Mike Bromley writes in: BBC has the explanation for the European LIA… it wasn’t really an ice age at all. See this strange quote.
“The Little Ice Age wasn’t really an ice age of any kind – the idea that Europe had a relentless sequence of cold winters is frankly barking” – Dr Mike Lockwood Reading University
No real discussion of the mechanisms that I could understand, referenced some papers your front line team would profitably have a go with. The BBC has solved the whole riddle. this has nothing to do with Global warming and it’s all local variability.
Full story here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-15199065
“The researchers emphasise there is no impact on global warming.”
Keeping the religion alive AND assuring continuing funding!!!
This is just SICK.
Hal
It all makes sense really. How could the LIA be associated with global warming? Tosspots.
How many = “relentless”?
The first time I read it on the BBC site yesterday I thought Lockwood’s ‘strange’ quote referred to the fact that not all the winters during the LIA were cold.
The bigger issue raised in the BBC article is whether the recent SORCE UV measurements are accurate: perhaps one of the WUWT solar experts could weigh in on that.
I’ve read the paper and the BBC hews to its meaning. The paper does not concern an effect of AGW or the LIA at all, but rather, the effect of solar cycles over the scale of individual decades.
Peiser really blew it. He really needs to apologize for sounding a false alarm.
Now that is remarkable.
The merchants of London must have been able to float their entire “frost fair” markets 18″ above the middle of the Thames with no visible means of support and without getting wet!!!
Furthermore, medieval technologists must have been able to freely skate above the water on the Thames with amazing efficiency.
Such technology must have made it to the New World, for we have reports of skating on the Hudson River. and on the Brandywine.
How can we recover this amazing technological expertise?
I think I get it — the Sun was responsible for significant climate variations in the 17th century, but has no effect on the climate in the 20th and 21st centuries.
Yup, that’s Warmista science all right.
So the LIA wasn’t an ice age of any kind, and the MWP didn’t exist (according to the Hockey Team), or was only regional. Sounds about the right time to quote/paraphrase some Orwell:
And if all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed -if all records told the same tale — then the lie passed into history and became truth. ‘Who controls the past,’ ran the Party slogan, ‘controls the future’
Hmm. Interesting.
So if there wasn’t a LIA, the Hudson River couldn’t have frozen in 1775 / 1776.
If this is the case, how did Colonel Knox get the cannons to Dorchester Heights?
In other words, American History requires a LIA, in much the same way as the history of Rome requires Caesar to cross the Rubicon.
Freezing your ass off doesn’t impact global warming. I’m speechless.
Bradley.
Benny Peiser on the GWPF website merely linked to the Sunday Times story. The Little Ice Age was their idea, not the GWPF. When the GWPF came to comment themselves they showed themselves to be far more accurate than the news websites.
For example.
Just compare David Whitehouse’ story
http://www.thegwpf.org/the-observatory/4063-the-sun-and-the-winter-of-2011.html
to Richard Black’s version.
Whitehouse is a real journalist, unlike Black.
Funny, I thought the Sun shone on the whole globe………..
Another Black from Black. The BBC has to make cuts so why not take the opportunity Beeb pen pushers to push? I am sure the WWF/GreenPees/Friends of the Earth/Plane Stupids could offer Mr Black a job……..
Yep…and no GCR/cloud connection needed. Imagine that!
Anthony, unless there is a second Mike Bromley on here, I didn’t post the LIA story. I submitted a blurb about Scientific American.
Anybody notice how Richard Black doesn’t allow comments on his BS anymore and if comments are allowed, they are closed before any debaye actually happens or sceptc comments are given negative reviews and yet the voiceds of true believers are not heard?
“The latest satellite data shows the UV output is far more changeable than scientists had previously thought.”
OK then … does this new fact not change their view that the ‘science is setted’ ???? The famous models did not include this but they are somehow above reproach.
There is just NO consistency to this narratve other than the preconcieved conclusion that we cause bad planetary behavior and must be punished.
.
The University of Reading is of comparable stature to the University of East Anglia. Don’t expect any Nobel Prize winning science from these folks. Lot’s of touchy, feely “Non-Science”.
It has been almost 200 years since the Thames froze over thanks to a warming climate and the Urban Heat Island effect.
I do not see the point of this BBC article unless it is an opening shot in a campaign to explain to the AGW faithful why you have colder winters in many parts of the globe, while there is ‘global warming’.
In other words, this is just another way of trying to explain away observations and data which do not agree with the IPCC’s and others’ climate models.
Now combine the UV stuff from that with the UV stuff from this:
” That means the plankton may react to UV rays quickly enough to impact their own weather.”
http://www.nasa.gov/vision/earth/environment/0702_planktoncloud.html
The Black article is the usual tosh but is it just me but doesn’t Richard Black look an awful ( and I mean AWFUL) lot like both Michael HockeySchtick Mann and Gavin RealClimate Schmidt? Same Mum? Same Dad? Clones?? TRIPLETS???
Maybe these blokes are all in some weird offshoot of Opus Dei and have weird plastic surgery to all look like…. hobbits? Orc-Hobbits?
Opus Gaia?
Just too weird to take seriously now but won’t this all make an amazing movie / mini series some time in the ( not too distant ) future. Imagine the Mann-Schmidt – Black teleconference scene or meeting over coffee at Copenhagen. Danny de Vito could play them all! Anyone want to work on the script?
So the incredible expansion of Andean, Alaskan, Canadian glaciers did not happen? The death of a million Chinese and the abandonment of Siberia and Greenland was a “denier’s’ lie?
Are these people insane?
Okay, so reading the GWPF report, this was NOT observed data, it was merely the result of feeding a reduction of uv levels into climate models. Do these people ever do real research based on measuring things??
Although the BBC has it wrong about UV being the likely solar variable responsible for for the LIA, they do correctly state that it was not an ice age.
I would recommend reading some of Shaviv’s works on the mechanisms in play during full blown ice ages. The LIA might have some similarities, say perhaps high GCR flux, but the temperature drop for an ice age is 10-15C as opposed to a couple of degrees for the LIA.
Seriously though, it good to see some credibility and actual quantification to the UV-stratosphere connection. This is an important step and displays a solar-climate connection that has nothing to do with the whole GCR issue…