
From the University of Colorado at Boulder, comes this study about radiocarbon dating some dead moss clumps exposed from under ice/snow at 4 locations on Baffin Island that somehow proves “unprecedented” warmth for the entire Arctic for the last 120,000 years. See below for my take on it.
CU-Boulder study shows unprecedented warmth in Arctic
The heat is on, at least in the Arctic.
Average summer temperatures in the Eastern Canadian Arctic during the last 100 years are higher now than during any century in the past 44,000 years and perhaps as long ago as 120,000 years, says a new University of Colorado Boulder study.
The study is the first direct evidence the present warmth in the Eastern Canadian Arctic exceeds the peak warmth there in the Early Holocene, when the amount of the sun’s energy reaching the Northern Hemisphere in summer was roughly 9 percent greater than today, said CU-Boulder geological sciences Professor Gifford Miller, study leader. The Holocene is a geological epoch that began after Earth’s last glacial period ended roughly 11,700 years ago and which continues today.
Miller and his colleagues used dead moss clumps emerging from receding ice caps on Baffin Island as tiny clocks. At four different ice caps, radiocarbon dates show the mosses had not been exposed to the elements since at least 44,000 to 51,000 years ago.
Since radiocarbon dating is only accurate to about 50,000 years and because Earth’s geological record shows it was in a glaciation stage prior to that time, the indications are that Canadian Arctic temperatures today have not been matched or exceeded for roughly 120,000 years, Miller said.
“The key piece here is just how unprecedented the warming of Arctic Canada is,” said Miller, also a fellow at CU-Boulder’s Institute of Arctic and Alpine Research. “This study really says the warming we are seeing is outside any kind of known natural variability, and it has to be due to increased greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.”
A paper on the subject appeared online Oct. 21 in Geophysical Research Letters, a journal published by the American Geophysical Union. Co-authors include CU-Boulder Senior Research Associate Scott Lehman, former CU-Boulder doctoral student and now Prescott College Professor Kurt Refsnider, University of California Irvine researcher John Southon and University of Wisconsin, Madison Research Associate Yafang Zhong. The National Science Foundation provided the primary funding for the study.
Miller and his colleagues compiled the age distribution of 145 radiocarbon-dated plants in the highlands of Baffin Island that were exposed by ice recession during the year they were collected by the researchers. All samples collected were within 1 meter of the ice caps, which are generally receding by 2 to 3 meters a year. “The oldest radiocarbon dates were a total shock to me,” said Miller.
Located just east of Greenland, (um, no, to the west – Anthony) the 196,000-square-mile Baffin Island is the fifth largest island in the world. Most of it lies above the Arctic Circle. Many of the ice caps on the highlands of Baffin Island rest on relatively flat terrain, usually frozen to their beds. “Where the ice is cold and thin, it doesn’t flow, so the ancient landscape on which they formed is preserved pretty much intact,” said Miller.
To reconstruct the past climate of Baffin Island beyond the limit of radiocarbon dating, Miller and his team used data from ice cores previously retrieved by international teams from the nearby Greenland Ice Sheet.
The ice cores showed that the youngest time interval from which summer temperatures in the Arctic were plausibly as warm as today is about 120,000 years ago, near the end of the last interglacial period. “We suggest this is the most likely age of these samples,” said Miller.
The new study also showed summer temperatures cooled in the Canadian Arctic by about 5 degrees Fahrenheit from roughly 5,000 years ago to about 100 years ago – a period that included the Little Ice Age from 1275 to about 1900.
“Although the Arctic has been warming since about 1900, the most significant warming in the Baffin Island region didn’t really start until the 1970s,” said Miller. “And it is really in the past 20 years that the warming signal from that region has been just stunning. All of Baffin Island is melting, and we expect all of the ice caps to eventually disappear, even if there is no additional warming.”
Temperatures across the Arctic have been rising substantially in recent decades as a result of the buildup of greenhouse gases in Earth’s atmosphere. Studies by CU-Boulder researchers in Greenland indicate temperatures on the ice sheet have climbed 7 degrees Fahrenheit since 1991.
A 2012 study by Miller and colleagues using radiocarbon-dated mosses that emerged from under the Baffin Island ice caps and sediment cores from Iceland suggested that the trigger for the Little Ice Age was likely a combination of exploding tropical volcanoes – which ejected tiny aerosols that reflected sunlight back into space – and a decrease in solar radiation.
-CU-
Contact:
Gifford Miller, 303-492-6962, cell 303-990-2071
===============================================================
I don’t dispute validity of radio-carbon14 dating techniques, but I think there is a logic failure in the claim being made.
The claim is that these plants haven’t been exposed for thousands of years, as dated by the C14 isotope.
At four different ice caps, radiocarbon dates show the mosses had not been exposed to the elements since at least 44,000 to 51,000 years ago.
That might be true, but then again they are long dead, so there wouldn’t be any uptake of new C14 if they were exposed to the open air in the past. There’s no claim that the mosses are now suddenly alive and growing again. So, if they had been “exposed to the elements” since then, they would not have an new C14 in them unless they came back to life and conducted photosynthesis.
Since plant material in the Arctic doesn’t decay like it does elsewhere due to low temperature and low humidity, it could very well remain intact while exposed for quite some time. All I think they can claim is that the plants haven’t been alive for 44,000 to 120,000 years. I don’t think they can’t prove with C14 dating that they have not been exposed then reburied under ice/snow since then. Ice is a funny thing, it can melt due to warmer temperatures or it can sublimate at below freezing temperatures if there’s not enough sustaining precipitation, as we know from Mount Kilimanjaro. What I’d really like to see is what the receding ice edge looks like. Sublimation leaves a signature that is quite different from melting.
Studies by CU-Boulder researchers in Greenland indicate temperatures on the ice sheet have climbed 7 degrees Fahrenheit since 1991.
Greenland is not Baffin island. You can’t just say that a temperature change in one place automatically means a similar temperature change in another place. Similarly, Baffin island isn’t the entire “Arctic”, yet it is portrayed in the press release as if this one proxy indicator of four sampled sites represents the entire Arctic temperature experience back 120,000 years. It’s Yamal all over again.
Recall our series of stories about “midges” used for proxy temperature reconstruction on Baffin island: Baffin Island Midge Study – debunked for a 3rd time – nearby weather station shows no warming.
This weather station on Baffin Island [Clyde Meteorological station] shows no summer temperature increase in the last 50 years. Summer matters most because that’s the melt season.
So what’s going on with the receding ice edge on Baffin island; is it melting or sublimating? Inquiring minds want to know. From the one photo they provided, it is hard to tell:

Of course the uncritical MSM is already trumpeting this story without question, with the usual bent that the posited current warmth is a bad thing.
What really bugs me (besides the fact the press release can’t even bother to mention the title of the study) is that they use of the word “unprecedented” in the title of the press release. Obviously this isn’t true, because it had to be warm enough, long enough, back then to give these mosses a chance to get a foothold and grow. If the warmth today was “unprecedented” they’d find nothing in the way of previous life forms under the receding ice. – Anthony
UPDATE: 10/25/13 11AM PDT
I lamented the lack of photographs to show me what sort of ice loss signature there was. The press release at AGU had such a photo in it which I show below, click for a much larger version.
![Fig.1.Sputnik[1]](http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2013/10/fig-1-sputnik1.jpg?resize=640%2C480&quality=83)
Note the albedo difference from the ice cap on the left side versus the right side. The right side is almost pure white, and there are no stream channels. The left side has lots of stream channels and is a dirty brown. Notice also that the ice in surrounding depressions is whiter that the ice cap, which is actually a small hill, though I don’t know what height it is above surrounding terrain.
What this looks like to me is that the windward side of the Sputnik icecap hill is on the left and it is picking up all sorts of debris and particulates (such as carbon soot) on the leeward side there is less deposition, and the ice is cleaner.
As we’ve noted before on WUWT, carbon soot is a big problem in the Arctic.
I’d really like to know why the authors have not mentioned what is obvious to the eye as an alternate possibility for the icecap decline.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
“Obviously this isn’t true, because it had to be warm enough, long enough, back then to give these mosses a chance to get a foothold and grow.”
Well, as the quote from Miller states directly. A roughly flat trend over 44k years is pretty unprecedented to them. Can’t expect too much as this guy is from the People’s Republic of Boulder. They’re doing well to sort out an order of coffee.
Hmmmmmm! as radiocarbon 14 has a half life of 5,730 years give or take 40 years we are talking about measurements of 5 1,000ths and 5 10,000,000ths of a not very known amount. Given that its creation varies according to the cosmic ray activity at the time and it in turn varies according to sunspot activity. This seems to be very impressive scientific measurements or ……
I understood that radiocarbon 14 dating was impossible after about 40,000 – 50,000 years!
Anthony, I wonder why the PEER review wouldn’t have also considered what you did and your line of logic. . .?
. . . oh, did I say Peer Review . . ? Goodness me, I really meant ‘PAL Review’ . . . .
OK, now I understand why it wasn’t questioned . . . silly me . . 🙂
Well, when the snow comes (this year) and completely covers his sampling area; we can excavate down and sample the ‘NEVER’ exposed in 120,000 year old plant samples that he himself sampled from last year.
All [143 plants] samples collected were within 1 meter of the ice caps, which are generally receding by 2 to 3 meters a year
From how many locations?
From how long a transect?
Why no perpendicular transects?
There are so many things wrong with their claim it is hard to believe it ever passed peer rearview. Tree line reached the Arctic coastline 9000 years ago and then receded. Several studies of Bowhead whale bones, driftwood, beach formation, GISP2 ice core and Scandinavian tree ring data all agree that temperatures were much warmer several times during the Holocene. This is another example of peer review failure that allows studies to make unsupported claims and spam the literature.
Here http://www.geochronometria.pl/pdf/geo_32/Geo32_02.pdf is an article entitled “TOO OLD AMS RADIOCARBON DATES OBTAINED FROM MOSS REMAINS FROM LAKE KWIECKO BOTTOM SEDIMENTS (N POLAND)”. It cites other work finding similar problems.
Our kids will only know what an ice road trucker is from the History Channel…. Maybe they will be able to buy the show in a double DVD set, together with the show that tells them what snow was all about, back in ye olden days?
“. . . , and it has to be due to increased greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. ”
[Gifford Miller, 2013]
That made me smile.
So they used a technique that isn’t valid for samples over 50,000 years old to determine that 120,000 years ago it was warm enough to grow moss, but it isn’t that warm now. Which shows that the recent warming is unprecedented.
I’ve long since come to accept that this sort of drek can be spouted in public without instigating jeering crowds of people pointing and laughing. What bothers me is that an area that hasn’t been able to support life in tens of thousands of years may possibly be able to in the future, and the drekkies think that is a bad thing.
This is as usual a big claim -The Arctic- from a small, specific area. ““The key piece here is just how unprecedented the warming of Arctic Canada is,” said Miller, also a fellow at CU-Boulder’s Institute of Arctic and Alpine Research. “This study really says the warming we are seeing is outside any kind of known natural variability, and it has to be due to increased greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.”
Not one reference about what atmospheric circulation is in this area during the HCO and the last glaciation in order to understand the regional specifics.
“Although the Arctic has been warming since about 1900, the most significant warming in the Baffin Island region didn’t really start until the 1970s,” said Miller. “And it is really in the past 20 years that the warming signal from that region has been just stunning. All of Baffin Island is melting, and we expect all of the ice caps to eventually disappear, even if there is no additional warming.”
Oh yeah, 20 years is all… and if Miller knew the work of Leroux he’d understand his claim is bogus as the warming here is related to dynamics of stronger MPHs coming out of the Arctic and advecting more warm air along the shores of Baffin and Greenland. I guess 1070hPa pressures must mean warming… LOL
And to boot, he cherry picked the summer temperatures…
I think the point the original authors are trying to make is the lichen was only uncovered due to receding ice – for whatever reason. As a result the lichen was not exposed to the elements for the last 40,000+ years, which is an interesting claim. More research would need to be done to clear up why this spot hasn’t been (or has it been) uncovered at any time in the previous 40K+ years and how does one prove/disprove that – in other words (Prof. Feynmans’s actually) is it falsifiable?
What is interesting to me is the melting alps glaciers are exposing villages and people who have been buried in the ice for a thousand years or more.
Something unusual does appear to be happening in the arctic, and it appears to be balanced by the increasing ice coverage in the antarctic – but why the warming has happened hasn’t been explained well enough to convince me that anyone yet knows the real reason. Personally I think it is part of the ice age cycles – which no one has an explanation for as far as I can tell – and has little if anything to do with CO2 emissions, but I am no expert and as a result my opinion is barely worth the photons you are reading it by…
Arctic biome changes on Baffin Island within the past 200,000 years: Lessons from past warm times
http://www.arcticnet.ulaval.ca/pdf/talks2010/FrechetteBianca.pdf
Eastern Baffin Is. summer temperatures were 4-5°C higher than today during MIS 5.
Jim Steele says:
“Peer rearview”. A delightfully apt typo. I’ve just started your book. Much there to provoke thought.
Rudolph food?
I predict that someday we will indeed see something entirely “unprecedented” appear in the annals of “climate science”. It will of course be the arrival of one of these clucks who has the slightest demonstrable capacity for constructing any kind of logically consistent thought or argument.
It seems obvious that this study is crap, because the moss was alive 44,000 years ago and is under ice today. That would point to unprecedented COOLING, not warming.
– Brent Walker says:
October 24, 2013 at 9:51 pm
Hmmmmmm! as radiocarbon 14 has a half life of 5,730 years give or take 40 years we are talking about measurements of 5 1,000ths and 5 10,000,000ths of a not very known amount. Given that its creation varies according to the cosmic ray activity at the time and it in turn varies according to sunspot activity. This seems to be very impressive scientific measurements or ……
I understood that radiocarbon 14 dating was impossible after about 40,000 – 50,000 years!-
I think what is meant is that it’s at to be at least 30,000 years, and that put into the last glacial period, so everything was cooler +30000 years ago. And it requires going back to last interglacial period for warmer conditions to have existed- which was 120,000 years ago.
But there already plenty of evidence that it was warmer 6000 years ago. And what they present as evidence seems quite hopeless inadequate.
All they seem to be proving is it was warming 120,000 years- but we knew that already.
Consider…
Kaufman, D. S., et. al., Holocene thermal maximum in the western Arctic (0-180°W), Quaternary Science Reviews, 23, 2004
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277379103002956
Which shows this region was warmer than today between 8.6 and 4.9 thousand year ago.
Or for the entire arctic…
http://climatesanity.wordpress.com/2008/10/15/dont-panic-the-arctic-has-survived-warmer-temperatures-in-the-past/
I think the logic is that since the mosses concerned have less than two thousandths of the radiocarbon that would be found in living mosses of the same species, they therefore should be at least 50 000 years old. As the amount actually found is ‘negligible’ (hence the guesswork of 50 000 years old or more) it is not possible to estimate a greater age than 50 000 years old. As the last ice age ended somewhere around 11 000 years ago there is a possibility that the mosses have not been uncovered since the last glaciation started about 120 000 years ago. This leads to the possibility that the mosses are 120 000 years old.
However, this is predicated on the assumption that there were sufficient mooses (meece ?) around between 120 000 years ago and now to ensure that if they had been uncovered the mosses would have been eaten. I am not sure that this is a strong assumption.
Their claim leads to the strong conclusion that the climate 120 000 years ago was at least warm enough for mosses of that species to grow, with a weaker conclusion that the climate was warmer than now up to the temperature where those mosses would have been replaced by a species adapted to warmer climates.
It also leads to the supposition that the smell/taste of this moss was not attractive to mooses and hence they were not eaten though uncovered in the last umpteen years. Did the team test this possibility by offering moss samples to a moose, with currently living moss samples as a control?
The strongest conclusion one can get from their work is that, in the absence of any statements that the CO2 levels in the atmosphere 120 000 years ago (or more recently, depending on the presence or absence of meese and their propensity to eat dead moss) were not as great or higher than at present, the past temperatures reached levels equal to or higher than today’s without the benefits of AGW. From which one may draw the corollary that CAGW is a load of bunkum.
How can these Baffin island research experts not be aware of the warm period 7,000 years ago called the hypsithermal? Back then trees grew in the arctic where now there is only tundra. Methinks they do know of the hypsithermal and chose not to hype it. 🙂
This is another desperate attempt to maintain the myth of current warming exceeding previous warming. It was what drove creation of the “hockey stick”. In that case history was rewritten. As the email Professor Deming received and he spoke about in his Congressional testimony, reportedly from one of the CRU people said, “We have to get rid of the Medieval Warm Period.”
Most of the Holocene was warmer than today as the Greenland ice cores show.However, if you are unconvinced by the ice core data, it is supported by physical evidence. Professor Ritchie (University of Toronto) identified and photographed a picea glauca (white spruce) stump on the Tuktoyaktuk Peninsula in tundra some 100km north of the current treeline (Figure 2). Radiocarbon date was 4940 ±140 years Before Present (BP). It was featured in Hubert Lamb’s classic work Climate, Present, Past and Future. This means global temperatures at least 2-3°C warmer than today.
It would seem to be at odds with this study in the Andes where the plants were growing and thriving 5000 years ago before being covered and suffocated.
http://www.amjbot.org/content/97/9/1579.full
And once more, here’s Hubert Lamb’s northern forest limits map comparing 2000 BC with the present:
http://www.sturmsoft.com/climate/forest_grassland_limits.png
It’s like the study in Greenland saying the ice is receding further than ever before and Oh yes uncovering Viking settlements? OOPS!
James Bull