Sifer, not sure how you can talk about something that hasn't happened yet. The length of time is what it is.
As stated earlier in the thread, the graph is not from McKittrick's paper:
Note: this figure is not from Dr. McKIttrick’s paper, but was created to illustrate his point about the HadCRUT4 surface data having a 19 year pause.
http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:1995
However this one is and you can clearly see the pause which 111 out 115 models did not predict:
View attachment 15246
Figure 1. Globally-averaged HadCRUT4 surface temperature anomalies, January 1850 to April 2014. Dark line is lowess smoothed with bandwidth parameter = 0.09. ward over the 20th century, but a leveling off at the end is visible. Figure 2 shows the lower troposphere (LT) series from the University of Alabama-Huntsville method (denoted UAH, [3]) and Figure 3 shows the LT series using the RSS method of [4]. These observations run from January 1979 to April 2014 and show a similar leveling- off over the ending segment. The IPCC does not estimate the duration of the hiatus, but it is typically regarded as having extended for 15 to 20 years. While the HadCRUT4 record clearly shows numerous pauses and dips amid the overall upward trend, the ending hiatus is of particular note because climate models project continuing warming over the period. Since 1990, atmospheric carbon dioxide levels rose from 354 ppm to just under 400 ppm, a 13% increase. [1] reported that of the 114 model simulations over the 15-year interval 1998 to 2012, 111 predicted warming. [5] showed a similar mismatch in comparisons over a twenty year time scale, with most models predicting 0.2˚C - 0.4˚C/ decade warming. Hence there is a need to address two questions: 1) how should the duration of the hiatus be measured? 2) Is it long enough to indicate a potential inconsistency between observations and models? This paper focuses solely on the first question.
Sorry for large graph, I cannot adjust it.
