservatives to stop resisting scientific evidence of global warming"

"National Review (the most prestigious conservative magazine) published a cover story calling on conservatives to shake off denial and get into the climate policy debate"

"Pat Robertson (very conservative Christian leader) 'It is getting hotter and the ice caps are melting and there is a build up of carbon dioxide in the air.  We really need to do something on fossil fuels.”

"I believe there is now more than enough evidence of climate change to warrant an immediate and comprehensive - but considered - response. Anyone who disagrees is, in my view, still in denial."

Ford Motor Company CEO William Clay Ford, Jr.

"The science of global warming is clear. We know enough to act now. We must act now."

James Rogers, CEO of Charlotte-based Duke Energy.

"Republican governors team up against global warming"

http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Republican...

"the overwhelming number of scientists now believe that there is significant human cause,'' Giuliani said, adding the debate on the existence of global warming "is almost unnecessary ... ''

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=...

"(from Republicans for Environmental Protection) The consensus of almost all climate scientists is that global warming is already happening, that human actions are causing it, and that it will cause major problems for our planet."

http://www.rep.org/news/GEvol5/ge5.1_glo...

Why would anyone intelligent trust their well being to a very few "skeptics" instead?  Are the above stupid, ignorant, or united in a giant conspiracy?

Answer 9

Anthropogenic global warming (AGW) meaning warming caused by people is a controversial issue. The years 1934, 1998 and 2007 are all tied as the warmest years in the continental US. Some of the warmest years were back in the 1930s. Just pointing this out will result in a lot of controversy because you're just not allowed to question this issue.

The temperature is not going up 1 degree a year, it's closer to 1 degree Celsius per century. All of the ice on Earth is not melting, it's actually getting thicker in the south as Antartica gets colder. Predicting the weather is imperfect, just watch the weather forecasts for one week in advance and see how close they come to reality. So it's far harder to predict long-term changes since there are so many variables and the globe can warm for a lot of different reasons.

I wouldn't say it stopped warming in 1998 but it does seem to be getting cooler this year and some scientists theorize that's because we've been warming due to solar activity from our sun. Others think cosmic rays (gamma) have contributed. Our planet isn't the only one in our solar system that's been getting warmer and you can't blame warming on Mars and Saturn's moons on CO2 levels here on Earth.

If you're in school, keep your head down on this since you'll find it hard to argue with a teacher on this since it's become an emotional issue on both sides of the debate. You can read some of the data for yourself, it looks like you did that already, and try to come to a conclusion but since the experts are still arguing, that seems unlikely.

There's always been climate change, we just used to call it the weather.

**** edit ****

"Why would anyone intelligent trust their well being to a very few "skeptics" instead? Are the above stupid, ignorant, or united in a giant conspiracy?"

See? Just questioning what is still just a theory can result in name-calling. It wasn't that long ago that Einstein was ridiculed for his theories or that scientists were positive that sub-atomic particles would behave exactly the same as visible particles, meaning in a predictable way. Einstein has been proven right, the others had great credentials, millennia of data and sterling reputations. But they were still all wrong.

Quoting anyone who believes in AGW will not prove it any more than the opposite will do. I'm afraid only evidence will convince me and that is still inconclusive no matter how much you wish it was not so.

Answer 10

It didn't.

If you think it did then you do not understand how statistics can pick patterns out of "noisy" data.

Answer 11

A recent Program on the Discovery Channel, took the world through temperature changes, up to 6 degrees.

   Yes, it was a computer generated simulation, but based on existing information available from around the world.

    The bottom line according to this Program, at a 6 degree increase, civilization as we know it, will alter to the point of being unrecognizable to us today. Flooding will displace some 300 million( estimate) people world wide. Moderate, temperate zones will become arid wastelands, while areas such as Canada would become moderate year around, making it one of the major crop producing countries of the world.

      It goes on, but even at a 2 degree increase, predicted sometime in the next one to two decades, the effects are significant.

      And thats the anxiety of this issue. It could speed up as some believe but it will continue at a steady pace, unless major world wide changes are enacted today. And don't believe for a second that will happen.

      I seriously hope I'm wrong and the skeptics are right. But better to plan and not need it, than to need it and have no plan.