A paper published January 21st in Quaternary Science Reviews reconstructs storm activity in Iceland over the past 1,200 years and finds storminess and extreme weather variability was far more common during the Little Ice Age in comparison to the Medieval Warm Period and the 20th century. The paper adds to many other peer-reviewed publications finding global warming decreases storm activity, the opposite of claims by climate alarmists.
The graph below shows storm activity shown in 2nd graph from top was much greater and more variable during the Little Ice Age in comparison to the Medieval Warm Period and the 20th century. Top graph shows one of Mann’s bogus hockey sticks in red, and another non-hockey-stick reconstruction in grey [Moberg et al 2005].
Fig. 8. Multiple proxies of environmental change in Iceland AD 700–2000. (a) Two multi-proxy temperature reconstructions, North Atlantic sea surface temperatures (SST, Mann et al., 2009) and Moberg et al. (2005). (b) Shows GISP2 Na+ deviations from the mean, a proxy for storminess (Meeker and Mayewski, 2002). Cumulative deviations from the mean show a shift to stormier and windier conditions around AD 1425 (Dugmore et al., 2007). (c) Changes in total organic carbon at Lake Haukadalsvatn, west Iceland used as a proxy for aeolian erosion (Geirsdóttir et al., 2009). Bold horizontal bars show means over periods matching key tephra horizons in study (see Table 1). (d) Woodland cover is represented by Betulapollen percentages from a lake core near Lake Mývatn, north Iceland (Lawson et al., 2007) and charcoal pits present in south Iceland (Church et al., 2007) (e) Mean aggregate SeAR from Skaftártunga for period separated by dated tephra layers, with 1 standard deviation show by grey shading. Mean calculated where n = >10. (f) Mean aggregate SeAR at the scale of the landholding, from two small landholdings (Hrífunes and Flaga, see Fig. 1d). (g) Change in SeAR at the landscape scale, 2 stratigraphic sections which record the onset of increased erosion at AD 1597, but profile 38 shows stability through the entire settlement period prior to AD 1918. (h) Population trends in Iceland. Prior to the first census in AD 1703 estimates are based on medieval populations being similar to or even higher than the population in AD 1703 (90 and 43). Plague reductions of ∼40% in AD 1402–1404 and ∼30% in AD 1496 are shown (Karlsson, 1996).
The paper:
Late-Holocene land surface change in a coupled social–ecological system, southern Iceland: a cross-scale tephrochronology approach
Richard Streeter, Andrew Dugmore
Highlights
• Tephrochronology can be used to produce cross scale-analysis of land surface change.
• Grímsvötn tephras are dated to AD 1432 ± 5 and AD 1457 ± 5.
• High resolution 1200-year record of land surface change from Skaftártunga, south Iceland.
• Increasing spatial heterogeneity in sediment accumulation rates after AD ∼870.
• Relationship between climate, vegetation cover and land surface change contingent on past conditions.
Abstract
The chronological challenge of cross-scale analysis within coupled socio-ecological systems can be met with tephrochronology based on numerous well-dated tephra layers. We illustrate this with an enhanced chronology from Skaftártunga, south Iceland that is based on 200 stratigraphic profiles and 2635 individual tephra deposits from 23 different eruptions within the last 1140 years. We present new sediment-accumulation rate based dating of tephra layers from Grímsvötn in AD 1432 ± 5 and AD 1457 ± 5. These and other tephras underpin an analysis of land surface stability across multiple scales. The aggregate regional sediment accumulation records suggest a relatively slow rate of land surface change which can be explained by climate and land use change over the period of human occupation of the island (after AD ∼870), but the spatial patterning of change shows that it is more complex, with landscape scale hysteresis and path dependency making the relationship between climate and land surface instability contingent. An alternative steady state of much higher rates of sediment accumulation is seen in areas below 300 m asl after AD ∼870 despite large variations in climate, with two phases of increased erosion, one related to vegetation change (AD 870–1206) and another related to climate (AD 1597–1918). In areas above 300 m asl there is a short lived increase in erosion and related deposition after settlement (AD ∼870–935) and then relatively little additional change to present. Spatial correlation between rates of sediment accumulation at different profiles decreases rapidly after AD ∼935 from ∼4 km to less than 250 m as the landscape becomes more heterogeneous. These new insights are only possible using high-resolution tephrochronology applied spatially across a landscape, an approach that can be applied to the large areas of the Earth’s surface affected by the repeated fallout of cm-scale tephra layers.
This article was originally published on The Hockey Schtick, and presented here with some minor edits for format and clarity.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Deadly dull weather is a catastrophe!!!!!
Chris Turney has had a hand in the development of tephrachronology. An interesting bite of the ass?
Perhaps a lower temperature differentials between the poles and equator will lead to lower pressure differentials and ergo slower, less violent turbulence? Who’d a thunk it? Well, I know Dr. Ball pointed that out to me a long time ago. If I recall correctly, he said he and others had been teaching that forever and a day.
I’ve been trying to hammer this point all last year about global warming meaning less extreme weather. Here are the Great storms of the Little Ice Age abstracts.
Further reading
Thanks for posting Anthony.
Why do climate scientists conveniently forget that temperature differentials drive all weather, not absolute temperatures?
The Jupiter Red Spot is the largest persistent storm system in the universe, larger than Earth + Mars in size, yet the average temperature of Jupiter is – 234 F [-145 C].
Completely debunks the ‘global warming puts more energy in the system, so there will be more storms and extreme weather’ meme.
Looking at a small sample. During our global warming peak from 1996 to 2007, the Atlantic Basin had one of the strongest hurricane seasons, it may be As the earth cools under weaker sunspot cycles, winter storms gain strength and under stronger sunspot cycles winter storms drop off and tropical storms pick up.
Something to look at. How else would the earth have glacier growth if not weaker sunspot cycles bringing on stronger winter storms? Stronger sunspot cycles bring on more tropical storms and more rain and increased agriculture.
May just be looking at balance.
Most Sincerely,
Paul Pierett
Lake Helluvastorm , love it.
Funny how “cold, stormy weather” seems much more familiar than “hot stormy weather”.
My eye says b, e and f precede temperature by about 150 years. Interesting.
Actually it’s a well known meteorological fact that an atmosphere that is more baroclinic will generate and experience greater turbulent weather patterns than a similar atmosphere that is more barotropic. Check any basic college course text book on Atmospheric Science.
Despite all the evidence to the contrary Warmists still insist on more extreme weather. How can I get through to someone who does not want to be gotten through to? 🙂
Forecast polar vortex on 30 January at an altitude of 15 km.
http://oi39.tinypic.com/2dipoxg.jpg
This Sun by ozone controls the weather.
Here is the English Channel. Note the cold and storminess.
Here is New York. Note the cold and storminess. Brrrrrr.
The data has not yet been adjusted.
Soon will experience it even more, because the sun goes to sleep.
If these things have little or no relation, we’re just assuming causation and extrapolating to unreasonable ends. At what temperature is there no extreme weather? At what temperature is all weather extreme?
Also, the article and most other studies of the nature assume reliable comprehensive global weather records from before the 1980s. That’s a stretch.
Here is the French Mediterranean
OK I think you get the point as I could go on and on. Warmists should desist from trying to scare little children who don’t know any better. What we have seen since 1997 is just the weather and not the climate (30+ years of data). There is no loaded dice but a pea under the thimble. It’s a shell game, a con job, don’t fall for it.
Jimbo says:
January 25, 2014 at 9:03 am
Despite all the evidence to the contrary Warmists still insist on more extreme weather. How can I get through to someone who does not want to be gotten through to? 🙂
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
You can’t when their pay check depends on ignoring you.
Science is simply amazing. Global warming decreases storms. Global cooling decreases storms. And the opposites are also true ref. increases. Anyway to get the climate to simply not change?
apparently lost in moderation:?
Thanks for posting Anthony.
Why do climate scientists conveniently forget that temperature differentials drive all weather, not absolute temperatures?
The Jupiter Red Spot is the largest persistent storm system in the universe, larger than Earth + Mars in size, yet the average temperature of Jupiter is – 234 F [-145 C].
Completely debunks the ‘global warming puts more energy in the system, so there will be more storms and extreme weather’ meme.
Sun wants to be appreciated.
http://vortex.accuweather.com/adc2004/pub/includes/columns/newsstory/2014/650x366_01251629_front.jpg
Blah weather is what directly precedes another 100,000 years of glaciation. Vive les extreme weather events.
Is this something new ?
Yet another salient reason why Warmer Is Better: milder weather, fewer extreme storms.
Felicitatus ex plus caloris