A decline that the Warmists were trying to hide
Two tenets of AGW theory are 1) tree-ring paleoclimate data reconstructs an accurate portrayal of the climate of the past [except when scientists don't like what it shows, call it a "divergence problem" and hide the decline] and 2) the poles should show the most warming of all.
Unfortunately, the Scots pines in the Torneträsk area within the Arctic Circle in northern Sweden around 68.5°N have not received the memo on AGW as of 2004. A 2008 paper shows that the updated Torneträsk data "show a trend of -0.3°C over the last 1,500 years". The trees also say that the end of the Little Ice Age in the late 1800's was the lowest temperature over the past 1,500 years, and according to ice core data was the lowest temperature in the past 10,000 years.
By pure chance, this exceptionally cold period is also the same time the global temperature record (HADCRU) begins in 1850. Thus, the global thermometer record showing increasing temperatures in the 20th century mostly represents the recovery from the lowest temperatures of the past 10,000 years during the Little Ice Age. The Torneträsk pines insist that the rate of temperature increase and temperature anomaly of the 20th century was not unprecedented and was less than that of the Medieval Warming Period (~850-1200AD). From the abstract:
"The new data show generally higher temperature estimates than previous reconstructions based on Torneträsk tree-ring data. The late-twentieth century, however, is not exceptionally warm in the new record: On decadal-to-centennial timescales, periods around ad 750, 1000, 1400, and 1750 were equally warm, or warmer. The 200-year long warm period centered on ad 1000 was significantly warmer than the late-twentieth century (p < 0.05) and is supported by other local and regional paleoclimate data. The new tree-ring evidence from Torneträsk suggests that this “Medieval Warm Period” in northern Fennoscandia was much warmer than previously recognized."
As the infamous Phil Jones recently admitted in an interview
"Of course, if the MWP was shown to be global in extent and as warm or warmer than today, then obviously the late 20th Century warmth would not be unprecedented. On the other hand, if the MWP was global, but was less warm than today, then the current warmth would be unprecedented"
OK Phil, here ya go: Medieval Warming Period was Global
More HERE (See the original for links)
Posted by John Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.). For a daily critique of Leftist activities, see DISSECTING LEFTISM. To keep up with attacks on free speech see TONGUE-TIED. Also, don't forget your daily roundup of pro-environment but anti-Greenie news and commentary at GREENIE WATCH . Email me here
-- R.G. Menzies
LIBERTARIAN/CONSERVATIVE DIGEST AND COMMENTARY FROM AN ACADEMIC PSYCHOLOGIST in Brisbane, Australia. My academic publications are widely read
Click on the title of any post to bring up the sidebar
Amateurish climate science from somebody who doesn't know what they're talking about. Surprise, surprise.
ReplyDeleteWhat you're saying is that a localised group of pine trees prove what? That because these tree rings support your "theory", insomuch as you have one, all the other proxies must be wrong?
Not only that, "tree-ring paleoclimate data" (as you call it) is not a "tenet of the AGW theory." It is part of climate science.
Incidentally, here is a graph showing the average tempauratures for the entire planet during 950 to 1250 A.D based on all the data that is available, just not a handful of cherry picked graphs.
The MWP was not global, therefore Phil Jones was right and the warming is unprecedented.
Tree ring paleoclimate data is indeed a "tenet of AGW theory" because it is used to "prove" that 20th century warming was unprecedented in rate and amount, and therefore something other than natural processes (i.e. anthropogenic GHG) is responsible. What this study and many others show (including that data cherry picked for the IPCC)is that the MWP was as hot or hotter and there have been other periods (such as 900-1000AD) when the rate and amount of warming was the same as the 20th century.
ReplyDeleteAnd your claim "the MWP was not global" is absolutely false as shown by the peer reviewed studies of over 800 scientists. Look at the map for the "Medieval Warming Project" at co2science.org
How dare you even print this report!!
ReplyDeleteThis proves NOTHING!! Amateurs like you should just shut up!
The climate is warming and cooling, it's unprecedented, the end will be upon us in 50 years, you bastards will see. 800 SCIENTISTS say so.
Phil Jones is the climate science hero, all hail Phil Jones, glory to Phil Jones.
I'm an intellectual, and it is my considered opinion that "Global warming" and "Climate change" are manufactured pretexts for Global Governance.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous, the chart I linked to but mysteriously didn't appear shows the average tempauratures for the entire planet in a 300 year period proving that it wasn't global.
ReplyDeleteYour Medieval Warm Period Project is a collection of cherry picked graphs showing at some points globally the weather was sometimes warm. But the climate for most of the planet almost certainly wasn't.
Here's a big peer reviewed paper for you, seeing as you trust them so much:
http://www.meteo.psu.edu/~mann
/shared/articles/MannetalScience09.pdf
A quick search reveals that Co2science.org has received funding from big oil.
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Center_for_the_Study_of_Carbon_Dioxide_and_Global_Change#Funding
Matthew:
ReplyDeleteOh right, "cherry picked" papers from 800 scientists at over 400 institutions, none of which were supported by big oil, all of which show the MWP to be as hot or (mostly) hotter than today. So you're going to refute that from a single paper by Michael Mann, one of the most discredited scientists
of the 20th century? Where are your 799 other rebuttals?
Guess you didn't read Mann's climategate email in which he states "it would be nice to contain the putative MWP"
Guess you haven't read the Wegman Report or the NAS report saying the statistical significance of Mann's hockey stick was "indistinquishable from zero"
Or the climategate emails indicating how upset Mann was about the GLOBAL MWP from this paper in Science:
http://mensch.org/5223_2007/archive/Science2001Broecker.pdf
Or the other Global Map of MWP papers shown in the original post above.
BTW the AGW-industrial-complex has received 3500 times more funding than skeptics, including from Big Oil (look at the HADCRU website major donors). But, since you didn't have any valid argument, default to the old tired "big oil" defense.
AHA!!!!
ReplyDeleteI knew it, it was Bushco and haliburton behind the skeptics and their climate terrorism.
You forgot to mention the oil pipeline under Afghanistan charlie.
ReplyDeleteSo matthew, when is the end coming?
I guess it's not coming then. Fire up the V8 ma, time to warm the planet.
ReplyDelete