Guest essay by Christopher Monckton of Brenchley
In 1990, the IPCC’s First Assessment Report showed a schematic demonstrating the then understanding that the medieval warm period had been appreciably warmer than the present and that the Little Ice Age had been colder. However, in 1995 Dr. Jonathan Overpeck, an IPCC scientist, wrote an email to Dr. David Deming to say, “We have to abolish the medieval warm period.”
By 2001, the IPCC’s Third Assessment Report had obliged; and, notwithstanding my Expert Review of the draft Fifth Report, in which I had listed some 400 papers from the medieval warm period database at www.co2science.org establishing by measurement that the medieval warm period was real, was global and was almost everywhere warmer than the present, the IPCC defied the evidence and preferred the models that had been shown to be defective (McIntyre & McKitrick, 2005).

In the autumn of 2013, the Government of Colombia invited me to Bogota, where, after several university lectures and two addresses to Simón Bolívar’s anti-corruption department, the Procuraduria, I was also asked to give a lecture to 200 trainees at the Army School of Intelligence and Counter-Intelligence.
I began with a quotation from Sun Tzu, the earliest strategist to write about how to win a warm. Sun Tzu wrote: “All warfare is based on deception.” I explained to the trainees that I was going to demonstrate to them by various examples a method by which a lay intelligence officer could identify deception even in a field of study that was not his specialism.
My first illustration was the absurd “hockey-stick” graph that had falsely abolished the medieval warm period by a series of flagrant statistical dodges. I said that before the modelers had worked their gloomy magic to abolish the medieval warm period attempts to reconstruct global temperatures had concentrated on studying the measurable effects of temperature change. And the most obvious effect of temperature change on the environment was sea level.
Water expands a little as it warms. This thermosteric expansion makes sea level rise in warmer weather and fall in cooler weather. I looked for a reconstruction of sea level rise over the past millennium and, thanks to Dr. Willie Soon of the Harvard-Smithsonian, who reads everything, I came across a graph from Grinsted et al. (2009).
The Grinsted graph is a poor match for the hockey-stick graph. However, it matches the IPCC’s earlier schematic to a very high correlation. I told the trainee intelligence agents that this simple but robust method, which demanded of the intelligence agent nothing more than what our British James Bonds call “the Mark I Eyeball”, indicated that the Middle Ages had indeed been warmer than the present, and the Little Ice Age cooler.

I also pointed out that, notwithstanding the pronounced fluctuations in temperature over the past millennium, including the cold weather that had frozen the Thames in London and the Hudson in New York during several winters at the end of the 17th century (Fig. 1), global sea level had varied by as little as ± 20 cm throughout the millennium. With a graph (Fig. 2) from the inimitable Willis Eschenbach, I showed that in the past 420,000 years absolute global temperature had fluctuated by as little as 3 Cº, or 1%, either side of the long-run median. It is difficult to get global temperature to change much.

With this small fluctuation in temperatures, how had sea level risen by 400 feet (130 m) in the 11,400 years since the end of the last Ice Age? The mean rate of rise was almost 4 feet/century. The answer is ice-melt. Once temperatures become warm enough to cause the ice on great northern-hemisphere land masses such as North America to melt, sea level will rise sharply, as it did after the end of the Younger Dryas cooling event that brought the last Ice Age to an end. In fact, global temperature rose by 5 Cº in just three years, according to the ice cores.
However, I said, in the past millennium the changes in the cryosphere had been comparatively small. The main reason for sea-level changes was thermosteric expansion, so the changes over the past 1000 years were in centimeters, not meters.
Nevertheless, it was clear that the weather had been warm enough in the Middle Ages to push sea level up by 20 cm, and cool enough in the Little Ice age to push it down by 20 cm. This profile did not fit the hockey stick (Fig. 3), but it did fit the IPCC’s 1990 schematic showing both the MWP and the LIA (Fig. 4).

The Director of the Intelligence School, who had been nodding enthusiastically throughout this part of my talk, quietly slipped out of the room and came back some minutes later clutching something.
At the end of my lecture, after several more than usually perceptive questions had come from the audience, the Director came on to the stage and presented me with a magnificent gong, the Medal of the Army School of Intelligence and Counter-Intelligence, that now has pride of place on my neo-Classical mantelpiece beneath the handsome portraits of my ancestors.
On returning to Scotland I told a friend of the award. He replied, “Intelligence medal? You?” That is what friends are for.
the earliest strategist to write about how to win a warm.
I see that the topic of Global Warming has been around for a long time.
“I began with a quotation from Sun Tzu, the earliest strategist to write about how to win a warm.”
“… how to win a warm.”
Freud was right.
I also have friends like that. An informative essay.
The Director of the Intelligence School, who had been nodding enthusiastically throughout this part of my talk, quietly slipped out of the room and came back some minutes later clutching something.
Being an intelligent fellow, the Director waited until positive that you were going to appear intelligent. After confirmation he brought the award to the proceedings. That shows his intelligence.
——
Spelling of ‘warm’ for ‘war’ (6 lines below woodcut),
Leave the “warm” typo in. Perfect.
I am conflicted between addressing you as either M’Lord, or M’Hero.
They hunted us. Now they are hunted. Good. We are all better men now.
I had the pleasure of talking to a ‘capstone’ class at our liberal arts college about climate skepticism. I pointed out that I myself had experienced winters of week long below zero weather, week long blizzards and snow drifts that covered telephone poles, but for 40+ years they have been gone. I explained that indeed they could return, based solely on natural climate variability, that could easily out muster any of their perceived human induced warming. I then referenced the ‘Thames ice festivals’ and noted they came and left, long before any possible human C02. The reaction was surprising: anecdotal ‘proof’ of climate variability is powerful! They relate, internalize it and it is real.
I have a feelling, Lord M, that you in your presentation created that ‘real link’ for them and the clarity of truth shone through.
Do we know for sure that it was Jonathan Overpeck who wrote “We have to get rid of the Medieval Warm Period”? I ask because my emailed question to him on the matter was never answered but turned up in the first Climategate batch of emails. I it were me, and I had not written it, I would say so. Why would anyone not deny it, if it was not them? I think his caviller approach the the AR4 WGI SOD publication deadline matter makes him a good candidate but without being sure I would not attribute it to him.
Oops, I meant “If it were me”
The ‘need ‘ to make the MWP vanish was one of the early signs of how religions like dogma had taken over from science in this area, it would be perfectly possible to have an MWP and AGW.
And its always struck me as funny that the proof of MWP although not world covering nor data heavy was still far better in both these areas than the infamous ‘hockey stick , indeed the poor nature of the actual data , especially given the great claims built on it , as always seemed an oddity of ‘the cause ‘ ‘ with its one tree magic .
And yet the [latter] was good enough to undermine the former. Because without the ‘unprecedented’ they knew that they had not a snow ball in hells chance of pulling this scam off. Once Mann [gave] them want they ‘needed’ they simply ran with it and stopped asking questions.
The range looks a little bit larger on this graph.
http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=vostok+temperature&qpvt=vostok+temperature&FORM=IGRE#view=detail&id=6F6E304B0635FD77A8BF623602884991617B4CF3&selectedIndex=5
It looks about +/- 5 degrees cent.
Some people find it hard to accept the truth 🙂 http://www.parliament.uk/business/news/2011/july/letter-to-viscount-monckton/
http://www.epw.senate.gov/hearing_statements.cfm?id=266543
“I had another interesting experience around the time my paper in Science was published. I received an astonishing email from a major researcher in the area of climate change. He said, “We have to get rid of the Medieval Warm Period.”
Jon says:
December 8, 2013 at 9:16 am
“Some people find it hard to accept the truth 🙂 http://www.parliament.uk/business/news/2011/july/letter-to-viscount-monckton/”
Where does Lord Monckton “claim to be a member of the HoL?” in this post? You post seems OT to me.
Sorry meany “Your post……….”
Good science, nice graph from Grinsted et al. I have proved, by the way, that AGW does not exist. See my comment on Hansen et al. in PLoS-One this month.
We all need friends like that to keep us grounded. Too funny.
The quote is a fabrication. Jonathan Overpeck’s exact words are:
“I get the sense that I’m not the only one who would like to deal a mortal blow to the misuse of supposed warm period terms and myths in the literature.”
Christopher Monckton, like Andrew Montford before him, alters the text to instead read:
“We have to abolish the medieval warm period.”
REPLY: I checked for a citation, and the quote you state is correct:
http://di2.nu/foia/1105670738.txt
As to this being a fabrication, no, it’s a summation or a paraphrase of a long quote, something that happens a lot in history. Monckton and Montford aren’t specifically at fault in this, as the summed up quote has been around for a long, long time and it appears to have originated with Dr. David Deming’s statement to the Senate.
The conversion to a paraphrase maintains the meaning. “Mortal blow” certainly equates to “get rid of” (as it is often said) or “abolish” as you state it, and “we” equates to “I’m not the only one”.
The most important point is that Overpeck thinks it should be gotten rid of so that people that don’t agree with his view can’t use it.
And that, is the real travesty. – Anthony
Can the opinion of a judge set aside the title and privilege granted by a King or Queen? Why then have Kings and Queens when Judges rule?
Jon Lord Monckton has as much right to claim to be in HOL as any other peer who no longer has a ‘right to vote ‘ on legislation but still remain members of the HOL . And these days that is the majority of peers.
Its always was a poor smear and time as not made it any better .
http://www.nohrsc.noaa.gov/snow_model/images/full/National/nsm_depth/201312/nsm_depth_2013120805_National.jpg
In the next week, the green band going through Michigan will be filled in. Then we’ll have 2/3’s Continental USA covered. Counting Alaska, 75% of the USA Land mass will be covered.
Meteorological Low: Jan. 21st (month after shortest day!)
So, we could have 85 to 90% of USA snow covered this year.
100% of Russia. Over 50% of Northern Hemisphere…just saying, Al Gore must be giving a LOT of Gorebull Warming lectures. Can we send him to South Africa?
Thanks Christopher, Lord Monckton. Good article.
And tanks for bringing healthy skepticism to Colombia.
There’s no evidence that Overpeck ever used that phrase, Deming claimed he received a mail using those words without at the time giving the source, but no longer has the alleged email, (and we know memory can play tricks), in the Climategate mails when Deming made the claim, Overpeck says he has no recollection of using the phrase, and certainly would not use words like that ….