Monday, 26 December 2011

The MWP WAS a Global Phenomenon

The findings of Neukom et al. go a long ways towards demonstrating that:
Reconstructed mean summer SSA temperatures. Adapted from Neukom et al. (2011).
  1. the Medieval Warm Period was a global phenomenon that was comprised of even warmer intervals than the warmest portion of the Current Warm Period, and that 
  2. the greater warmth of the Medieval Warm Period occurred when there was far less CO2 in the air than there is nowadays, which facts clearly demonstrate that the planet's current -- but not unprecedented -- degree of warmth need not be CO2-induced.  
Neukom, R., Luterbacher, J., Villalba, R., Kuttel, M., Frank, D., Jones, P.D., Grosjean, M., Wanner, H., Aravena, J.-C., Black, D.E., Christie, D.A., D'Arrigo, R., Lara, A., Morales, M., Soliz-Gamboa, C., Srur, A., Urritia, R. and von Gunten, L. 2011. Multiproxy summer and winter surface air temperature field reconstructions for southern South America covering the past centuries. Climate Dynamics 37: 35-51.

In order to know how unusual, unprecedented or unnatural the global warming of the 20th century was, it is necessary to do what the eighteen authors of this important paper did, so as to be able, as they describe it, "to put the recent warming into a larger temporal and spatial context."
Working with 22 of the best climate proxies they could find that stretched far enough back in time, Neukom et al. (2011) reconstructed a mean austral summer (December-February) temperature history for the period AD 900-1995 for the terrestrial area of the planet located between 20°S and 55°S and between 30°W and 80°W -- a region they call Southern South America (SSA) -- noting that their results "represent the first seasonal sub-continental-scale climate field reconstructions of the Southern Hemisphere going so far back in time."

Read more HERE.

Harsh Political Reality exposes MSM Alarmism

From the New York Times by Justin Gillis:
New York Times Photo

Harsh Political Reality Slows Climate Studies Despite Extreme Year

At the end of one of the most bizarre weather years in American history, climate research stands at a crossroads.
Scientists say they could, in theory, do a much better job of answering the question “Did global warming have anything to do with it?” after extreme weather events like the drought in Texas and the floods in New England.
and later in the article:
This year, when the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration tried to push through a reorganization that would have provided better climate forecasts to businesses, citizens and local governments,  Republicans in the House blocked it.
The idea had originated in the Bush administration, was strongly endorsed by an outside review panel and would have cost no extra money. But the House Republicans, many of whom reject the overwhelming scientific consensus about the causes of global warming, labeled the plan an attempt by the Obama administration to start a “propaganda” arm on climate.
You can tell that the author is coming from the Alarmist side when he uses phrases such as "reject the overwhelming scientific consensus.."

Jane Lubchenco,  the director of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), said her agency had been deluged with information requests regarding future climate risks.

Ken Schlichte writes:
This article incorrectly suggested that climate change was responsible for this year’s Texas drought.  The rejection of a climate change “propaganda” arm headed by NOAA’s Jane Lubchenco distributing this type of climate change misinformation is appropriate.  The NOAA National Climatic Data Center figures below indicate the following:

  •        The Texas annual temperature trend from 1895 through 2010 was perfectly flat.
  •        The Texas annual temperatures trended downward at a rate of 1.19 degrees F per decade from 1998 through 2010.
The 2011 Texas drought was produced by extreme weather conditions, not by climate change.

Some of the following data are preliminary and have not been quality controlled.
For official data, please contact the NCDC Climate Services and Monitoring Division at
Annual 1895 - 2010 Data Values:
Annual 1901 - 2000 Average = 65.04 degF
Annual 1895 - 2010 Trend = 0.00 degF / Decade
Annual Temperature

Some of the following data are preliminary and have not been quality controlled.
For official data, please contact the NCDC Climate Services and Monitoring Division at
Annual 1998 - 2010 Data Values:
Annual 1998 - 2010 Average = 65.78 degF
Annual 1998 - 2010 Trend = -1.19 degF / Decade

Ken Schlichte is an expert forest soil scientist in western Washington.