A new look at the MWP

Can OleRocks or someone else (probably someone else) explain the following caption to his cartoons in the OP???



How do you calculate a fractional degree "anomaly" relative to a 30 year period of time? And why relative to anything in that period? Isn't it more important to determine the anomaly with respect to a more contemporary time period? Why not use the LIA?






They choose the parameters based on what benefits their narrative the most. They tell you that hurricane activity is the greatest it's been in 30 years, not bothering to let you know that 50 years ago the hurricane activity was more prevelent and more destructive.

The 1950s-1960s was the last maximum "amo" the hurricane activity increases and decreases with that 30 or so year cycle within the Atlantic ocean. This period had a year like 1964 that was alot like 2004...

The 1970s and 1980s were less active with a avg from 8-12 storms a season. A nino year would have 4-6 storms like 1983, 1986, ect. Nina years like 1985, 1988, 1989 had 10-13.

That is a negative amo or cold Atlantic. A warm Atlantic or what we have since 1995-2010 has a avg of 14-15 storms a season with more hurricane activity. 1995 had 19, 2005, 28 and 2008, 2003, 16 a pieces with 2010, 19 named storms.

It is like a sine wave, which during the 1870s-1890s time frame was another active period with 1887 having 19 known storms. 1886 had like a half dozen hurricane landfalls within the gulf coast, amazing fucking season! Imagine without any thing besides crappy ship reports finding a season like that=2005? 1837 is also another possible 2005 like year. I believe that 1995, 1969 happen every 30 to 40 years and 2005 every 100 or so. Not as rare as most would think.

Negative amo from 1900-1920's then mid 1920's to late 60s positive.

No increase in activity at all. Normal Atlantic natural patterns and in fact a negative amo can give us 1979, 1980, 1985, 1992.



This is exactly true. With today's radar technology and satelite observations, we can see every gust of wind on the planet as it turns in a weather system. Nothing is missed.

Before 1978, if entire squadrons of airplanes were driven from the sky by weather, we had only a good guess that something might have happened.

Given identical weather and climate, any tally of storms from the past would be lower than a tally from today simply because the methods of data gathering are so much superior.
 
The Medieval Warm(ish) Period In Pictures

The MWP was very unlike warming today; the growing North American glaciers during the MWP being somewhat of a giveaway. The MWP only affected warming in a handful of regions, with Greenland being especially warm (Figure 1), whereas much of the Earth was actually cooler than the late 20th century. By comparison; today virtually every glacier and ice sheet on the planet is in rapid retreat.

Both the climate proxies and the climate models imply that the MWP was a re-organization of the Earth's climate, and that much of this re-organization can be explained by oceanic patterns of warming and cooling, although what started all this rolling in the first place is still unknown.

So while some climate "skeptics" are stuck in a time loop, wilfully reliving their own version of Groundhog Day, science continues to move forward.



You have said in the past that a good way to see the effects of a warming climate is the evidence presented by the crops and plants growing in any area. During the time of Roman expansion, the Romans expanded to areas from Northern Africa to Britain.

Where the Romans went, Vinyards appearred.

At the time of the great Northern European exodus to America, the cheap drink of the masses in those areas was beer. This is why Americans are Beer Drinkers more than wine drinkers.

Vinyards were killed by the cooling climate following the MWP.
 
The Medieval Warm(ish) Period In Pictures

The Medieval Warm(ish) Period In Pictures
Posted on 10 July 2011 by Rob Painting
The Medieval Warm Period (MWP) is a subject of "skeptic" focus, primarily because it was a time of natural warming. It took place from about 950-1250 AD, and, as opposed to today's warming which is global in extent and due to human activities, the MWP was mainly a northern hemisphere phenomenon and smaller in scale. Indeed, the advance of North American glaciers during the MWP is in stark contrast to what is happening in North America today

Why lie rocks. The fact is that the MWP was global and warmer than the present. You name an area on the earth and I will gladly provide you with peer reviewed studies that support a warmer MWP in that region.

Geez rocks, the Vostok ice core data brought the MWP to light. Do you have any idea where Vostok is? It is about 800 miles from the geographic south pole at the damned center of the East Antarctic Ice Sheet. If the MWP was a northern phenomenon, why, praytell, might it have registered so strongly in ice cores from the south pole?

Are you capable of looking at anything critically or are you really no more than a tool to be used by your masters as they see fit?

No answer rocks? Do you think ignoring glaring facts that prove you wrong makes your ignorance less offensive? Answer the question rocks. If the MWP was a local phenomenon to selected locations in the northern hemisphere, why does it register so strongly in ice cores taken at the south pole?
 
OleRocks: Listen carefully to yourself...

On the other hand, in the context of the long-term reconstructions, the early 20th century appears to have been a relatively cold period while the mid 20th century was comparable in warmth, by most estimates, to peak Medieval warmth (i.e., the so-called “Medieval Warm Period”). It is not the average 20th century warmth, but the magnitude of warming during the 20th century, and the level of warmth observed during the past few decades, which appear to be anomalous in a long-term context.

Remember the cartoons you posted in the OP with the mysterious captions? Why is the MWP not measured for the SAME significant factors?? In other words.. Forget normalizing to a 30 yr period of 1960 to 1990 (whateverthefuck that means) and figure out how that deviation from ADJACENT periods looked. The length of it. The rate of it.. ect???????

That would also be less prone to picking cherry years or normalizing factors...
 
ScienceDirect - Global and Planetary Change : Land surface temperature changes in Northern Iberia since 4000 yr BP, based on δ13C of speleothems

Land surface temperature changes in Northern Iberia since 4000 yr BP, based on δ13C of speleothems
Purchase
$ 39.95


References and further reading may be available for this article. To view references and further reading you must purchase this article.


Javier Martín-Chiveleta, b, , , M. Belén Muñoz-Garcíaa, b, , R. Lawrence Edwardsc, , María J. Turrerod, and Ana I. Ortegae,

a Dpt. Estratigrafía, Facultad de Ciencias Geológicas, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, 28040 Madrid, Spain

b Instituto de Geociencias (CSIC-UCM), Facultad de Ciencias Geológicas, c/ José Antonio Nováis 2, 28040 Madrid, Spain

c University of Minnesota, Department of Geology and Geophysics, 310 Pillsbury Drive SE, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA

d Ciemat, Dpt. Medioambiente, Avda. Complutense 22, 28040 Madrid, Spain

e Centro Nacional de Investigación sobre la Evolución Humana CENIEH. Paseo Sierra de Atapuerca s/n, 09002 Burgos, Spain

Received 9 June 2010; accepted 14 February 2011. Available online 22 February 2011.

Abstract
The surface temperature changes for the last 4000 years in northern inland Iberia (an area particularly sensitive to climate change) are determined by a high resolution study of carbon stable isotope records of stalagmites from three caves (Kaite, Cueva del Cobre, and Cueva Mayor) separated several tens of kilometers away in N Spain. Despite the local conditions of each cave, the isotopic series show a good overall coherence, and resulted to be strongly sensitive to surface temperature changes.

The record reflects alternating warmer and colder intervals, always within a temperature range of 1.6 °C. The timing and duration of the intervals were provided by 43 230Th–234U (ICP-MS) ages. Main climatic recognized periods are: (1) 3950–3000 yr BP: warm period punctuated by cool events around ~ 3950, 3550 and 3250 yr BP; (2) 2850–2500 yr BP cold interval (Iron Age Cold Period); (3) 2500–1650 yr BP moderate warm period (Roman Warm Period), with maximum temperatures between 2150 and 1750 yr BP; (4) 1650–1350 yr BP cold interval (Dark Ages Cold Period), with a thermal minimum at ~ 1500 yr BP; (5) 1350–750 yr BP warm period (Medieval Warm Period) punctuated by two cooler events at ~ 1250 and ~ 850 yr BP; (6) 750–100 yr BP cold period (Little Ice Age) with extremes occurring at 600–500 yr BP, 350–300 yr BP, and 150–100 yr BP; and (7) the last 150 years, characterized by rapid but no linear warming (Modern Warming). Remarkably, the presented records allow direct comparison of recent warming with former warm intervals such as the Roman or the Medieval periods. That comparison reveals the 20th century as the time with highest surface temperatures of the last 4000 years for the studied area.

Spectral analysis of the time series shows consistent climatic cycles of ~ 400, ~ 900 and ~ 1300 yr, comparable with those recognized in the North Atlantic marine record, the Greenland ice cores, and other terrestrial records for the middle–late Holocene, suggesting common climate forcing mechanisms related to changes in solar irradiance and North Atlantic circulation patterns.
 
http://www.springerlink.com/content/a42l382370422365/

bstract
The Medieval Warm Period is an interval of purportedly warm climate during the early part of the past millennium. The duration, areal extent, and even existence of the Medieval Warm Period have been debated; in some areas the climate of this interval appears to have been affected more by changes in precipitation than in temperature. Here, we provide new evidence showing that several glaciers in western North America advanced during Medieval time and that some glaciers achieved extents similar to those at the peak of the Little Ice Age, many hundred years later. The advances cannot be reconciled with a climate similar to that of the twentieth century, which has been argued to be an analog, and likely were the result of increased winter precipitation due to prolonged La Niña-like conditions that, in turn, may be linked to elevated solar activity. Changes in solar output may initiate a response in the tropical Pacific that directly impacts the El Niño/Southern Oscillation and associated North Pacific teleconnections
 
LOL oldsocks tries to bury the fact he was made a fool of again by spamming irrelevant links and data already addressed... Nice try socks why not answer the question you were asked instead of trying to bury your embarrassment?
 
LOL oldsocks tries to bury the fact he was made a fool of again by spamming irrelevant links and data already addressed... Nice try socks why not answer the question you were asked instead of trying to bury your embarrassment?

You assume that rocks understood the question, and that he understood what the material in his links was saying. In my experience with rocks, I would bet that he understands neither but is just posting what he considers to be scripture.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top