One of the favorite buzzwords of alarmists is “unprecedented” when talking about present day warming. Yah, the Earth’s never, ever, been hotter, the “hockey stick” proves it, it’s unprecedented, and its all your fault!
Well, we’ve known it’s unsubstantiated spin for quite a long time. NOAA apparently has too, because the data presented in this video is in fact from NOAA and is from the year 2000 on their website. But you don’t see it publicized much. Why? Well, because it totally destroys claims of “unprecedented warming” in our present day.
The source of inspiration is from my post Hockey stick observed in NOAA ice core data. And the source of inspiration for that is from J. Storrs Hall, writing here.
WUWT reader “docattheautopsy” produced a YouTube video for us for distribution for which I’m grateful and you can see below. I’ve also produced an animated GIF which is done somewhat like a video, since not all blogs and websites can support video. Here is the low-res version at 480 pixels wide. As you go back in time, our “unprecendented” temperatures of the present day don’t seem quite so large, when put in perspective of geologic time.
Here are the permalinks to both the low-res and hi-def versions:
Low-res: http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/noaa_gisp2_icecore_anim3.gif
Hi-Definition: http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/noaa_gisp2_icecore_anim_hi-def3.gif
And here is a YouTube video showing the same process:
Just a couple of caveats to mention:
1) The ice core data from Greenland doesn’t go past the year 1900
2) The reason for this is that ice is formed by the compaction of snow, that takes time. Young snow, and snow in transition to becoming ice through compaction is not a reliable indicator yet.
3) From the observed temperature change in the last century, one could add about a .5C to 0.7C line to the end of the ice core data. It does not change the conclusion. UPDATE: Upon further thought, In version 3 of the animation, I decided to do this to be a better comparison to the Mann/IPCC chart shown, since that is what they did also. The instrumental record for the last century (~ 0.7C) is shown in red, approximately fit to each scale.
4) My first animated GIF had a labeling error due to using a template. I forgot to label the Vostok Ice Core presentation separately. Fixed now and links updated. If you grabbed links in the first 30 minutes, please note they have changed.
UPDATE: I’ve added the source images for those that may want to include them in a slide show or display independently. Click each image below for full sized version suitable for saving on your local disk.
Can you also show us the medieval warm period on the Vostok core. Ive been looking but not skilled enough to see it.
dorlomin,
Did you notice the title of the article? The scale of Vostok covers half a million years. The MWP is only 1/500th of that, so it can’t be seen at that scale. Check out the video starting at about the 12 second mark and you’ll clearly see the MWP.
Off thread but: I see the NYTimes is asking for questions for reporters over at dot earth – to be answered on video early next week.
http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/
From the film Grand Canyon, the character Simon (played by Danny Glover) describes how he felt when he visited the Grand Canyon:
“You know what I felt like? I felt like a gnat that lands on the ass of a cow chewing his cud on the side of the road that you drive by doing 70 mph.”
Vosok to 10,000 bp
dorlomin (09:11:41) :
http://mclean.ch/climate/figures_2/Vostok_to_10Kybp.gif
Greenland to 10,000bp
http://mclean.ch/climate/Ice_cores.htm
both overlayed found on the link
dorlomin (09:11:41)
This is partly presented by ice core analyst/glaciologist
Truly puts it all into perspective. I love my interglacial. My wife, who is bored to tears by all this, asked a very pertinent question regarding the scale of this reconstruction. She asked what the temperature fluctuation range was on the graphs. My Mark II eyeball says ~10-12 C. She said she thought that was not all that alarming then. I love my wife. Of course I did not complicate it by pointing out that this is “smoothed” and the actual range of temperature fluctuation can be much greater. Her eyes would glaze over as I go on to explain that the graph is another depth charge to the false theory. Some are not as enthusiastic about my passions as I am. 8^D At least she laughs when she hears on the MSM that all the weather anomalies of late are “unprecedented”. She knows this not to be accurate.
Problem is, this ice core hockey stick above goes until 1900 only.
My favorite chart is CET or Armagh long instrumental record:
http://www.junkscience.com/MSU_Temps/CETvsArmagh_long.html
especially the period 1695-1940. Two degrees increase during 40 years, compare this with barely one degree during 70 years since CO2 ramped up.
Loehle reconstruction is very telling as well:
http://www.worldclimatereport.com/wp-images/loehle_fig2.JPG
Arctic has been warming faster in 20-40ties than in recent times as well:
http://ff.org/centers/csspp/library/co2weekly/2005-04-21/what_files/image014.gif
There is NOTHING unprecedented on recent 30 years temperature increase, but hey tell that to generation fed by hockey stick for decade.
2) The reason for this is that ice is formed by the compaction of snow, that takes time. Young snow, and snow in transition to becoming ice through compaction is not a reliable indicator yet.
Somebody help me out here.
That being the case, how do we know that the CO2 measurements taking from ice cores are accurate as to what was present in the atmosphere? I notice you never find any O2 PPM’s listed. I’ve not seen any good information on how the ice core measurements are correlated to atmospheric measurements. Sorry if this is a stupid question.
Another video that would be of interest involves the historians.
Historians tend to focus on particular areas, and when you bring up “Medieval Warm Period” and ask about it in their particular area, the answer are similar to: “Well, the scientists tell us it was localized, but it damn well happened in my area.” Then local anecdotes, “Europe moved towards wheat over rye.” or “Egypt managed five crops a year in that era.” or “The Pacific Northwest natives essentially retreated south for the LIA.” or “The New Zealander’s migrations….”
The total dismissal of the masses of written records as “anecdotal” because they don’t calibrate into a strict temperature reading is appalling.
The BBC is showing a version of this if anyone would care to comment
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/sci_tech/2009/copenhagen/8386319.stm
It is said that a picture is worth a 1000 words. This one short animated GIF sez it all; and totally destroys the ”hocky stick” alarmism all by itself.
Now: If we could just get the MSM to show this animation on the air. . . .
In 2000 myself & my wife visited the geodetic hills on Axel Heiborg island in the Canadian arctic. We saw mummified trees which the scientists working there had established had grown at that latitude. The tree rings apparently showed that they had experienced 6 months darkness plus 6 months light. This shows that the island had always been at that latitude & not drifted north as Spitzbergen( which has petrified tree stumps) had. At that time they had not dated the trees & other artefacts that had been found.
Prehistoric global warming?
http://www2.brandonu.ca/academic/environmental/images/Mummified%20tree%20stump%20of%20a%20dawn%20redwood.pdf
Execelent series of graphs. Where can I get individual copies. I put them on my I-Phone to show to warmists and other confused people.
REPLY: the iPhone should be able to display an animated GIF, try it – A
Thank you for your reply. The GIF is fine for me because I have seen all this before. It is to fast for the uninitiated. I will try it and see if I can puse it like I did on my computer.
Your web site is great
REPLY: I added separate images to the post at your request – Anthony
The Economist, to which I’ve subscribed for almost 30 years, has radically changed from a very analytical publication, to a cheerleader for the CO2=CAGW [human emitted CO2 will cause climate catastrophe] alarmist point of view. Human-caused runaway global warming is accepted as settled science by this formerly rational magazine.
This change came about with the appointment in 2006 of John Micklethwait as editor-in-chief. The change has been amazing; skeptics are now ridiculed and dismissed out of hand, confirming Dr Richard Lindzen’s recent paper, where Lindzen shows through first hand experience that a change in even one position by a radical such as Micklethwait is enough to change the entire organization into an AGW propaganda outlet. We’ve seen the same thing happen at the APS, the ACS, and countless other professional publications, where the editorial board is seriously at odds with the rank-and-file membership over the question of AWG.
Currently the Economist has a blog that attempts to refute Willis Eschenbach’s article: click
You can comment on the Economist blog regarding the ad hominem attacks against Willis, or you can simply click to vote on comments already made. The lack of understanding and the unthinking acceptance that CO2 is the cause of upcoming climate catastrophe is apparent, especially in the blogger’s article. Comments setting the [anonymous] blog writer straight would make it clear that the blogger is out of his depth.
Correcting his ignorance shouldn’t be hard; several posters have already shredded his arguments. But more input from the skeptics’ side is important, since scientific skepticism is essential to the scientific method of separating truth from conjecture.
Anthony starting so many threads leads to the same misinformation being repeated and absorbed by posters. I will therefor repost from the other entry as people obviously are not reading it!
“Present” is assumed to be 1950 in this plot:
(Present might be different in ice cores but does not make much difference)
http://img132.imageshack.us/img132/1373/gisp2moderngrnlnd.png
This appends a shifted (-29degC) measurement from modern Greenland on to the end of the misrepresented plots made here.
As can be seen even this crude addition shows modern temperature at 1degC above the MWP.
Todays temperature is in fact as high as any in the last 2000 yeats. In the period of the core there are only 3 higher temperatures (5900BC,4975BC, 1347BC).
REPLY: Get your own blog then, but please don’t tell me how to run mine. I’ll post as many threads as I wish. And where’s your data citation link? Shifted and spliced data? Prove that’s valid. And if you really want to be taken seriously, drop the “galactic hero” meme and come clean with your full name. No need to hide. -Anthony
M White (09:56:08) :
The BBC is showing a version of this if anyone would care to comment
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/sci_tech/2009/copenhagen/8386319.stm
—————————————————-
They still use the hockey stick to get rid of the MWP. They can’t be taken seriously as long as they ignore the ice cores. It is nothing but the old MBH hockey stick which has been thoroughly discredited by climateaudit.org
http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/Carboniferous_climate.html
CO2 can, and has been, much higher than today. Keep in mind that 800,000 years while a long time for us is a tick on the geologic clock.
Excellent article in the Calgary Sun: http://www.calgaryherald.com/technology/Real+scientists+should+care+more+about+fraud/2333666/story.html
For those going to or will be watching the Olympics in Whistler next year, some information on the mountains dirty little secrets (or glaciers and trees)
http://hol.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/17/8/1069.pdf
I posted this on another thread earlier today, but think it will be of interest to readers here
http://www.badscience.net/2009/12/copenhagen-climate-change-blah-blah
Ben Goldacre is a well known/respected ‘bad science’ exposer [and MD doctor] so I find his caricature of those who are not card-carrying AGW members rather odd.
To get more people to watch that youtube video everyone should rate it (hopefully high), comment, and, if they want, favorite – all three actions will make it show up for people more during searches,suggestions and the various “daily/weekly/monthly” things.
For those who don’t use youtube, click on the video again (after it is playing) and the site will pop up in a new window (and you’ll need an account).
There’s nothing like a visual representation to drive the point home. Mix in a few blink comparators to show the cooking of the books that’s happening these days and the usually disinterested taxpayer may just want his money back.
David Ball. Me too. I love my wife as she patiently listens to my rantings about temperature manipulation, fraud, etc. She has taken lately to commenting, when in public, about ” global warming”, and has noticed a consistent reply by total strangers of ” what global warming”. I do not believe the average American puts much faith in global warming. Too easy to observe the actual temperatures. Even my 85 year old mother in law commented about it when it snowed here ( Fair Oaks, CA.), on Monday. I believe the “average Joe”, does not like hypocrites, as we see in the AGW crowd. This may ultimately be our greatest weapon. fm
I thought about putting together a similar video. I was going to end it with something like this:
http://images.cheezburger.com/completestore/2009/12/12/129051187414232791.jpg