Today while looking for something else I came across an interesting web page on the National Climatic Data Center Server that showed a study from 2002
A continuous multimillennial ring-width chronology in Yamal, northwestern Siberia (PDF) by Rashit M. Hantemirov and Stepan G. Shiyatov
That study was tremendously well done, with over 2000 cores, seemed pretty germane to the issues of paleodendroclimatology we’ve been discussing as of late. Jeff Id touched on it breifly at the Air Vent in Circling Yamal – delinquent treering records?
A WUWT readers know, the Briffa tree ring data that purports to show a “hockey stick” of warming in the late 20th century has now become highly suspect, and appears to have been the result of hand selected trees as opposed to using the larger data set available for the region.
OK, first the obligatory Briffa (Hadley Climate Research Unit) tree ring data versus Steve McIntyre’s plot of the recently available Schweingruber data from the same region.

The Hantemirov- Shiyatov (HS) tree ring data that I downloaded from the NCDC is available from their FTP server here. I simply downloaded it and plotted it from the present back to the year 0AD (even though it extends much further back to the year 2067 BC) so that it would have a similar x scale to the Briffa data plot above for easy comparison. I also plotted a polynomial curve fit to the data to illustrate trend slope, plus a 30 year running average since 30 years is our currently accepted period for climate analysis.
Compare it to the Briffa (CRU) data above.

When I first saw this plot, I thought I had done something wrong. It was, well, just too flat. But I double checked my data import, the plot, the tools used to plot, and the output by running it 2 more times from scratch. Then I had Jeff Id over at the air vent take a look at it. He concurs that I’ve plotted the data correctly.
The trend is flat as road kill for the past 2000 years, though it does show an ever so slight cooling.
So the next task was to look at more recent times. Here’s the last 200 years of the data:

Still flat as road kill.
Finally, since Tom P made a big deal out of the late 20th century with his analysis where he made the mistake of combining two data sets that had different end points, I thought I’d show the late 20th century also:

Still flat.
Note that in the graph done by Steve McIntyre showing both Briffa and Schweingruber data, both of those data sets are also quite flat until we get into the late 20th century. So out of the 3 data sets we’ve looked at, the Briffa data, the data kept hidden for almost 10 years, is the only one that shows any propensity for sudden 20th century warming.
But don’t take my word for it that this record is so flat. Look at the authors results. Their results seem identical to what I’ve plotted. Here is the last 2000 years of data charted taken from their paper:
Figure 8 Reconstructed southern Yamal mean June–July temperature anomalies relative to mean of the full reconstructed series.
But for those that want more close up views, I’ve done some additional graphs. Since the authors used a 50 year window in one of their graphs I did the same. I also changed the Y scale to show a zoomed in +/- 0.3°C as the range rather than the +/- 4.0°C the authors used in the plot above. Some details begin to emerge, but once again the trend is essentially flat, and slightly negative.

And here are the last 200 years zoomed

The period around 1800 was warmer than the late 20th century according to the data viewed this way, but we can see that slight rise in temperature for the 20th century. However compared to the rest of the Yamal HS data record it appears insignificant.
The authors insist that this wood contains a valid climatological record.
Holocene deposits in the southern Yamal Peninsula contain a large amount of subfossil tree remains: tree trunks, roots and branches. This is the result of intensive accumulation and the good preservation of buried wood in the permafrost. The occurrence of this material in the present-day tundra zone of the Yamal Peninsula was described for the first time by Zhitkov (1913). Later, Tikhomirov (1941) showed that, on the evidence of remains of trees preserved in peat, during the warmest period of the Holocene, the northern tree-line reached the central region of the Yamal Peninsula (up to 70°N), whereas today the polar timberline passes through the southernmost part of the peninsula at a latitude of 67°309 N.
By 1964, attention had been drawn to the potential significance of Yamal subfossil wood for reconstructing climatic and other natural processes over many thousand years, as a result of fieldwork carried out within the valley of the Khadytayakha River in the southern part of the Yamal Peninsula (Shiyatov and Surkov, 1990).
I was impressed with the amount of field work that went into this paper. The authors write:
We travelled by helicopter to the upper reaches of the river to be sampled. Small boats were then used for locating and collecting cross-sections from wood exposed along the riverbanks. It was also possible, when going with the stream, to explore the nearest lakes.
The best-preserved material from an individual tree is usually found at the base of the trunk, near to the roots. However, many of these remains are radially cracked and it is necessary to tie cross-sections, cut from these trunks or roots, using aluminum wire before sawing. This wire is left in place afterwards as the sections are air-dried.
Here’s how they got many of the tree samples using a rubber boat:
And here is how they sum up the last 2000 years from a tree line analysis they did:
From the beginning of the first century bc to about the start of the sixth century ad, generally warm conditions prevailed. Then began a quasi 400-year oscillation of temperature, cooling occurring in about 550–700, 950–1100, 1350–1500 and 1700–1900. Warming occurred in the intermediate periods and during the twentieth century. The more northerly tree-line suggests that the most favourable conditions during the last two millennia apparently occurred at around ad 500 and during the period 1200–1300. It is interesting to note that the current position of the tree-line in Yamal is south of the position it has attained during most of the last three and a half millennia, and it may well be that it has not yet shifted fully in response to the warming of the last century.
Interestingly while the authors note some warming in the last century, they don’t draw a lot of attention to it, or refer to it as being “unprecedented” in any way. There’s no graphs of nor mention of “hockey stocks” either.
Here’s the link to the source data:
ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/paleo/treering/reconstructions/asia/russia/yamal_2002.txt
Feel free to make some plots of your own.
===
UPDATE: While I had originally surmised this data supported Steve McIntyre’s recent findings with respect to Briffa, Steve notes in comments that the methodology is different between the two data sets:
Steve McIntyre: I’ve made MANY references to Hantemirov and Shiyatov 2002 in my posts on Yamal. In my first post on Yamal after getting access to the data, I discussed the Hantemirov and Shiyatov 2002 reconstruction as archived at NCDC see http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=7142
In that post, I observed that the standardization method used in H and S 2002 was different than Briffa 2000, that the H and S method would be unable to recover centennial scale variability and that it was not relevant to the issues at hand.
The H and S reconstruction does not “support” my point in respect to Yamal. It’s irrelevant to it.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.


Hence there was no MWP at all in western Syberia??
Apparently, Climate is not Global.
tokyoboy (20:57:19) :
The more northerly tree-line suggests that the most favourable conditions during the last two millennia apparently occurred at around ad 500 and during the period 1200–1300. It is interesting to note that the current position of the tree-line in Yamal is south of the position it has attained during most of the last three and a half millennia, and it may well be that it has not yet shifted fully in response to the warming of the last century.
It looks like they infer a delay, a ‘shift’. So the 1200-1300 could be the delay to the MWP.
This was a very thorough study with over 2000 tree cores and no ridiculous hockey stick.
from another thread:
Here’s another interesting dissertation with descriptions of the Yamal trees and environment:
http://vak.ed.gov.ru/common/img/uploaded/files/vak/announcements/biolog/2009/13-07/KHantemirovRM.pdf
From the same document a hockey stick!:
Figure 18- of change in the mean temperature of summer (deviations from the average), smoothed by 50-year filter, and the dynamics of polar timber line
Trees make lousy thermometers. Tree-lines however, I have no problems with.
REPLY: Tree lines are absolutes for temperature, plotting the movement of absolutes would seem more sensible since there are so many competing factors at play for tree ring growth as I’ve already noted here:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/09/28/a-look-at-treemometers-and-tree-ring-growth/
-Anthony
Wonder how a Yamal rainfall overlay would look. I am thinking in particular of that upswing from 1966 (approx) to 1990 on the graph above “Fig 8” (they may need to be renumbered),that could be a good rainfall period. That cross sectional analysis with aluminium wire to stop splintering sounds thorough.
It looks like they find, as has been noted by others like Craig Loehle, that tree rings are not a reliable proxy for determining temperature. Tree lines have value for that, yes. Tree rings, no.
At some point, the idea of trees as thermometers is going to end up flushed down the toilet. What McIntyre’s work really shows is that the long handle of the hockey stick isn’t any more valid than the bogus blade.
What the heck happened between 1800-1840?
Tongue in cheek warning!!!!!!
Sarcasm alarm!!!!!!
Snip alert!!!!!!
This reminds me of perspective. The predators hunting for ants in the world probably don’t see much difference in ant size. But zoom in to the ant’s view and you get huge differences between humans, monkeys, ant eaters, birds, and bugs that eat ants.
Skeptics look at ants and go “eh”. AGW’ers are ants looking at things that eat ants and die from alarm! Could explain why Skeptics see “flat”, and AGW’ers see “unprecedented warming”.
We talk of reality here while those in power talk of regulating CO2
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/09/30/AR2009093002854.html The message is that our government wants to control and tax everyone based on CO2 stories, while the science does not even remotely support Boxer, Lisa Jackson, Pelosi, Waxman or Obama. Have they not heard the facts or are they just not listening.
And I repeat:
I think that I shall never see
A worse thermometer than a tree
I’ve made MANY references to Hantemirov and Shiyatov 2002 in my posts on Yamal. In my first post on Yamal after getting access to the data, I discussed the Hantemirov and Shiyatov 2002 reconstruction as archived at NCDC see http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=7142
In that post, I observed that the standardization method used in H and S 2002 was different than Briffa 2000, that the H and S method would be unable to recover centennial scale variability and that it was not relevant to the issues at hand.
The H and S reconstruction does not “support” my point in respect to Yamal. It’s irrelevant to it.
Sorry bout that, Steve
REPLY: No worries, I was just following something I thought was interesting. I’ll change the title to reflect your points. – Anthony
Gene Nemetz (21:11:31) :
tokyoboy (20:57:19) :
>It looks like they infer a delay, a ’shift’. So the 1200-1300
>could be the delay to the MWP.
Thanks. A possibly relevant fact is that most temperature measuring sites here in Japan show a clear peak at around 1960, not around 1940 as is the case for many sites in other countries. This may reflect a difference in the modes of ocean currents, I suppose.
The science of dendroclimatology is not settled.
Pamela Gray (21:25:37) : “…zoom in to the ant’s view and you get huge differences between humans, monkeys, ant eaters, birds, and bugs that eat ants…”
For those of you who simply must see the world from the ant’s point of view:
http://flashfictionpost.wordpress.com/2008/09/15/the-problem-of-rocks-that-move/
I’ve seen the “Tom P” response mentioned above on Open Mind as well, but am not familiar with it and have not been able find it. Can anyone help me out with a link?
cheers
REPLY: Read all about it here: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/09/29/more-broken-hockey-stick-fallout-audit-of-an-audit-of-an-auditor/
Phillip Bratby (22:10:33) : “The science of dendroclimatology is not settled.”
I still think it’s dendrophrenology. Or diddlerclimatology.
“At high latitudes, interannual variability in ring width is known
to correlate well with variations in summer temperature. To de ne
the optimum season for this study, we correlated individual
monthly mean temperature series with the prewhitened chronology.
The temperature data used were observations from the
Salekhard meteorological station located 150 km to the southwest
of the research area. Correlations were calculated for the period
ad 1883–1996.
The largest correlation coef cients show that ring width is
increased in association with warm conditions during June and,
more especially, during July, with correlation coef cients for June
of 0.35 and for July of 0.63. An average of June and July mean
temperatures was therefore selected as the predictand to be reconstructed
using these tree-ring data.”
This is from page 5 of the H&S link,and it it boils to ‘are the correlation coefficients high enough’ to assume a reliable temperature estimate. Also one uncertainty is correlated against another(Met station data and ring width).
June and July were combined and the correlations do not look high to me but then I am not a Dendro.
A brilliant effort. But I am deeply worried as to why the data was suppressed in the first place and why it took so long to surface. There is more than just a few unscrupulous scientists involved in this matter.
The over 2000 cores, the thoroughness, reminds of another post here at WattsUpWithThat about Morton D. Winsberg and his work on climate in Florida being affected by land use. He likes to be thorough too.
“I don’t play golf,” he explains. “I prefer to play with aggregate data.”
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/02/10/floridatrend-its-hot-but-dont-blame-global-warming/#more-5542
WattsUpWithThat : 2009 Best Science Blog!
Tree rings are obviously a waste of time when looking at temperature reconstruction, thankfully they are good at storing 14C enabling a reliable solar proxy record as confirmed now by 10Be.
[snip too sly on self promotion there, sorry]
Jeff Id (21:18:37) : said
“Trees make lousy thermometers. Tree-lines however, I have no problems with.”
REPLY: Tree lines are absolutes for temperature, plotting the movement of absolutes would seem more sensible since there are so many competing factors at play for tree ring growth as I’ve already noted here:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/09/28/a-look-at-treemometers-and-tree-ring-growth/
-Anthony”
I have no problem either with tree lines-I have cited them before as marking Bronze age and MWP settlements on nearby (to me!) Dartmoor in South West England.
However, even reading the link Anthony provides I can not find any indication of the time scales needed for tree lines to shift, nor if this time lag differs according to the type of trees. Can anyone define any time lines to go with the tree lines?
tonyb
Whatever happened to the Medieval Warm Period? That seems to have disappeared too.