Will Lonnie Thompson archive THIS new ice core data?

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

This photo from a 1977 expedition to Quelccaya Ice Cap in Peru shows clearly defined annual layers of ice and dust visible in the ice cap’s margin. Researchers at the Ohio State University are using a set of ice cores taken from Quelccaya as a “Rosetta Stone” for studying other ice cores taken from around the world. Credit: Photo by Lonnie Thompson, Courtesy of Ohio State University.

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.

The climate data they don't want you to find — free, to your inbox.
Join readers who get 5–8 new articles daily — no algorithms, no shadow bans.
0 0 votes
Article Rating
129 Comments
David L.
April 5, 2013 2:21 am

Andrew Russell on April 4, 2013 at 11:19 pm
“Nick Stokes, 10:37 pm: “The question poses facts that I am supposed to respond to”
More “LOOK, A SQUIRREL!”
Your refusal to answer a straight forward question, well documented, pretty well answers another question: Is Nick Stokes intellectually honest?”
Why bother? It’s obviously a religion to Nick, meaning faith based. That is far different than being a scientist that demands an open mind.
As I scientist I’ve given up on these lost souls long ago. You just can’t convince closed minded people to have an open mind and challenge their own beliefs.

Editor
April 5, 2013 3:05 am

Lonnie, himself, wrote in 2003
For the Quelccaya Ice Cap (13.93°S, 70.83°W), this work revealed that peak temperatures of the MWP were warmer than those of the last few decades of the 20th century.
And back in 1986, discussing ice cores on the same glacier in Peru
The fact that the Little Ice Age (about A.D. 1500 to 1900) stands out as a significant climatic event in the oxygen isotope and electrical conductivity records confirms the worldwide character of this event.
Meanwhile he is now coming across plant remains as the Quelccaya recedes which are dated to 3000BC.
Unprecedented warming?
http://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2012/12/24/another-wild-alarmist-prediction-bites-the-dust/

Nick Stokes
April 5, 2013 3:41 am

“Unprecedented warming?”
No. Marcott, for example, famously said “Current global temperatures of the past
decade have not yet exceeded peak interglacial values but are warmer than during ~75% of
the Holocene temperature history.”. And if you look at his Fig 1B, about 3000BC (maybe 3500) is close to the most recent high point
AR4 has a section on warmth at about this period, though they don’t seem to have data on S America. Fig 6.9 has it.

April 5, 2013 4:07 am

I’m sure some of you will find this comment amusing, over on the James Delingpole thread.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100209502/hayes-fallon-deckchairs-titanic/#comment-852918222
I quote;
Why do I find myself laughing at the idea of the illiterates at WUWT ‘shredding’ peer-reviewed science? They attack it alright, but they don’t understand it.
I’ve suggested he pops over to enlighten you all but you shouldn’t hold your breath.

jc
April 5, 2013 4:08 am

@donaitkin says:
April 5, 2013 at 2:14 am
People can collect, compile or stockpile what they like. Build their case in privacy or secret if someone is prepared to indulge that with support.
If they make a claim to others that relies in any way on this stockpiled data they must make it -any parts required to validate a claim – available. Surely that is obvious.

Stacey
April 5, 2013 4:16 am

Is it possible to obtain aerial photos back to the 1979’s or thereabouts?

Gail Combs
April 5, 2013 4:23 am

Ian says:
April 4, 2013 at 6:46 pm
Looking at the many of the 71 posted comments to the time of writing is there really any need to be so dismissive and derogatory? …..
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
1.) They have a history of not releasing their data so it can be checked. Therefore they have established themselves as secretive non-scientists.
2.) US Scientists Significantly More Likely to Publish Fake Research, Study Finds
3.) They claim some very unconvincing photos show the retreat of the glacier. My house as a kid sat on a Recessional Moraine. know what they look like photo. There is no debris showing in that 2nd photo – NONE. As the glacier melts it should look like this photo. Moraine is material transported by a glacier and then deposited. The first photo shows a near vertical cliff face. Any climber will tell you there is normally a lot of debris at the bottom of a cliff face, Again where is the debris? The second photo does not show that steep an angle so there should be debris If the rock had been scrapped clean it would be rounded instead of looking like “$hitty Shale” photo that crumbles as soon as you put weight on it. (You can see the uplifted bedding planes) photo and photo
I decided to check the actual geology to see if my SWAG was correct:
The Quelccaya Ice Cap is located in the Cordillera Oriental section of the Andes mountains of Peru, link
Cordillera Occidental (Western mountain range) link
• Includes Apolobamba,
Munecas, and Real
Cordilleras
Quartzite, Slate, shale,
with intrusions of
granodiorite causing
some metamorphism

• High relief primarily
from faulting
So yes the rock shown probably is shale/slate and not a ‘durable’ rock like granite. So where is the debris?

Gail Combs
April 5, 2013 4:41 am

Don Aitkin says:
April 5, 2013 at 1:36 am
Not everyone who fails to archive data is a crook….
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
They may not be a ‘crook’ but they are not a scientist either. If the work is funded by grants from the public purse as most of this CAGW work is, then it is NOT THEIR DATA, it belongs to the people who funded the study, the tax payer.
If the work is done for a private company in industry then yes “…fails to archive data…” does not mean they are a crook. However the company, if the findings are important, are going to request verification from a second lab. The key words in science is REPEATABLE and verified.
Personally, as a scientist, I am disgusted with the new ‘post-normal science’ which is just another name for Lysenkoism/propaganda.

Randy Dewees
April 5, 2013 6:05 am

The second photo the rock doesn’t look like slate to me – more like granite that has a fracture system making it weather out ledgy. There isn’t a lot of till, well none to speak of really, which suggests this area has been exposed for quite a long time

Steve Keohane
April 5, 2013 7:17 am

Gail Combs, thank you for the information wrt the local geology. Looked it up on Google Earth. Their image is from 12/31/1969! We should be able to find something more recent to compare that image to.

Theo Goodwin
April 5, 2013 7:18 am

Gail Combs says:
April 5, 2013 at 4:23 am
Dynamite post, thanks.
As regards the press release, reading it does not remind me of used car salesmen, as some have suggested; rather, it reminds me of small town gossips who are talking about a neighbor and showing photos.

Gerald Machnee
April 5, 2013 8:06 am

RE: Nick Stokes says:
April 4, 2013 at 10:30 pm
Steve McIntyre says: April 4, 2013 at 8:54 pm
“NIck, please identify a single incorrect statement in the linked post http://climateaudit.org/2012/07/01/lonnie-and-ellen-serial-non-archivers/.”
**Right at the top.**
As usual Nick does not answer the question.
Steve has stated that they have done SOME archiving.
So, Nick, WHAT IS INCORRECT ABOUT STEVE’S STATEMENTS?
SPECIFIC ANSWER PLEASE.

highflight56433
April 5, 2013 8:40 am

Sounds like a bid for more public funds to pad their estate planning.

trafamadore
April 5, 2013 9:28 am

Bryan A says: “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.”
But we know it was. That was the Marcott paper last month, remember?

trafamadore
April 5, 2013 9:36 am

Gail Combs says:”They claim some very unconvincing photos show the retreat of the glacier.”
This is the current press release for their science paper and there is a cool slider pict in it that is pretty convincing. I don’t know if this http will work, but here’s a try:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/05/world/americas/1600-years-of-ice-in-perus-andes-melted-in-25-years-scientists-say.html
But you can google “andes 1600 year thompson” and get it too.

Vince Causey
April 5, 2013 9:39 am

Nick Stokes,
“No. Marcott, for example, famously said “Current global temperatures of the past
decade have not yet exceeded peak interglacial values but are warmer than during ~75% of
the Holocene temperature history.”. And if you look at his Fig 1B, about 3000BC (maybe 3500) is close to the most recent high point.”
I don’t agree with that at all. The problem with Marcotts dataset is the very low resolution. Quite simply, there is no way of knowing what short term spikes occurred, either upwards or downwards. Therefore, there is no way you can claim that about 3000BC is close to the recent high, when the recent high is based on ultra high resolution measurements. If there is a spike at 3000BC, it would likely be higher than the modern high, but we wouldn’t be able to see it in Marcotts proxy.

trafamadore
April 5, 2013 9:54 am

Gail Combs says: “They claim some very unconvincing photos show the retreat of the glacier. My house as a kid sat on a Recessional Moraine.”
Moraines left by glaciers in recession reflect hesitations in the retreat. If the retreat is rapid, only the rock actually in the glacier at the time it melted is left, and that can be very little, esp if it was a rapidly moving glacier. The Hayden glacier (above Bend, Or) is a great example, there is just bare rock with a few eccentrics left where we once had glacier school classes in the 80’s. The terminal moraines are much lower, where the glacier used to terminate.
It’s still a pretty cool glacier, and you can easily walk there in a few hours. It has also pulled away from the lateral moraines on the North side of the glacier and last time I was there you could walk up for several hundred feet alongside the glacier and in one case walk sideways into the bottom of a crevice.

April 5, 2013 10:06 am

Nick Stokes says:
April 4, 2013 at 10:30 pm
Steve McIntyre says: April 4, 2013 at 8:54 pm
“NIck, please identify a single incorrect statement in the linked post http://climateaudit.org/2012/07/01/lonnie-and-ellen-serial-non-archivers/.”
Right at the top.
“the serial non-archiving couple of Lonnie Thompson and Ellen Mosley-Thompson, who, as it turns out, is an even worse offender than husband Lonnie, if such can be imagined. Their long career of non-archiving has flourished despite clear U.S. federal government policies dating back to 1991 which, on paper, require thorough data archiving by the climate community as a condition of receiving grants.”
And it goes on… and on .
In fact, they have lodged an extensive set of archives. Currently fifteen, and I think most predate last July. Lonnie is listed as as lead contributor, but Ellen is a frequent participant. And as I said above, the next most prolific ice-core contributors, Parrenin and Pedro, have five each. The Thompsons are by far the most prolific. This is not in accord with your characterization.
At least one of those fifteen was archived by Ellen.
###########################################################
Nick, Imagine your wife cheated on you every even month of the year.
And in divorce court you argued that she was a serial cheater.
Then Imagine her lawyer stood up and asked you?
Did she cheat in Jan? No
Did she cheat in March? no
Did she cheat in May ? No
Did she cheat in July? No
Did she cheat in Sept? No
Did she cheat in Nov? No
Then, how can you call her a serial cheater?
or imagine an employee of yours who came in to work every other week
and you go to fire him for serial non attentence.. What would your reaction
be to his defense ‘ But I was here every other week!!
If your 10 year child pooped his pants every other day and your wife said,
“its time to toliet train him hes a serial pants pooper” would you respond
Hey, wait. he didnt poop his pants yesterday!
I suspect you would see through these lame defenses.
Why? Why would you see through these. Its pretty simple. When it is expected
or required to perform an action X, and expected to perform that action continously
and diligently, a repeated failure to do this is best described as ” he is a non Xer”
Even though factually he may do X on occasion
Your wife may only cheat on you ON OCCASION, but describing her as faithful is
misleading.
Your employee may show up ON OCCASION, but describing him as a work attender
as opposed to a truant is misleading.
Your son may only crap his pants every other day, but to describe him as toilet trained because he occasionally drops a bomb on the right target is misleading.

Grey Lensman
April 5, 2013 10:53 am

Not only plants but tropical plants, thus indicating it was warmer and cooled very rapidly. No link but discovery channel program covered it. They reported it but obviously did not make or draw attention to the connections/implications

Bryan A
April 5, 2013 11:03 am

Re: Jimmy says:
April 4, 2013 at 4:08 pm
Jimmy,
You make a good point about the veg material likely being transported DOWN the slope. But this only means that 6000 years ago the Ice Cap had to be even smaller and temperatures even warmer to allow for the growth to have occured higher up the slope

Nick Stokes
April 5, 2013 1:02 pm

Steven Mosher says: April 5, 2013 at 10:06 am
Steven,
It may be that their archiving is not keeping up with youir demands. But why is all this venom heaped on the people who have done by far the most archiving in the field?

Nick Stokes
April 5, 2013 1:07 pm

Vince Causey says: April 5, 2013 at 9:39 am
“I don’t agree with that at all.”

Vince, my point was simply that Marcott’s curve shows relatively high values in about 3000BC, so it is not surprising if the glacier bottom shows signs of plant remains then. Maybe it was even warmer for periods at other times.

Gerald Machnee
April 5, 2013 8:23 pm

Nick Stokes says:
April 5, 2013 at 1:02 pm
————————————————
Steven Mosher says: April 5, 2013 at 10:06 am
Steven,
It may be that their archiving is not keeping up with youir demands. But why is all this venom heaped on the people who have done by far the most archiving in the field?
—————————————————–
As I indicated above and Steven has done in detail – YOU ARE NOT ANSWERING THE QUESTION!!
Again, Nick – it is what they got paid for and have not done.
SO, ANSWER THE ###### QUESTION!!!

April 6, 2013 12:29 pm

At the great risk of appearing a little cynical, I must admit I have been an avid follower of Dr Thomson. I guess I’m a little jealous of him. As a keen mountaineer and weather boffin, I would love to have his job! Travelling around the world studying glaciers and mountain ecology, all on big juicy research grants would be great. I don’t think I would care too much whether or not most people believed my conclusions or not, so long as the grants keep on coming!! But then, I guess I don’t have high enough ethics to be entrusted with such funds – and that’s partly why the honoured Drs Thomson, Mann, Hansen et al get the job and I don’t?!!

April 6, 2013 1:41 pm

“To be or not to be….to tell the truth or to lie….to archive or not to archive- just in case the truth comes back one day to bite you in the bum: these are the questions”!
Someone on this site once pointed out (not me!), that the one thing that science and religion have in common, is the search for the truth. Well, I guess we are all too aware of how much organised religion has often fallen well short of adhering to its own compassionate message of truth. But, is it that we are now witnessing much of science falling foul its own message? In any search for any truth, there will always be one essential starting point – the integrity of the searcher. Be it the search for God or the search for the causes of climate change, or any other phenomena, we must be honest – most of all with ourselves! We must rely on any research paper that we read being presented openly and honestly, with no agenda other than the genuine search for truth.
If that agenda is there, then we would expect much more in the way of open dialogue on any issue to do with climate science. In other words, open admissions of misplaced reliance on certain assumptions; or open admissions of not telling the whole truth; or open admissions of telling outright lies; or even open admissions of telling any combination of these! Instead, what we see is absolute denial of any wrong doing or of any failings in the methodology.
We must assume therefore, that all current predictions of AGW scientists should be bang on or at
least within some form of recognised tolerance. Only time will tell, but things already look a bit marginal to me. I will be truly relieved though if, or when, at least one of the main proponents of AGW steps forward and admits making a few mistakes. Only then, will my trust be restored in his, her or their genuine search for scientific truth.