Guest post by J Storrs Hall
There are several ways to predict what the temperature trends of the next century will be like. The standard method of prediction in science is to create a theory which embodies a model, test the model experimentally, and then run it into the future for the prediction. There is another way, however, which is simpler in some ways although more complex in others. That’s simply to remember what’s happened before, and assume it will happen again.
Here’s a record of what’s happened before, which most WUWT readers will be familiar with. It’s the GISP2 Greenland ice core record, shown for the Holocene:
I have shamelessly spliced on the instrumental record in red (by setting the temps in 1850 equal); it is the HadSST record.
When I first started looking at GISP2 it seemed to me that there were several places in the record that looked very much like the sharp spike in temperature we’re experiencing now. The obvious thing thing to do seems to be to overlay them for an easy comparison:
Here I’ve plotted the 400 years following each minimum in the record that leads to a sustained sharp rise. There were 10 of them; the first five are plotted in cyan and the more recent 5 in blue. You can see that in the latter part of the Holocene the traces settle down from the wilder swings of the earlier period. Even so, every curve, even the early ones, seems to have an inflection — at least a change in slope — somewhere between 200 and 250 years after the minimum.
The hatched black line is the average of the 5 recent (blue) spikes. The red dots are the uptick at the end of GISP2 and HadSST, spliced at 1850. Note that ALL the minima dates are from GISP2.
Prediction of the 21st century is left to the reader as an exercise.
Read ’em and weep.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
The first graph appears to be a proverbial ‘target rich environment’ insofar as hockey sticks are concerned. 🙂
Ian W says:
July 1, 2011 at 9:34 pm
You have totally bought into the debased language of the Warmista. If you want to know about hypotheses and prediction, read about Kepler’s Three Laws. Then we will have a common background to discuss the matter. Using Kepler’s Laws, one can predict the phases of Venus.
The Warmista would like us to use the language of the man in the street. The man in the street believes that he can predict the next winning Lotto number, the next Super Bowl winner, and so on. Obviously, there is no basis for any such prediction. The man in the street has hunches and may have very good hunches, but it is a grave error to dignify them with the terminology of science. Hunches are not scientific predictions.
The Warmista offer us hunches and model runs but claim that they offer us scientific predictions. They are just as wrong as the man in the street. Models cannot predict. Hunches are not predictions.
Extrapolations from experience and old graphs might be useful and fun but they are not scientific predictions. This is easily demonstrated. Scientific predictions are falsifiable. That means that one or more hypotheses used in the prediction will be falsified if the prediction turns out to be false. If instead of hypotheses you have old graphs then what are you going to falsify? Are you going to say that the old graph is false? How can it be false? It is just what it is, a plot of numbers.
Ian W says:
July 1, 2011 at 9:34 pm
“You can use any synonyms you want for that reporting – extrapolation, forecasting, prediction, experience….. but that first observation of a cycle is the foundation of the science of why that repetition takes place.”
Why do you declare these to be synonyms? Do you believe that extrapolation from an old graph is scientific prediction? Why? Do you believe that forecasts by weathermen are scientific predictions? Why? Sorry, but this list you give is not a list of synonyms.
Do I live in the only country on the planet where local temperatures have been falling every year, freezing lakes that don’t usually freeze over and destroying crops? Forget global temperature charts that show increased temperatures, they are useless and do not represent reality.
Anyone who opens their mouths with the disgraceful lies that “man made global warming” will increase temperatures or that temperatures here are rising then its clear that they are idiotic fools and they need to be stopped in the interest of public safety, such people seem to have no concept of the dangers of cold winters, the death toll due to the past three winters alone were extremely high and injuries were even higher there were even reports of people losing limbs from frost bite.
It’s irresponsible (and I believe criminal) to inform the public that the entire planet is warming and to expect milder winters, barbecue summers and that our local climate will change to be a more tropical kind.
Man Made Global warming is a huge scam and I’m sick to my back teeth of all the false claims, regulations and taxes and increased domestic prices based on eco-dribble and what moronic public figures believe.
People need to get off their fat lazy asses and demand that these people get prosecuted it’s disgusting and bloody outrageous that this “Man Made Global warming” Bull Sh*t has dragged on for so long and cost so much.
Dave Springer says:
July 2, 2011 at 5:48 am
If by “global warming” you’re referring to what the IPCC-compliant computer models are projecting, I’d agree. However, only a “sane, objective, informed person” would look at the empirical data, be satisfied with the outcome, and completely reject those discrepancy-laden computer models. They can’t hindcast so I seriously doubt they can forecast. For me, a bit more warming would be tolerated; even gladly accepted. Besides, upon what thesis are you saying there will be intolerable warming in the future? CO2?? Laughable.
Bill Illis says:
July 2, 2011 at 5:41 am
The Arctic and Antarctic intertwine (converge and diverge) the same way in the long-term cycles as they do today in the Sea Ice cycles. They also follow much the same path, the walker being the Big Antarctic Cap and walked dog being the Greenland Cap.
Climate models, of the Hansen variety, can only create scenarios, IE “what if’s”. Spin creates predictions.
huishi says:
July 1, 2011 at 4:26 pm
“I think your graphs show that we will likely see a much colder climate over the coming decades. Since that means problems with growing food, and we now have over 7 billion people to feed; it don’t look good to me…”
Don’t worry too much, Huishi, the current population of the world could, for example, fit into a small Principality the size of Wales, with a generous 3m^2 of ground space per person. This means the rest of the world could be available for huge green-houses and battery farms for livestock. No worries… :-))
BFL says:
July 1, 2011 at 9:40 pm
I personally like this one, the blue line that is. Historically it looks like there is no place to go but down and 8 deg C is quite a drop:
http://www.brighton73.freeserve.co.uk/gw/paleo/400000yearslarge.gif
======================================================================
Well BFL, a sane person would look at that and see that every time CO2 levels went up…
….temperatures crashed
That for some reason, recent temperatures did not go up as high as they used to….
….and CO2 levels are higher than they use to be
but then that wouldn’t be science, would it?
Russia is taking the ‘Arctic business’ seriously.
Russia to create Arctic troops – defense minister
Russia will deploy troops in the north to defend its interests in the Arctic region, Defense Minister Anatoly Serdyukov said on Friday.
http://en.rian.ru/mlitary_news/20110701/164952606.html
Bill Illis: Hi! Where do your two graphs come from please?
Dave
Mike says:
July 2, 2011 at 6:26 am
“…the over whelming(sic) evidence…”
Cite three papers that provide said evidence. To avoid… confusion, that would be;
Evidence that mankind’s contribution to total atmospheric carbon dioxide content caused the warming we have experienced since, say, 1911. Not evidence that the globe warmed. Not models.
If it is overwhelming I will be convinced. I may be pedantic but I am not wilfully stupid.
Theo: “I did not say that you should ignore them.”
You said even worse: “it is not different in principle from reading chicken bones.”
Go away Troll.
Tenuc says:
July 2, 2011 at 7:27 am
“Don’t worry too much, Huishi, the current population of the world could, for example, fit into a small Principality the size of Wales, with a generous 3m^2 of ground space per person. ”
Wouldn’t that make it prone to tipping over?
😛
(See: Hank Johnson D-GA ref Guam)
Eric Worrall says:
July 2, 2011 at 2:24 am
It’s not proper climate science if you admit you spliced data together in an arbitrary way
_____
Uh, this particular post has nothing to do with climate science…if you haven’t noticed.
If you merely circle wagons and don’t allow a factual debate ’bout Greenland, then you in this hour, don’t deserve a shower. Self-selection takes no prisoners. Thinkers fled from this debate, already. It’s Summer outside. No BANDWIDTH LIMITED issues exist, outside. Real people, they exist, out there. They want to meet you. Nothing would make them happier. Go out. Report back. Negative self-selection prevents my message from having any effect, here, in a especially contrived junior science backwater.
You hours do not affect.
M.A.Vukcevic says:
July 2, 2011 at 7:54 am
Russia is taking the ‘Arctic business’ seriously.
Russia to create Arctic troops – defense minister
Russia will deploy troops in the north to defend its interests in the Arctic region, Defense Minister Anatoly Serdyukov said on Friday.
http://en.rian.ru/mlitary_news/20110701/164952606.html
_____
As well they should. The USA, Canada, Denmark, Iceland, Sweden, Norway, Finland, Russia, and most recently China, have all initiated or expanded military readiness programs on one level or another to prepare for potential military action in the Arctic based on the sole criteria that access to the region and its resources is going to get easier and easier in the future as the ice thins and recedes on a year to year basis. Of course, those who think the next Little Ice Age is about to descend upon us probably think all this preparation is for nothing. We will know in less than a decade.
History repeats itself. Has to. No-one listens.
R. Gates says:
” potential military action in the Arctic based on the sole criteria that access to the region and its resources is going to get easier and easier in the future as the ice thins and recedes on a year to year basis. ”
You just made that up.
Rod Gill says:
July 1, 2011 at 4:36 pm
Great example of heavy use of common sense. Are you an Engineer (it takes one to know one!)?
I know predicting the future by looking in the rear view mirror is not recommeded …
I’m not qualified to comment on the OP, but (as a software engineer) I’ve done a lot of work relating to Risk Management systems for UK banks (read: working out potential and actual customer’s credit-worthiness). The golden rule in that area is “The future is like the past,” and it seems to work out more often than not. So, at least where the money is, “predicting the future by looking in the rear view mirror” is not only recommended, it’s essential. And the recent crash/recession/(depression?) is evidence of what happens when that golden Rule is set aside.
Regarding the GISP2 Greenland ice core record. The short term trends after major drops were up for the -5000, -3000 & -1000 (aprox). It appears stable and rising. The drop that ended the MWP (aka little ice age) has trended downward until recently.
While I hope for a warmer greener planet (with lots of CO2 for our plants) I think a downward trend is more likely. In real simple terms (ones I can grasp 🙂 3 out of 4 ain’t bad but I’m going to have to live through the 1.
R. Gates says:
July 2, 2011 at 11:51 am
Yes, step on it, and you just did. Russia doesn’t seem to be the slightest bit concerned over how much or how little ice there is in the Arctic:
http://en.rian.ru/business/20110617/164678803.html
The State run Rosneft Oil Company of Russia has invited all 4 of the Big Oil companies, including BP and Shell. Russia is busy making deals for the oil that you blame for all of the world’s troubles.
What are the Alarmists doing? Making up stories to steer the West into a poverty-stricken pile of goo, with the new Model A being Fred Flinstones’ car. Yabba-dabba doo.
As J Storrs Hall said “Read ‘em and weep.”
We better hope that he’s wrong.
A rough approximation on the arrival of “Bond Zero”.
http://i51.tinypic.com/6zbqds.png
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/07/01/whats-up-next/#comment-692980
Not sure why you are including Iceland, Finland. Sweden, and China in your list?
There are only five countries with actual territorial clains in the Arctic (CCW, and as it so happens to be, also in alphabetical order); Canada, Denmark, Norway, Russia, and the USA.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exclusive_Economic_Zone (200 NM)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Territorial_claims_in_the_Arctic (only the five countries above have additonal claims over and above their respective EEZ’s (and even these EEZ’s are only disputed by said same five countries))
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_waters
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/06_08_08_arcticboundaries.pdf (not a whole lot left to fight over for as I see it)
Also, this “article” has absolutely no predictive skill whatsoever.
Cherry picking, did you say?
You betcha!
So, for example, pick the ten highest maxima, plot them to there respective minima, then plot the current surface temperature time series (1850-present) against those ten and guess what?
OMG, 100% bonafide proof of AGW!
🙁
theduke says:
July 1, 2011 at 7:18 pm
I’ll go you one better:
Temperature will not remain constant.