UPDATE – 4/7/13
At the time I wrote this post, April 4th 11:45AM, at ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/paleo/icecore/trop/quelccaya/
there was a placeholder file quelccaya2013.txt reading then:
“# Data will be added to this file upon publication of Thompson et al. 2013 Science”
It seems they listened. Good on them for doing so (assuming WUWT had an impact). Now there are several data files dated April 5th at 8:20PM.
Steve McIntyre offers some praise and some notes for this latest development here -Anthony
=============================================================
From the Ohio State University , taken with a grain of salt since Dr. Thompson and his wife Ellen are serial non archivers of ice core data (even when asked for it), which prevents other scientists from checking their work.
Discovery of 1,800-year-old ‘Rosetta Stone’ for tropical ice cores
Find offers the most complete picture of Earth’s low-latitude climate history to date
COLUMBUS, Ohio—Two annually dated ice cores drawn from the tropical Peruvian Andes reveal Earth’s tropical climate history in unprecedented detail—year by year, for nearly 1,800 years.
Researchers at The Ohio State University retrieved the cores from a Peruvian ice cap in 2003, and then noticed some startling similarities to other ice cores that they had retrieved from Tibet and the Himalayas. Patterns in the chemical composition of certain layers matched up, even though the cores were taken from opposite sides of the planet.
In the April 4, 2013 online edition of the journal Science Express, they describe the find, which they call the first annually resolved “Rosetta Stone” with which to compare other climate histories from Earth’s tropical and subtropical regions over the last two millennia.
The cores provide a new tool for researchers to study Earth’s past climate, and better understand the climate changes that are happening today.
“These ice cores provide the longest and highest-resolution tropical ice core record to date,” said Lonnie Thompson, distinguished university professor of earth sciences at Ohio State and lead author of the study.
“In fact, having drilled ice cores throughout the tropics for more than 30 years, we now know that this is the highest-resolution tropical ice core record that is likely to be retrieved.”
The new cores, drilled from Peru’s Quelccaya Ice Cap, are special because most of their 1,800-year history exists as clearly defined layers of light and dark: light from the accumulated snow of the wet season, and dark from the accumulated dust of the dry season.
They are also special because of where they formed, atop the high Andean altiplano in southern Peru. Most of the moisture in the area comes from the east, in snowstorms fueled by moist air rising from the Amazon Basin. But the ice core-derived climate records from the Andes are also impacted from the west—specifically by El Niño, a temporary change in climate, which is driven by sea surface temperatures in the tropical Pacific.
 |
||||
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
  IMAGE: This 2002 photo of Quelccaya Ice Cap, taken from the same spot as a previous photo in 1977, shows the retreat of the ice wall’s vertical margins.Click here for more information. |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
||||
El Niño thus leaves its mark on the Quelccaya ice cap as a chemical signature (especially in oxygen isotopes) indicating sea surface temperatures in the equatorial Pacific Ocean over much of the past 1,800 years.
“We have been able to derive a proxy for sea surface temperatures that reaches back long before humans were able to make such measurements, and long before humans began to affect Earth’s climate,” Thompson said.
Ellen Mosley-Thompson, distinguished university professor of geography at Ohio State and director of the Byrd Polar Research Center, explained that the 2003 expedition to Quelccaya was the culmination of 20 years of work.
The Thompsons have drilled ice cores from glaciers atop the most remote areas of the planet—the Chinese Himalayas, the Tibetan Plateau, Kilimanjaro in Africa, and Papua Indonesia among others—to gauge Earth’s past climate. Each new core has provided a piece of the puzzle, as the researchers measured the concentrations of key chemicals preserved in thousands of years of accumulated ice.
A 1983 trip to Quelccaya yielded cores that earned the research team their first series of papers in Science. The remoteness of the site and the technology available at the time limited the quality of samples they could obtain, however. The nearest road was a two-day walk from the ice cap, so they were forced to melt the cores in the field and carry samples back as bottles of water. This made some chemical measurements impossible, and diminished the time resolution available from the cores.
“Due to the remoteness of the ice cap, we had to develop new tools such as a light-weight drill powered by solar panels to collect the 1983 cores. However, we knew there was much more information the cores could provide” Mosley-Thompson said. “Now the ice cap is just a six-hour walk from a new access road where a freezer truck can be positioned to preserve the cores. So we can now make better dust measurements along with a suite of chemical analyses that we couldn’t make before.”
The cores will provide a permanent record for future use by climate scientists, Thompson added. This is very important, as plants captured by the advancing ice cap 6,000 years ago are now emerging along its retreating margins, which shows that Quelccaya is now smaller than it has been in six thousand years.
“The frozen history from this tropical ice cap—which is melting away as Earth continues to warm—is archived in freezers at -30ºC so that creative people will have access to it 20 years from now, using instruments and techniques that don’t even exist today,” he said.
Coauthors on the study include Mary Davis, Victor Zagorodnov, and Ping-Nan Lin of Byrd Polar Research Center; Ian Howat of the School of Earth Sciences at Ohio State; and Vladimir Mikhalenko of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Funding was provided by the National Science Foundation’s Paleoclimatology Program and Ohio State’s Climate, Water and Carbon Program.
Perhaps if they had been standing there holding a contemporary copy of one of the following rags (found in the possession of every _serious_ environmentalist) for each of the photos it would have lent that needed air of authenticity:
AdBusters
Farmers National Weekly
Grist Magazine
International Socialist Review
Kommunist
Left Turn
Marxist Group
Mother Jones
People’s Daily
Pravda
The Nation
The New York Times
Utne Reader
Workers’ Weekly
.
@ba 1226pm
“Paper says data already archived:”
If you follow that link there is a distinct lack of data supposedly archived as yet
What keeps amazing me, mindboggling, is the fact that the data have not been archived, the cores are not safeguarded for future reanalysis. Is this the sorry state of climate research ™?
In my branch of science, we have to submit our findings until the last basepair before we get even a possibility to publish. This is not science, this is an alibi to extract even more money from gullible citizens.
Count me out.
“Two annually dated ice cores drawn from the tropical Peruvian Andes reveal Earth’s tropical climate history in unprecedented detail—year by year, for nearly 1,800 years.”
For nearly 1800 years ice has been in this location, therefore two points mentioned below.
!) The ice presence indicates that the recent period is still cold enough to preserve it.
2) What happened to the ice that wasn’t present before 1800 years ago? Only indicates that the tropical location was too warm prior then to maintain it for this detail.
Therefore when considering these points the tropical location is colder over the recent period than the past. How can 6000 years ago the glacier be bigger when there is no ice data before nearly 1800 years ago? If the glacier was bigger than the more layers would have been preserved to measure this so called unprecedented detail. If any science can be determined from this and that being the glacier has been bigger over the last 1800 years because the layers can be carefully examined.
If the cores compact to 5% of the original snow volume to ice over 1500 years, wouldn’t this allow for considerable opportunity for gas diffusion between the layers, hence averaging apparent atmospheric concentrations over very long periods ?
http://members.casema.nl/errenwijlens/co2/quelccaya.htm
I don’t care what “science” they claim to have produced. Without verifiable evidence and independantly reproducible results they are full of “it”. As far as I am concerned anything they’ve offered up is no better than leftovers at a McDonald’s dumpster after a dog has rotated it through it’s bowels and left it as a gift on someone’s yard. At some point it was pretty tasty, but that is certainly not the case anymore.
Unsubstantiated trash until they provide the data and methodologies used to obtain results. Sad state of affairs for these hucksters. The parade is over.
we now know that this is the highest-resolution tropical ice core record that is likely to be retrieved.
Which tells me there has been snow and ice accumulation at this location every year for centuries. Which further investigation proves to be indeed the case. An average of around 1.2 meters of water equivalent per year, or about 35 feet of snow per year.
What’s surprising is that snow accumulation increased substantially in the 20th century compared with the previous 2 centuries.
See figure 5 at the link.
As for the retreating glacier, the pictures tell me it is in a sun facing location, which would be north facing as this is in the southern hemisphere.
Just like pretty much everywhere else, sun facing glaciers are retreating and those that aren’t sun facing aren’t retreating. Which means warmer atmospheric temperatures aren’t the cause.
http://www.pnas.org/content/103/28/10536.full.pdf+html
nice try, BA
but we’ve learned to “watch the pea under the thimble” with these folk before (as noted above by Hans Erren)
Hans Erren says:April 4, 2013 at 12:09 pm
Thank you for your link. You don’t mention it, but everyone should know that you posted this nine years ago, Steve McIntyre looked at the data and pointed out a strange pattern in the early years.
As a graduate of the Ohio State University Department of Geology I’m ashamed that they haven’t denounced LonnieThompson and all of his climate scientology and dubious research methods and lack of transparency. They’ve changed the name of the department from Geology to “Earth Systems Science.” With a BS new name they seem proud of a BS artist like Thompson.
“Dr. Thompson and his wife Ellen are serial non archivers of ice core data (even when asked for it), which prevents other scientists from checking their work.”
After exposure of Ellen Moseley-Thompson’s role in the attack against Soon and Baliunas, I think, checking their work is a very important issue.
http://climateaudit.org/2011/11/25/behind-closed-doors-perpetuating-rubbish/
“Will Lonnie Thompson archive THIS new ice core data?”
It seems so. Following BA’s link, there is a placeholder with metadata, and forward dated to
# Contribution_Date
# Date: 2013-05-05
At the bottom there is a note:
# Data will be added to this file upon publication of Thompson et al. 2013 Science
There is an extensive database of the earlier Quelccaya data here.
So you should have everything you need.
BA writes (in part):
” Anthony Watts asks:
“Will Lonnie Thompson archive THIS new ice core data?”
Paper says data already archived:
“The data are archived at the NOAA World Data Center-A for Paleoclimatology:”ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/paleo/icecore/trop/quelccaya/quelccaya2013.txt”
The data are not yet archived. Anthony is right to ask his question, for the lead author apparently has not responded to at least some prior data requests. The site linked by BA states data will be added when the paper is published, presumably the print version of SCIENCE.
This research was supported by the National Science Foundation–meaning the US taxpayers. NSF requires data sharing, as described here:
From http://www.nsf.gov/bfa/dias/policy/dmp.jsp–
“Dissemination and Sharing of Research Results
“NSF Data Sharing Policy
“Investigators are expected to share with other researchers, at no more than incremental cost and within a reasonable time, the primary data, samples, physical collections and other supporting materials created or gathered in the course of work under NSF grants. Grantees are expected to encourage and facilitate such sharing. See Award & Administration Guide (AAG) Chapter VI.D.4.”
‘This 2002 photo of Quelccaya Ice Cap, taken from the same spot as a previous photo in 1977, shows the retreat of the ice wall’s vertical margins.’
Ok, I don’t know that much about glaciers but doesn’t that 2002 photo, the caption appearing above, look sort of strange. Those are fairly rough looking rocks in the foreground considering they’ve had ice grinding down on them for, I dunno, a gazillion years before us nefarious humans came along and changed everything. Where’s the smooth pebbles, gravel, deposited boulders? Where’s the terminal moraine? Ok, if not the terminal moraine, where’s the recessional moraine? Glacial melt water lake? Like I said, ok typed, “I don’t know that much about glaciers,” but that sure doesn’t look quite like any retreating glacier I’ve ever seen. Where was that photo taken? It doesn’t seem to reveal much.
“This is very important, as plants captured by the advancing ice cap 6,000 years ago are now emerging along its retreating margins”
Can these climate scientists say why there was no glacier 6000 years ago, and then what caused the glacier to emerge and grow, and now retreat again presumably back to the natural state that existed prior to 6000 years ago?
“taken with a grain of salt since Dr. Thompson and his wife Ellen are serial non archivers of ice core data (even when asked for it), which prevents other scientists from checking their work.”
If this is the case, it is time to change from reaction to pro-action by independent scientists. This kind of behavior (hiding data to prevent checking) was made morally correct by Dr. S. Schneider who said it was okay to exaggerate and bend the truth if it serves the cause. I’m disturbed by the statement by Thompson that “history from this tropical ice cap—which is melting away as Earth continues to warm…”. This is prima facie evidence of a bias that ensures that the latitude available in the data WILL be interpreted in favor of CAGW. He is not going to reconsider even the “expected” intensity of 21st century warming in light of 16 yrs ( a sixth of a century) without significant warming. The “Schneider factor” in the data of the Marcott et al paper shows that there is little incentive by the true believers in CAGW to even hide the crude shenanigans that have been sanctified by Schneider’s statements. Getting their version of reality out there is all that matters – even withdrawing the paper after it has hit the news is even okay.
I believe funding of independent research, as in the case of the ground-breaking and highly effective surfacestations project, is necessary and doable – I’m on board.
Regarding the Thompsons, I second the reservations most have expressed here. But I can’t help but think how awesome it would be if this proves to be true:
“Patterns in the chemical composition of certain layers matched up (to other ice cores…retrieved from Tibet and the Himalayas), even though the cores were taken from opposite sides of the planet.”
“…they call (thier find) the first annually resolved “Rosetta Stone” with which to compare other climate histories from Earth’s tropical and subtropical regions over the last two millennia”
Wow! If true, this could salvage the reputation of the Thompsons, (which is all the more reason to hold their feet to the fire and force them to put up or shut up).
The best Lonnie Thompson, global glacier wonder-boy, article ever was an NPR hagiography in 2010.
They gave the Lon-Man the national stage to opine that the glacier he visited in Indonesia was “literally melting beneath my feet!”
“While Thompson and his team were there drilling cores, he says, they witnessed the glacier drop 12 inches in just two weeks.
So, Lonnie said, “If that’s representative of the annual ice loss on these glaciers,” he says, “you’re looking at losing over seven meters of ice in a year. Unfortunately, that glacier’s going to disappear in as little as five years if that rate continues.”
Well, Lonnie, how’s that prediction working out? It’s been 3 years, nearly 5. Is the glacier still there?
A real scientist would go back and check and report.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=129652700
What would AlGore do? What would Michael Mann do?
GeologyJim says:
April 4, 2013 at 12:25 pm
With Lonnie and Liz, I’m not even willing to accept the assertion that the two photos were taken “from the same spot” 35 years apart….
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
A close look at the first photo seems to indicate a very steep/vertical slope of rock with some ice clinging in spots in the lower left corner. The second photo show a a foreground of moderately steep slope that does not look vertical at all. If it is the same spot the first shot was with a zoom and the second a normal or wide angle. The lack of definition of the ‘rings’ in the ice also indicates this is comparing apples and oranges. Deception is the word that comes to mind.
So, the glacier is 6,000 years old, representing a new interglacial, mid-Holocene-age ice advance near the Equator that is now retreating and is not a remanent of the last glacial period. Is that right?
GeologyJim says:
April 4, 2013 at 12:25 pm
With Lonnie and Liz, I’m not even willing to accept the assertion that the two photos were taken “from the same spot” 35 years apart. In any event, it would be a remarkable coincidence that both photos were obtained with lenses of equal focal length and magnification (which would alter the appearance of distance, etc).
========================================================================
Let’s say they did.
Ice melts.
So what?
We can’t cause or change it.
Gary Pearse says: April 4, 2013 at 2:30 pm
‘“taken with a grain of salt since Dr. Thompson and his wife Ellen are serial non archivers of ice core data (even when asked for it), which prevents other scientists from checking their work.”
If this is the case, it is time to change from reaction to pro-action by independent scientists…’
But it isn’t. I checked the NOAA icecore gateway. This has the databases for all ice-cores, polar and tropical, which is Thompson’s speciality. You can order them by contributor; Thompson’s wouldn’t fit on a page, but there are fifteen of them. This will make sixteen.
Is that a lot? I did some counting. There were 181 altogether (all ice cores). The next highest contributors had five each. Seems like he’s a star.
6000 years ago? Wasn’t that the year that the world was created? [/sarc]
After having read the paper, here’s my thoughts about various people’s comments:
toml: “Is there actually a paper, or just a press release?”
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/early/2013/04/03/science.1234210
Bryan A: “This could also be written
The cores will provide a permanent record for future use by climate scientists, Thompson added. This is very inportant, as plants captured by the advancing ice cap 6,000 years ago are now emerging along its retreating margins, which shows that Quelccaya was smaller 6,000 years ago than it is now and that the climate there was likely warmer then than it is now”
Or maybe not even 6000 years ago. Basically they found plant material that is ~6000 years old in spots recently uncovered by the retreating glacier and conclude that the plants grew in that spot 6000 years ago, meaning that it had to have been ice free there. However, they don’t explain why they exclude the possibility that the plants grew in a spot at higher elevation (one currently covered in ice) 6000 years ago, were encased in ice, and have since been moved by the moving ice down the slope to where they found them.
crosspatch: “So … there has probably only been ice up there for about 2000 years?”
No. The paper describes how ice continues to accumulate at the top, while simultaneously melting where it contacts the ground. So there likely was a significant amount of ice up there 2000 years ago, but all the ice from that point and before has since melted. (Matt G, this addresses a portion of your comment also)
date: Sat Sep 18 08:48:09 2004
from: Phil Jones
subject: Re: kilimanjaro
to: “Jenkins, Geoff”
Geoff,
The data that are used for the grid box should be within the grid box. They will be low
elevation sites though, and this may be part of the reason. It might be worth seeing if
there is anything in the U/A data – but I reckon there won’t be much in that region.
I’ve heard Lonnie Thompson talk about the Kilimanjaro core and he got some local temperatures – that we don’t have access to, and there was little warming in them. The same situation applies for Quelccaya in Peru and also some of his Tibet sites. Lonnie thinks they are disappearing because of sublimation, but he can’t pin anything down. They are going though.
Lonnie’s email is “Lonnie G. Thompson”
You could try emailing Ellen as well both might be in the field.
Ellen Mosley-Thompson
I’m off much of the next 6 weeks at meetings.
I hear you’re retiring soon – hope all goes well ! I’m sure you’ll still be in the field somewhere.
Cheers
Phil
At 10:32 16/09/2004, you wrote:
phil
<>
we have been concerned that people often use the melting glacier on kilimanjaro as an
example of impacts of man-made warming. you may have seen some stories countering this on the sceptics websites.
I got philip brohan to look at temps there (see attached) and there isnt any convincing consistent recent warming in the station data. but your gridded CRUtem2V does show a recent warming. presumably that is because (as philip suggests) the gridded stuff has influences from quite a large radius, and hence may reflect warming at stations a long way from kilimanjaro?
would you agree that there is no convincing evidence for kilimanjaro glacier melt being due to recent warming (let alone man-made warming)?
be grateful for your help
cheers
geoff
Dr Geoff Jenkins
Head, Climate Prediction Programme
Hadley Centre
Met Office
FitzRoy Road, EXETER, EX1 3PB, UK
tel: +44 (0) 1392 xxxxxx
mobile: 0787 966 1136
[1]www.hadleycentre.xxxx.xx