One concludes that they do not refer to the same climate:

Intro:A multi-proxy, high-resolution 1200-year lake sediment record was analysed at Marcacocha, 12 km north of Ollantaytambo, in the heartland of the Inca Empire. This record reveals a period of sustained aridity that began from AD 880, 10 followed by increased warming from AD 1100 that lasted beyond the arrival of the Spanish in AD 1532.

5.4 AD 1400–1540
This interval, which coincides with a period of rapid Inca expansion outside of the Cuzco heartland, appears to have been relatively stable from a climatic point of view.
Temperatures seemed to have remained warm, with precipitation (and corresponding lake-levels) being low. Despite this climatic stability, significant land-use changes occurred in the basin.

Whereas the graph shows no such stability in MWP warmth in fact it dives into minus 0.5C

Sorry for the misattribution, I agree with the rest of your comment about the nontoxicity of CO2 entirely and had planned to add something very similar to my own comment, but I had to go take care of a problem, so I just posted what I had finished. I had also intended to add something to the effect, that if we took a tiny fraction of the money they’re about to squander trying to suppress carbon and invested it in subsidizing the transfer of well developed American technologies for cleaning non CO2 pollutants from smokestacks and autos to developing countries like China and India, we would see real and profound improvements in not only the world environment, but the American economy as well. Of course, improving the American economy seems to be exactly opposite to the goals our politicians are striving to achieve.

Way to stay classy Phil.
But the commenter that Nasif mentioned wasn’t as off base as you other guys assumed. With the improvements in auto exhaust standards carbon monoxide is unlikely the to be the lethal agent in modern suicide by asphyxiation by automotive exhaust and CO2 probably plays more of a part than CO although the actual smoking gun is probably O2 depletion. http://journals.lww.com/amjforensicmedicine/Abstract/2002/06000/Asphyxial_Deaths_Caused_by_Automobile_Exhaust.2.aspx

Correction: it was not me who made the commentary but Sam the Skeptic.

Nonetheless, I stand on Sam the Skeptic’s, Anthony’s and Evan’s assertions because if the authors at AM Journal of Forensic Medicine attribute the deaths to high concentrations of carbon dioxide and depletion of oxygen they would be talking about asphyxiation, not intoxication, and the carbon dioxide remains as a non-hazardous product. The same happens with liquid water and water vapor; water, sand, carbon dioxide and other non toxic products suffocate, do not intoxicate.

Some Wikipedia authors have forced the definition and classification of toxic substances for making carbon dioxide and water appear as toxic substances. However, they do not change the chemistry of the body neither set off apoptosis nor stop or transmute metabolic processes, as toxic substances do; they simply asphyxiate, that is, do not permit the oxygen to act as an acceptor of electrons. It is a 101-biophysics matter.

Hyponantremia, a condition of high dilution of sodium in biological tissues for taking too much water, is not a result of toxicity of water, but an osmotic misbalance. The terminology has been corrupted at the extreme. You are toxic, I am toxic, air is toxic, water is toxic, pinto beans are toxic, and the whole Universe is toxic… This is stupid. As I have mentioned above these lines, the real and original concept of toxicity is about substances which change the chemistry of the body, induces apoptosis, and stop or alter the metabolic processes.

You have a problem with that?

REPLY: I sure do Phil. I find it abhorrent that you think such comments are OK. Explain yourself – Anthony

[REPLY - Then perhaps explain the difference between carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide . . . ~ Evan]

Way to stay classy Phil.
But the commenter that Nasif mentioned wasn’t as off base as you other guys assumed. With the improvements in auto exhaust standards carbon monoxide is unlikely the to be the lethal agent in modern suicide by asphyxiation by automotive exhaust and CO2 probably plays more of a part than CO although the actual smoking gun is probably O2 depletion. http://journals.lww.com/amjforensicmedicine/Abstract/2002/06000/Asphyxial_Deaths_Caused_by_Automobile_Exhaust.2.aspx

You have a problem with that?

REPLY: I sure do Phil. I find it abhorrent that you think such comments are OK. Explain yourself – Anthony

[REPLY - Then perhaps explain the difference between carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide . . . ~ Evan]

Current global warming is almost exclusively in the high northern latitudes, more localized than the MWP.

Kiwi wit at its finest. :)

The Maori first discovered New Zealand around 950 and the “great fleet” of settlers came sometime during the 11th century. Why was that? What was it driving thousand of people to risk their lives in canoes to resettle at this particular time? “”"

They probably heard that there were 20 sheep for every person in New Zealand, and that they made some pretty good wines; the Kiwis that is; not the sheep.

Supposedly Kupe discovered the place around 960 AD, but the actual migrations were spread out over several hundred years. They talk about the seven great canoes; but there were a bunch more than that; I can only remember the Arawa, and the Tainui; maybe there was a Takitimu, or is it Takitumu ?

Maori is a very simple language; only 14 letters; plus that impossible ng sound, and every syllable ends in a vowel; so there are no esses to make plurals, so singular and plural are the same. The vowel sounds are absolutely identical to Spanish; I happen to have a resident Spanish expert, and she says Maori is identical in vowel sounds.

To bad they killed off all the Moa; I could use a 12 foot pet bird to kick some A***.

George

Now let me see; what was happening in Europe around this time? Gee, I wonder if there was any connection between warm weather in Europe and a large civilization flourishing in North America?

How about those Mongols, too; Temujin was declared Great Ruler (Genghis Khan) in 1206, but of course this nomadic tribe had been growing in power for a number of years. After Genghis Khan lead the explosion out of the Gobi (a place traditionally limited in food supply because it`s a desert) his band of horseback nomads conquered much of the civilized world and ruled an empire far larger than that of Julius Caesar`s for over a century. Now, why did a bunch of ignorant horsemen living in the desert suddenly unite and invade all of the surrounding country?

The Maori first discovered New Zealand around 950 and the “great fleet” of settlers came sometime during the 11th century. Why was that? What was it driving thousand of people to risk their lives in canoes to resettle at this particular time?

We could go on and on with this.

Ray (12:51:22) :
I think I know why great civilizations collapse one it get cold… [sic]

People stay indoors and don’t socialise anymore. All the bonds in society break down and nobody cares anymore. I see that every winter.

Actually, I have heard it claimed that the genius that informed the American and industrial revolutions, and the intellectual fervor that accompanied them, were a result of the cold weather in places like Boston keeping one’s mind on indoor studies, as opposed to the torpid South, where people lay around on their porches languidly sipping mint juleps and visiting.

That, of course, is a conceit one hears in places like Harvard.

/Mr Lynn

People stay indoors and don’t socialise anymore. All the bonds in society break down and nobody cares anymore. I see that every winter.

“But parsnips, yams, and sweet potatoes?

I’d rather die.”

Have you ever had young parsnips roasted to a golden brown. Better than roast potatoes- Truly delicious. Sweet potatoes are great in Curries.

tonyb

Seriously, I also would like to know how our brighter minds on this site reconcile the difference in timeline given for the “European” MWP and the SH MWP (if that is an appropriate way to distinguish) as implied by the subject paper.

The references on Wiki re: MWP cite a 1979 paper (presumably untainted by a zeal for AGW-targeted grant funding) that says a stalagmite in New Zealand indicated a MWP of 1050-1400. This seems to correspond more closely to the warm period that caused the Incas, also in SH, to flourish although it ends 100+ years earlier.

Does this imply that there were warm periods in both hemispheres but that regionally these phenomena were far from simultaneous? Would this in turn imply that something other than well-mixed GHG (or even sunspots), which presumably would impact global temps more uniformly, is the primary driver?

To my little pea-brain, it would seem that oceans are the regulators and have the capacity to regulate on a short-term (El Nino/La Nina) as well as longer-term MWP/LIA basis. But don’t they have to get the heat they absorb/release from somewhere…?