Nasa climate scientists: We said 2014 the warmest year on record..but only 38% sure we were right

[Kosh]

Tell us Ian, how cold do you and Mr Homewood think it was last year? Do you believe the Earth is cooling off?

Looks like the Earth is cooling, what does the AGW cult see?

 

[Crick]

On a geological scale? Really Ian? Not very impressive. We were talking about a trend that began 14 years ago. Where does that fall on your graphic? Three-fourths of the way through the last pixel?

 

[Billy_Bob]

Okay, here's the last 50 years in 3 month steps:

Poor Crick found one leg of a Sine Wave that is earths cyclical pattern...

 

[westwall]

I have yet to see an explanation why they keep forgetting the mid-evil warm period, they have found evidence of crocodiles as far north as New England, but what we have now is record setting, give me a break.

The 'mid-evil' warm period was a slow and gradual change that took about 450 years. We've surpassed it. And have done so in about 50 years.

Untrue. The MWP was much warmer than the current day. Wine grapes were able to be planted as far north as Scotland. Good luck trying to do that today. Also the warming was NOT gradual during the MWP, it was sudden and global. Over 100 peer reviewed papers show warming in the northern and southern hemispheres. Here in my own backyard the MWP was 2 degree's C warmer during the MWP then the present day.


http://www.fs.fed.us/psw/publications/millar/psw_2006_millar027.pdf

 

[IanC]

On a geological scale? Really Ian? Not very impressive. We were talking about a trend that began 14 years ago. Where does that fall on your graphic? Three-fourths of the way through the last pixel?

Are you addressing me?

Did you comment on your explanation for why the CET went up?

 

[saveliberty]

I am waiting for Faithers to suggest processed cheese is rediscovered every ten million years or so and throws the planet in to a methane gas cycle that overheats the Earth and makes it smelly....

 

[Old Rocks]

http://www.fs.fed.us/psw/publications/millar/psw_2006_millar027.pdf

Deadwood tree stems scattered above treeline on tephra-covered slopes of Whitewing Mtn (3051 m) and San Joaquin Ridge (3122 m) show evidence of being killed in an eruption from adjacent Glass Creek Vent, Inyo Craters. Using tree-ring methods, we dated deadwood to AD 815– 1350 and infer from death dates that the eruption occurred in late summer AD 1350. Based on wood anatomy, we identified deadwood species as
Pinus albicaulis, P. monticola, P. lambertiana, P. contorta, P. jeffreyi, and Tsuga mertensiana. Only P. albicaulis grows at these elevations currently; P. lambertiana is not locally native. Using contemporary distributions of the species, we modeled paleoclimate during the time of sympatry to be significantly warmer (+3.2°C annual minimum temperature) and slightly drier (−24 mm annual precipitation) than present, resembling values projected for California in the next 70–100 yr.
© 2006 University of Washington. All rights reserved.

Very small area from which to make a statement concerning the climate of the whole world.

 

[Old Rocks]

A more comprehensive paper here.

An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie

Abstract
A frequent conclusion based on study of individual records from the so-called Medieval Warm Period (∼1000-1300 A.D.) is that the present warmth of the 20 th century is not unusual and therefore cannot be taken as an indication of forced climate change from greenhouse gas emissions. This conclusion is not supported by published composites of Northern Hemisphere climate change, but the conclusions of such syntheses are often either ignored or challenged. In this paper, we revisit the controversy by incorporating additional time series not used in earlier hemispheric compilations. Another difference is that the present reconstruction uses records that are only 900–1000 years long, thereby, avoiding the potential problem of uncertainties introduced by using different numbers of records at different times. Despite clear evidence for Medieval warmth greater than present in some individual records, the new hemispheric composite supports the principal conclusion of earlier hemispheric reconstructions and, furthermore, indicates that maximum Medieval warmth was restricted to two-three 20–30 year intervals, with composite values during these times being only comparable to the mid-20 th century warm time interval. Failure to substantiate hemispheric warmth greater than the present consistently occurs in composites because there are significant offsets in timing of warmth in different regions; ignoring these offsets can lead to serious errors concerning inferences about the magnitude of Medieval warmth and its relevance to interpretation of late 20 th century warming.

 

[Old Rocks]

Again, one small area, hardly acceptable to judge the whole of the world by what we see here.

Summer temperatures during the Medieval Warm Period and Little Ice Age inferred from varved proglacial lake sediments in southern Alaska - Springer

Abstract
For the heavily glaciated mountains of southern Alaska, few high-resolution, millennial-scale proxy temperature reconstructions are available for comparison with modern temperatures or with the history of glacier fluctuations. Recent catastrophic drainage of glacier-dammed Iceberg Lake, on the northern margin of the Bagley Icefield, exposed subaerial outcrops of varved lacustrine sediments that span the period 442–1998 AD. Here, an updated chronology of varve thickness measurements is used to quantitatively reconstruct melt-season temperature anomalies. From 1958 to 1998, varve thickness has a positive and marginally significant correlation with May–June temperatures at the nearest coastal measurement stations. Varve sensitivity to temperature has changed over time, however, in response to lake level changes in 1957 and earlier. I compensate for this by log-transforming the varve thickness chronology, and also by using a 400-year-long tree-ring-based temperature proxy to reconstruct melt-season temperatures at Iceberg Lake. Regression against this longer proxy record is statistically weak, but spans the full range of occupied lake levels and varve sensitivities. Reconstructed temperature anomalies have broad confidence intervals, but nominally span 1.1°C over the last 1500+ years. Maximum temperatures occurred in the late twentieth century, with a minimum in the late sixth century. The Little Ice Age is present as three cool periods between 1350 and 1850 AD with maximum cooling around 1650 AD. A Medieval Warm Period is evident from 1000 to 1100 AD, but the temperature reconstruction suggests it was less warm than recent decades—an observation supported by independent geological evidence of recent glacier retreat that is unprecedented over the period of record.

 

[Old Rocks]

I am waiting for Faithers to suggest processed cheese is rediscovered every ten million years or so and throws the planet in to a methane gas cycle that overheats the Earth and makes it smelly....

I am waiting for you to actually say something that is remotely intelligent.

 

[saveliberty]

Faithers are some of the best entertainment on USMB.

 

[Billy_Bob]

I am waiting for Faithers to suggest processed cheese is rediscovered every ten million years or so and throws the planet in to a methane gas cycle that overheats the Earth and makes it smelly....

I am waiting for you to actually say something that is remotely intelligent.

Funny, That is what we think about you.

You post lots of pellets of shit claiming that they are to small to judge the earths systems by yet you cherry pick your shit pellets and claim that your small areas are indicative of it. You are nothing but a paid Obama phone shill.

Now how about you try to post anything intelligent... I am not going to hold my breath though. You haven't even addressed the empirical evidence i have posted several times showing your belief a lie. I wonder why that is...

 

[westwall]

Again, one small area, hardly acceptable to judge the whole of the world by what we see here.

Summer temperatures during the Medieval Warm Period and Little Ice Age inferred from varved proglacial lake sediments in southern Alaska - Springer

Abstract
For the heavily glaciated mountains of southern Alaska, few high-resolution, millennial-scale proxy temperature reconstructions are available for comparison with modern temperatures or with the history of glacier fluctuations. Recent catastrophic drainage of glacier-dammed Iceberg Lake, on the northern margin of the Bagley Icefield, exposed subaerial outcrops of varved lacustrine sediments that span the period 442–1998 AD. Here, an updated chronology of varve thickness measurements is used to quantitatively reconstruct melt-season temperature anomalies. From 1958 to 1998, varve thickness has a positive and marginally significant correlation with May–June temperatures at the nearest coastal measurement stations. Varve sensitivity to temperature has changed over time, however, in response to lake level changes in 1957 and earlier. I compensate for this by log-transforming the varve thickness chronology, and also by using a 400-year-long tree-ring-based temperature proxy to reconstruct melt-season temperatures at Iceberg Lake. Regression against this longer proxy record is statistically weak, but spans the full range of occupied lake levels and varve sensitivities. Reconstructed temperature anomalies have broad confidence intervals, but nominally span 1.1°C over the last 1500+ years. Maximum temperatures occurred in the late twentieth century, with a minimum in the late sixth century. The Little Ice Age is present as three cool periods between 1350 and 1850 AD with maximum cooling around 1650 AD. A Medieval Warm Period is evident from 1000 to 1100 AD, but the temperature reconstruction suggests it was less warm than recent decades—an observation supported by independent geological evidence of recent glacier retreat that is unprecedented over the period of record.

Yes, "one small area" but those "small areas" are all over the world. So, what to make of them? Either, those "small little areas" were incredibly strange, and somehow defied the laws of physics by being extremely small localized areas that somehow managed to stay extremely warm compared to the areas around them....or, the whole planet was warmer, and for a very long time.

How do we reconcile these two POV? Well, the best way is too look at OTHER sources of information and wouldn't you know it, those pesky priests and natural scientists back then kept pretty good records (they had to for tax purposes) and they show beyond any question that the MWP was both warmer and wetter than the present day.

The records from China say the same thing. And from Japan. The records are also corroborated by archeological information from central and south America.

No olfraud, no matter how desperately you fools try and disappear the MWP, real facts and real historical data is always going to bite you in the ass.




"Executive Summary
The Earth currently is experiencing a warming trend, but there is scientifi
c evidence that human
activities have little to do with it. Instead, the warming seems to be part of a 1,500-year cycle (plus or
minus 500 years) of moderate temperature swings.
It has long been accepted that the Earth has experienced climate cycles, most notably the 90,000-
year Ice Age cycles. But in the past 20 years or so, modern science has discovered evidence that within
those broad Ice Age cycles, the Earth also experiences 1,500-year warming-cooling cycles. The Earth
has been in the Modern Warming portion of the current cycle since about 1850, following a Little Ice Age
from about 1300 to 1850. It appears likely that warming will continue for some time into the future, per
-
haps 200 years or more, regardless of human activity.
Evidence of the global nature of the 1,500-year climate cycles includes very long-term proxies for
temperature change — ice cores, seabed and lake sediments, and fossils of pollen grains and tiny sea crea
-
tures. There are also shorter-term proxies — cave stalagmites, tree rings from trees both living and buried,
boreholes and a wide variety of other temperature proxies"


http://ruby.fgcu.edu/courses/twimberley/EnviroPhilo/Unstoppable.pdf

 

[mamooth]

Untrue. The MWP was much warmer than the current day. Wine grapes were able to be planted as far north as Scotland. Good luck trying to do that today.

It's interesting to see how denier myths evolve. The myth was originally "grown in England", but since people showed so many examples of how wine grapes are still grown in England and have always been grown in England, the deniers have moved their grape example further north into Scotland. Given how much importance they put in their myth (that grapes can't be grown now in Scotland), it almost seems cruel to show them Adam Smith describing how grapes were grown in Scotland during his time.

Adam Smith on growing grapes in Scotland Utopia - you are standing in it

Also the warming was NOT gradual during the MWP, it was sudden and global. Over 100 peer reviewed papers show warming in the northern and southern hemispheres. Here in my own backyard the MWP was 2 degree's C warmer during the MWP then the present day.

http://www.fs.fed.us/psw/publications/millar/psw_2006_millar027.pdf

 

[mamooth]

Yes, "one small area" but those "small areas" are all over the world. So, what to make of them? Either, those "small little areas" were incredibly strange, and somehow defied the laws of physics by being extremely small localized areas that somehow managed to stay extremely warm compared to the areas around them....or, the whole planet was warmer, and for a very long time.

If the MWP was global, data for the whole world would show it for the whole period.

It doesn't. Not even close. The data shows pretty much the opposite. Most spots outside of the northern Europe area show no warming, while some scattered spots show brief warming, with each scattered spot warming during a different time than the other scattered spots.

You're relying on a brazen and obvious cherrypicking fallacy. Good scientists instantly recognize your fallacy, which is why they reject your pseudoscience.

How do we reconcile these two POV? Well, the best way is too look at OTHER sources of information and wouldn't you know it, those pesky priests and natural scientists back then kept pretty good records (they had to for tax purposes) and they show beyond any question that the MWP was both warmer and wetter than the present day.

The records from China say the same thing. And from Japan. The records are also corroborated by archeological information from central and south America.

That's just your cherrypicking fallacy again, mixed in with a lot of handwaving.

No olfraud, no matter how desperately you fools try and disappear the MWP, real facts and real historical data is always going to bite you in the ass.

Is it that you don't understand what a cherrypicking fallacy is? Or is that you do understand, and just don't care, because the big lie pushes your cult agenda?

You can keep raging in your cult bubble, but the outside world is going to keep ignoring you. That's not because of a vast socialist conspiracy; it's because your science sucks.

 

[westwall]

Untrue. The MWP was much warmer than the current day. Wine grapes were able to be planted as far north as Scotland. Good luck trying to do that today.

It's interesting to see how denier myths evolve. The myth was originally "grown in England", but since people showed so many examples of how wine grapes are still grown in England and have always been grown in England, the deniers have moved their grape example further north into Scotland. Given how much importance they put in their myth (that grapes can't be grown now in Scotland), it almost seems cruel to show them Adam Smith describing how grapes were grown in Scotland during his time.

Adam Smith on growing grapes in Scotland Utopia - you are standing in it

Also the warming was NOT gradual during the MWP, it was sudden and global. Over 100 peer reviewed papers show warming in the northern and southern hemispheres. Here in my own backyard the MWP was 2 degree's C warmer during the MWP then the present day.

http://www.fs.fed.us/psw/publications/millar/psw_2006_millar027.pdf

No, the point was how easy it was for them to be grown in England then with no modern contrivances as opposed to now, where they must use those contrivances to grow them. During the MWP England rivaled France in wine production. How is that working now? BTW, the most northerly vineyard in the present day is in Norway. A south facing slope and it benefits from the Gulf Stream which warms the surrounding area.

They are also getting ready to harvest the first grapes from a vineyard in the Firth of Forth area, I believe this year, with once again a south facing slope and benefits of the current.

 

[westwall]

Yes, "one small area" but those "small areas" are all over the world. So, what to make of them? Either, those "small little areas" were incredibly strange, and somehow defied the laws of physics by being extremely small localized areas that somehow managed to stay extremely warm compared to the areas around them....or, the whole planet was warmer, and for a very long time.

If the MWP was global, data for the whole world would show it for the whole period.

It doesn't. Not even close. The data shows pretty much the opposite. Most spots outside of the northern Europe area show no warming, while some scattered spots show brief warming, with each scattered spot warming during a different time than the other scattered spots.

You're relying on a brazen and obvious cherrypicking fallacy. Good scientists instantly recognize your fallacy, which is why they reject your pseudoscience.

How do we reconcile these two POV? Well, the best way is too look at OTHER sources of information and wouldn't you know it, those pesky priests and natural scientists back then kept pretty good records (they had to for tax purposes) and they show beyond any question that the MWP was both warmer and wetter than the present day.

The records from China say the same thing. And from Japan. The records are also corroborated by archeological information from central and south America.

That's just your cherrypicking fallacy again, mixed in with a lot of handwaving.

No olfraud, no matter how desperately you fools try and disappear the MWP, real facts and real historical data is always going to bite you in the ass.

Is it that you don't understand what a cherrypicking fallacy is? Or is that you do understand, and just don't care, because the big lie pushes your cult agenda?

You can keep raging in your cult bubble, but the outside world is going to keep ignoring you. That's not because of a vast socialist conspiracy; it's because your science sucks.

And it does. Northern hemisphere, or southern hemisphere. It doesn't matter. The MWP was warmer, and global in nature. I have already posted on this forum links to over 25 papers that show the warming.

 

[Old Rocks]

Yes, and one of your papers, based on ocean sediments from the Indian Ocean, stated that they estimated the whole of the warming in the MWP, worldwide, to be no more than 0.2 C. Where we have already quadrupled that today.

 

[mamooth]

No, the point was how easy it was for them to be grown in England then with no modern contrivances as opposed to now, where they must use those contrivances to grow them.

Uh-oh! Another denier myth in danger! Move those goalposts fast!

Please explain more about these "modern contrivances" you've suddenly decided are the crux of the issue. Are you claiming a south-facing slope or a hotbed is a modern contrivance?

During the MWP England rivaled France in wine production. How is that working now?

Now you're just making stuff up. If you're not lying, then you'll be able to back up your nutty claim there. Please do so.

BTW, the most northerly vineyard in the present day is in Norway. A south facing slope and it benefits from the Gulf Stream which warms the surrounding area.

They are also getting ready to harvest the first grapes from a vineyard in the Firth of Forth area, I believe this year, with once again a south facing slope and benefits of the current.

 

[westwall]

Yes, and one of your papers, based on ocean sediments from the Indian Ocean, stated that they estimated the whole of the warming in the MWP, worldwide, to be no more than 0.2 C. Where we have already quadrupled that today.

No, in the Sierra Nevada mountains it was over two degrees, in the Indian ocean near the Equator it was indeed 0.2C (they never claimed it for the world wide temp) but then, warming at the equator is always the least. Isn't it. It's the Poles and Temperate Zones that experience the greatest warming.