Jo Nova finds the Medieval Warm Period

From Jo Nova a look at how the MWP looks when other data is used, not just a few trees in Yamal.

These maps and graphs make it clear just how brazen the fraud of the Hockey Stick is.

World Map of temperatures and studies showing warming

Click to enlarge

It’s clear that the world was warmer during medieval times. Marked on the map are study after study (all peer-reviewed) from all around the world with results of temperatures from the medieval time compared to today. These use ice cores, stalagmites, sediments, and isotopes. They agree with 6,144 boreholes around the world which found that temperatures were about 0.5°C warmer world wide.

Huang et al Boreholes graph of world temperatures

Bishop Pachuri of the IPCC and his wind powered staff

What follows is a sordid tale of a graph that overthrew decades of work, conveniently fitted the climate models, and was lauded triumphantly in glossy publication after publication. But then it was crushed when an unpaid analyst stripped it bare. It had been published in the highest most prestigious journal, Nature, but no one had checked it before or after it was spread far and wide. Not Nature, not the IPCC, not any other climate researcher.

In 1995 everyone agreed the world was warmer in medieval times, but CO2 was low then and that didn’t fit with climate models. In 1998, suddenly Michael Mann ignored the other studies and produced a graph that scared the world — tree rings show the “1990’s was the hottest decade for a thousand years”. Now temperatures exactly “fit” the rise in carbon! The IPCC used the graph all over their 2001 report. Government departments copied it. The media told everyone.

But Steven McIntyre was suspicious. He wanted to verify it, yet Mann repeatedly refused to provide his data or methods — normally a basic requirement of any scientific paper. It took legal action to get the information that should have been freely available. Within days McIntyre showed that the statistics were so flawed that you could feed in random data, and still make the same hockey stick shape nine times out of ten. Mann had left out some tree rings he said he’d included. If someone did a graph like this in a stock prospectus, they would be jailed.

GRAPH: Mann's Hockey stick graph wiped out the midieval warm period with statistical trickery.

Astonishingly, Nature refused to publish the correction. It was published elsewhere, and backed up by the Wegman Report, an independent committee of statistical experts.

GRAPH: Briffa's reconstruction was affected by one freak tree.

In 2009 McIntyre did it again with Briffa’s Hockey Stick. After asking and waiting three years for the data, it took just three days to expose it too as baseless. For nine years Briffa had concealed that he only had 12 trees in the sample from 1990 onwards, and that one freakish tree virtually transformed the graph. When McIntyre graphed another 34 trees from the same region of Russia, there was no Hockey Stick.

The sharp upward swing of the graph was due to one single tree in Yamal.

Skeptical scientists have literally hundreds of samples. Unskeptical scientists have one tree in Yamal, and a few flawed bristlecones…

Climate models don’t know why it was warmer 800 years ago.

The models are wrong.

The so-called “expert review” is meaningless. The IPCC say 2,500 experts review their reports, but those same “experts” made the baseless Hockey Stick graph their logo in 2001.

Craig Loehle used 18 proxies to graph the last 2000 years.

Craig Loehle used 18 other proxies. Temperatures were higher 1000 years ago, & cooler 300 years ago. We started warming long before cars and powerstations were invented. There’s little correlation with CO2 levels.

Sources: Loehle 2007, Haung and Pollack 1997, See co2science.org for all the other peer reviewed studies to go with every orange dot on the map.  McIntyre & McKitrick 2003 and 2005, and update, Mann et al 1998, Briffa 2006, read McIntyre at climateaudit.com, see “ClimateGate”, and  Monckton “What Hockey Stick” (Science and Public Policy Institute paper)


This is Page 8 & 9 The Skeptics Handbook II. 20 page PDF

I know a similar graph went up a couple of days ago around the web. The skeptics Handbook II was published on Friday Nov 20.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: Thanks to Craig Idso of CO2science.org for his fabulous collation of research and his Medieval Warming Project which is an excellent resource, try the animated map!  A big thank you to John N for his work in helping to create the map.


Sponsored IT training links:

Get real 642-374 question for real success. No need to go through dozen of books. Just download 70-291 study pack and pass your RH202 in single attempt.


5 2 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

95 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
SABR Matt
December 4, 2009 4:12 am

pwn3d
Seriously…it is beyond ridiculous how bad the science has been in this field the last two decades. 🙁

Dave
December 4, 2009 4:14 am

Bet you won’t find this debated at Copenhagen or reported on the BBC or Sky.
Is that because the science is proven and we only have, er, twenty or is it ten days to save the world?

December 4, 2009 4:20 am
Jean Meeus
December 4, 2009 4:26 am

I don’t believe in AGW, but I have a question about the graph “The real shape of the last 2000 years”. That drawing shows that during the Medieval Warm Period the mean global temperature was only about 0.5 °C warmer than now, and the Little Ice Age only 0.5 °C cooler than now.
Can half a degree centigrade have such an influence on the climate? You can hardly feel such a very slight temperature difference!

William Bowie
December 4, 2009 4:28 am

A great short summary that is something that canbe given to those currently bemused by the conflict between the science and Goreism. Thank you.

lee
December 4, 2009 4:28 am

Well that’s thrown a falx in the works…..

Rhys Jaggar
December 4, 2009 4:30 am

I understand from reading your blogs some months ago that other researchers were trying to piece together reports from the UK navy over a few centuries to determine the extent of ice around the world, particularly at the entry to the NW passage.
Has that been completed yet as its answers might prove most informative at this epochal time…..?

nofreewind
December 4, 2009 4:30 am

Now the “tone” on CNBC has completely changed, skeptics are coming out of the woodwork! ClimateChange is now referred to as a “theory”. I wonder if this has anything to do with the fact that NBC/MSNBC/CNBC is no longer owned by GE?

Gösta Oscarsson
December 4, 2009 4:35 am

I have waited for this article for two years. I have in parallel studied WUWT and Co2 Science, and what they have refered has been the ultimate argument against Mann-made anihilation of the Medieval Warm Period. Well good that this finally reaches the 100.000 readers of WUWT today.
I have in vain recommended journalists of the Mainstream Media in Sweden to interview the scientific foot soldiers, doing this type of research in Scandinavia. No interest. I have also contacted some of the foot soldiers and asked why they do not speak up. Their answers made me think of McIntyres phrase “the silence of the lambs”.
Gösta Oscarsson
Stockholm

outoftown
December 4, 2009 4:42 am

link to map wont work – –

Alexej Buergin
December 4, 2009 4:43 am

Switzerland is a very small country with a surprising number of daily newspapers, but not one good one amongst them. The voters have decided – in another matter – to completely disregard them. They “inform” about the MWP like this:
There were settlements in Greenland. The arctic sea was almost ice-free. Farmer plant in places higher up. THERE ARE NO INDICATIONS that is was warmer than today.

December 4, 2009 4:45 am

An excellent summary of the Hockey stick fraud versus the MWP truth. I have a feeling that if the mercury thermometer had been invented in the year 1000AD instead of 1714 ( and in the depths of the LIA to compound the issue) we would not have the current climate panic.

December 4, 2009 4:45 am

Rhys Jaggar (04:30:02),
This might be what you’re looking for: click

December 4, 2009 4:48 am

Is there another multiproxy global reconstruction except Loehle 2007, not made by Team?

December 4, 2009 4:51 am

Besides his fantastic work on the MWP, I also want to thank Craig Idso for his fantastic compilation of peer-reviewed studies at his website that I used as part of my research,
450 Peer-Reviewed Papers Supporting Skepticism of “Man-Made” Global Warming
His epic 868 page report refuting global warming hysteria is available for free online,
Climate Change Reconsidered
(PDF) (NIPCC)
Check it out!

Billyquiz
December 4, 2009 4:57 am

A poster (Charlie) over on eureferendum just posted this:
“Gorgeous busty Maundy Minimum has bust out with news of her three[check data]-in-a-bed romp with top Climate Professor Jones. Maundy, 34-28-36 [originally 32-30-42], said: ‘Well, when he asked me to massage his figures, who was I to argue? I called on my friend Climey Gate [36-24-36 – check figues with MM], and she said she’d be happy to help.’ Prof Jones, said the girls, needed help with his ‘hockey stick’ – although Maudy claimed that all that was needed was a good puck. ‘We sure put the upcurve in his stick!’ giggled the voluptuous Maundy. ‘Although, come to think of it, things did grind to a premature halt. Last we saw of the foxy prof was as he ran from the hotel room, hiding his figure in a towel, mumbling about losing his hard drive and “hiding the decline”……’
;D

TerryBixler
December 4, 2009 4:57 am

The only climate catastrophe is in the minds of those in government that want to increase taxes to increase their importance. So far the MSM has not even twitched on this hoax that dwarfs Madoff’s efforts.

seekeroftruth
December 4, 2009 5:01 am

Really enlightening. All these graphs are for saving!

John Simpson
December 4, 2009 5:03 am

I Found This reference to wattsupwiththat in the hacked emails
(memo to tom wrigley) see 1254751382.txt
Tom:
Briffa has already made a preliminary response and he failed to explain his selection procedure. Further, he refused to give up the data for several years, and was forced to do so only when he submitted to a journal that demanded data archiving and actually enforced the practice.
More significantly, Briffa’s analysis is irrelevant. Dendrochonology is a bankrupt
approach. They admit that they cannot distiguish causal elements contributing to tree
ring size. Further, they rely on recent temperature data by which to select recent tree
data (excluding other data) and then turn around and claim that the tree ring data
explains the recent temperature data. If you can give a principled and reasoned defense of Briffa (see the discussion on Watt’s website) then go for it. I’d be fascinated, as would a rather large number of others.

December 4, 2009 5:05 am

” Jean Meeus (04:26:21) :
I don’t believe in AGW, but I have a question about the graph “The real shape of the last 2000 years”. That drawing shows that during the Medieval Warm Period the mean global temperature was only about 0.5 °C warmer than now, and the Little Ice Age only 0.5 °C cooler than now.
Can half a degree centigrade have such an influence on the climate? You can hardly feel such a very slight temperature difference!

The reason is that the 0.5C is a smoothed average and over time this can impact glacier formation and sea level etc.

Jean Bosseler
December 4, 2009 5:06 am
3x2
December 4, 2009 5:09 am

At some point in the future, hopefully, we may all sit around and laugh about the dead moose (or some other slow release fertilizer) that almost changed the world.

DoneThat2
December 4, 2009 5:10 am

Here’s another source for Medieval Warming & Little Ice Cooling graphs, confirming what JoNova’s work.
http://www.c3headlines.com/temperature-charts-historical-proxies.html

Charlie Barnes
December 4, 2009 5:12 am

‘All models are wrong – but some are useful’ ; this quote, I think, due to George Box (sometime of Madison-Wisconsin).
The usefulness of any model is usually dependent on the adequacy of the assumptions underlying it. Nobody associated with driving the global warming/climate change/carbon dioxide scenario and its ramifications seems to have thought this to be important.

A Wod
December 4, 2009 5:13 am

I notice that the widget showing the temperature anomaly has jumped from 0.28 to 0.5, which is getting close to the MWP.
The BBC did mention the Climategate scandal on the radio 4 Today programme. There is going to be another radio programme called ‘the Report’ discussing the issue some time in the coming days. They said that the the blogosphere is awash with Climategate and that it will be difficult to persuade the US senate to ratify what Obama has signed up to.

1 2 3 4