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.
How quickly the frost-destroyed citrus crops are forgotten.
Now, when the Warming is gone, the reality starts to sink in.
Yes, we’ve been there before, saw that.
Some poor guy named Lowden got all excited here as a settler, when it was warm, and planted many orchards and strawberries.
Then the climate changed. late 1870’s onwards.
Mr. Lowden didn’t think it would ever do that, but it did. Ruined his crops
more often than not.
Hope you enjoyed your Global Warming while it lasted.
Everyone should go to Reddit and help the outnumbered anti-AGW commenters and article submitters who are systematically outvoted by the AGW alarmists. Here’s a good one about the Economist blog article. Don’t let them use bullying as a way to advance their agenda on so-called scientific discussion sites.
http://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/ae084/the_economist_scepticisms_limits_so_for_the_time/
Anthony
Very important, thank you. So important is this series of diagrams IMHO that I’ve done another modification to your animated gif – I’ve coloured each historical section so you can see the HS “fade” into insignificance
Hope it is ok.
“We’re only 10 years into the 21st century, but so far, global temperature has done exactly what was expected by mainstream climate scientists. Exactly…
The guys a doofus. The models have pretty much missed it-completely.
EUReferendum points to some interesting documents
http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2009/12/chaotic-system.html
AJStrata (13:37:04)
Interesting
I believe that Briffa is ill (or was) maybe he or an assitant was putting together the FOI files and because of the illness the files where left where they became accessable.
Is it possible that Briffa is an unintentional whistleblower? – in any event who cares – the deed is done and many are thankful.
I sincerely hope Keith Briffa is well or recovering.
It is exactly as I thought it would be,
first they /the pro agw) claim the world is heating up,
then they will claim that they have succesfully reduced CO2 concentration
finally, the cooling will emerge and voilà, they have saved the planet.
In a few years time, a lot of trials will commence
Now, I am off to prepare for winter
Are the temps used in the videos based upon RAW (or adjusted data)?
I think many have suggested that we may be heading into a much cooler period very soon.
Any ideas on how cold it may get in 50 – 100 – 200 -300 years out?
Whilst the greenhouse effect is generally thought of as heating earths environment, it is more accurate to describe it as preventing the environment from cooling. There is a critical difference.
If the effects of the atmosphere results in preventing the loss of heat, then surely the most accurate means to judge it’s effectiveness, and any changes that occur over time, is to monitor the lowest average temperatures.
The degree to which heat is radiated off, and the rate of such loss, is directly controlled by the greenhouse effect, with only an indirect connection to the warming.
The maximum temperatures are directly connected to the amount of incoming radiation, and only indirectly connected to the residual retention of heat by the greenhouse effect.
I would like to see the focus on all temperature related matters dealing with climate change being directed at the average mean minimum temperatures, rather than the average mean, or average mean maximum temperatures as at present. To do so would help tremendously in better understanding the impact the various contributing factors that determine not only our short term weather, but the climate over time.
Frank Mosher (11:22:05) :
” what global warming”
Here in the San Francisco Bay Area it was cold this week. There was snowfall over night Sunday. The snow lasted for four days in the hills. I’ve never seen that before. And it’s only early December, not even winter yet.
Bruce Cobb (13:46:51) :
‘If anything, thanks to the Warmists, man is focused on exactly the wrong thing climatically speaking. There is good evidence for significant cooling in the coming decades, possibly rivaling the LIA. That was not a good time for man then, and it won’t be for us either, even with our technological advances.’
This is why I support climate research. What I don’t need is BS like Climategate.
Open the “Books” or I will demand that funding STOPS.
MD,
I’ve posted the following comment on http://tamino.wordpress.com/2009/12/07/riddle-me-this/
Let’s put this into perspective for you readers and commenters, using the GISP proxy ice core samples from Greenland and Antarctica. Let me preclude this by saying that the data stops at around the year 1900 and that I have separately obtained the raw data files from NOAA’s ftp site and plotted the graphs myself and they match the graphs you’ll see on the link. Short summation – GLOBAL WARMING IS A GOOD THING. By rights we should currently be experiencing an ice age.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/12/12/historical-video-perspective-our-current-unprecedented-global-warming-in-the-context-of-scale/
Here are the links to the NOAA raw data:
Antarctica –
ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/paleo/icecore/antarctica/vostok/deutnat.txt
Greenland –
ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/paleo/icecore/greenland/summit/gisp2/isotopes/gisp2_temp_accum_alley2000.txt
Riddle me this:
Why is everyone getting so exciting about climate variation, when it’s natural and going to happen anyway, regardless of Man’s contribution?
Enjoy the fact that we have been living in an abnormally warm period for the last 10000 years, otherwise you’d be living in a much harsher climate – that is, an ice age.
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
A question that needs to be answered is, did Briffa allow for CO2 induced growth in his tree ring analysis?
Most of us know that the age of trees can be accurately determined by counting the growth rings, and the width of each growth ring is a reflection of the growing conditions at the time.
Researchers such as Keith Briffa have supposedly been able to determine the temperature from the study of such rings.
However there have been numerous studies also done regarding plant growth and CO2 levels in both enriched and depleted environments that find that in some plants the difference in plant biomass production between CO2 levels half current levels, and current levels, can see increases of 200% for the higher levels of CO2.
My question is, did Briffa, or anybody else study the effects different CO2 levels had on the growth of the trees being measured, and if so was the data collected calibrated to allow for the changes?
As far as I have been able to determine, it has not been done.
This is an interesting article on the BBC not completely OT.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/8408386.stm
Excellent! The hockey stick always needs to be put in perspective!
This is a great blog. I’m new to wordpress, but your information is really something. It’s nice to see someone else out there like me grabbing information from the best sources and putting it into perspective. Rock on 🙂
I don’t know if there’s anything to it, but I find it interesting that Sumer came about after the dip around 6000BC (specifically 5300BC). And the warm period started around 9000BC-8000BC. This “plateau” from 8000BC to present day doesn’t seem to have been flat in other warm periods of the past. Is it just me, but isn’t the current warm period between ice ages rather LONG compared to the others? What if a decline (over a few hundred years) is the more serious issue since it looks like it will come sooner or later no matter what.
And yes, the contrast between warm periods and ices ages completely dwarfs the hockey stick.
Thank God tons of people tune into the Weather Channel to check on the weather during snowy times like this. Everyone is seeing the snow and blizzard conditions from the comfort of their homes. The warmists can’t hid this from us. The propaganda value of the Weather Channel natural climateists is outstanding. Love the Home Alone music too.
Good stuff! I also think this is a good video presentation by Joseph D’Aleo, with information on climate variability and science, and the climate issue. Nice to watch and listen to for anyon. Imagine a christmas candle on his desk; good to among ordinary people.
(Oops, correction (it’s late in Sweden) : Nice to watch and listen to for anyone. Imagine a christmas candle on his desk; good to share among ordinary people.)
I’ve submitted this to Slashdot. If they run it, I hope your server can handle the traffic, Anthony!
Booker is making some interesting connections today:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/copenhagen-climate-change-confe/6797265/Copenhagen-climate-summit-descends-into-row-as-350-protesters-arrested.html
Forgive my ignorance with this question: But what does it mean that the hockey stick is insignificant when viewed against longer time intervals (if I’m understanding the point of the article) when McIntyre showed that — hopefully paraphrasing correctly — the hockey stick is an artifact of the data analysis, that is, it can be shown to occur in random pink noise data.
Isn’t the hockey stick phony to begin with and is non-existent. So what is the argument that, eg here, it exists but is irrelevant. Are you saying the hockey stick is real?
I now have to use an IP Proxy to be able to post in Guardian using an alias, sad.
human vanity preyed upon by politicians and businessmen.
where has reason gone.
agw dogma taught in grade schools, will not soon be gone.
why aren’t the republicans (US) all over this??
guess they’re in on it too. scary!!