From The Earth Institute at Columbia University comes another tree ring hockey stick. I have to laugh though at the choice of graphic for the press release, which shows a weather event (Euro heat wave) in 2003, rather than showing us the science, like maybe a reconstruction. I wonder what absurd assumptions or tricks (like Zombie proxies) Mr. McIntyre will find in this one that he hasn’t already – Anthony

Earth’s current warmth not seen in the last 1,400 years or more, says study
Fueled by industrial greenhouse gas emissions, Earth’s climate warmed more between 1971 and 2000 than during any other three-decade interval in the last 1,400 years, according to new regional temperature reconstructions covering all seven continents. This period of manmade global warming, which continues today, reversed a natural cooling trend that lasted several hundred years, according to results published in the journal Nature Geoscience by more than 80 scientists from 24 nations analyzing climate data from tree rings, pollen, cave formations, ice cores, lake and ocean sediments, and historical records from around the world.
“This paper tells us what we already knew, except in a better, more comprehensive fashion,” said study co-author Edward Cook, a tree-ring scientist at Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory who led the Asia reconstruction.
The study also found that Europe’s 2003 heat wave and drought, which killed an estimated 70,000 people, happened during Europe’s hottest summer of the last 2,000 years. “Summer temperatures were intense that year and accompanied by a lack of rain and very dry soil conditions over much of Europe,” said study co-author Jason Smerdon, a climate scientist at Lamont-Doherty and one of the lead contributors to the Europe reconstruction. Though summer 2003 set a record for Europe, global warming was only one of the factors that contributed to the temperature conditions that summer, he said.
The study is the latest to show that the Medieval Warm Period, from about 950 to 1250, may not have been global, and may not have happened at the same time in places that did grow warmer. While parts of Europe and North America were fairly warm between 950 and 1250, South America stayed relatively cold, the study says. Some people have argued that the natural warming that occurred during the medieval ages is happening today, and that humans are not responsible for modern day global warming. Scientists are nearly unanimous in their disagreement “If we went into another Medieval Warm Period again that extra warmth would be added on top of warming from greenhouse gases,” said Cook.
Temperatures varied less between continents in the same hemisphere than between hemispheres. “Distinctive periods, such as the Medieval Warm Period or the Little Ice Age stand out, but do not show a globally uniform pattern,” said co-author Heinz Wanner, a scientist at the University of Bern, in a press release. By 1500, temperatures dropped below the long-term average everywhere, though colder temperatures emerged several decades earlier in the Arctic, Europe and Asia.
The most consistent trend across all regions in the last 2,000 years was a long-term cooling, likely caused by a rise in volcanic activity, decrease in solar irradiance, changes in land-surface vegetation, and slow variations in Earth’s orbit. With the exception of Antarctica, cooling tapered off at the end of the 19th century, with the onset of industrialization. Cooler 30-year periods between 830 and 1910 were particularly pronounced during weak solar activity and strong tropical volcanic eruptions. Both phenomena often occurred simultaneously and led to a drop in the average temperature during five distinct 30- to 90-year intervals between 1251 and 1820. Warming in the 20th century was on average twice as large in the northern continents as it was in the Southern Hemisphere. During the past 2000 years, some regions experienced warmer 30-year intervals than during the late 20th century. For example, in Europe the years between 21 and 80 AD were likely warmer than the period 1971-2000.
The study involved the collaboration of researchers in China, Pakistan, India, Russia and the U.S., among others, under the auspices of the International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme. The project, Past Global Changes 2k Network, or PAGES 2k Network, was funded by the U.S. and Swiss National Science Foundations and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. The data compiled in the study will be made public and incorporated into the 2013-2014 climate report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
==============================================================
Source: http://www.earth.columbia.edu/articles/view/3081
But there’s no Title, no DOI, no citation to the paper of any kind. And the graphic is absurd.
Sloppy really. A press release should at least NAME THE PAPER.
UPDATE: After prodding the press release writers, they provided a link to the paper.
http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/ngeo1797.html
Continental-scale temperature variability during the past two millennia
Nature Geoscience (2013) doi:10.1038/ngeo1797 Received 09 December 2012 Accepted 11 March 2013Published online 21 April 2013
Abstract
Past global climate changes had strong regional expression. To elucidate their spatio-temporal pattern, we reconstructed past temperatures for seven continental-scale regions during the past one to two millennia. The most coherent feature in nearly all of the regional temperature reconstructions is a long-term cooling trend, which ended late in the nineteenth century. At multi-decadal to centennial scales, temperature variability shows distinctly different regional patterns, with more similarity within each hemisphere than between them. There were no globally synchronous multi-decadal warm or cold intervals that define a worldwide Medieval Warm Period or Little Ice Age, but all reconstructions show generally cold conditions between ad 1580 and 1880, punctuated in some regions by warm decades during the eighteenth century. The transition to these colder conditions occurred earlier in the Arctic, Europe and Asia than in North America or the Southern Hemisphere regions. Recent warming reversed the long-term cooling; during the period ad 1971–2000, the area-weighted average reconstructed temperature was higher than any other time in nearly 1,400 years.
Thermometers, thermometers, we duz not need no fricking thermometers, we gotz reconstructions. The temperature record from the MSU (and SCAMS and NEMS) covers the period. It would be interesting to compare the temps from the inversions with their lousy tree rings.
Yeah, reconstructions, that does have a familiar ring, doesn’t it?
Jimbo says: “I thought researchers got grants to study something new and not something we already know. In other words duplication is frowned upon. Is this not duplication?”
In Climate “Science”, attempts at duplication are frowned upon, and even interfered with, but only if a skeptic is the one attempting it. Duplicity, however, is not frowned upon in Climate “Science;” it’s rewarded.
There should be no distinction in the treatment of wrongdoings of tobacco companies and the climate science industry.
“Earth’s climate warmed more between 1971 and 2000 than during any other three-decade interval in the last 1,400 years …”
===============================================
The temperature rise c.1910 – c. 1945 (including 30 year 1911 – 1940) was just as steep, if not steeper, and was not mainly due to human CO2 emissions from fossil fuel burning as is generally acknowledged:
http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut3vgl/from:1901/to:2000/plot/hadcrut3vgl/from:1911/to:1940/trend/plot/hadcrut3vgl/from:1971/to:2000/trend
These guys. Only when they agree with the findings though.
I presume that they mean the last 3 decades of PDO/AMDO positive cycle since the LIA.
And the point is?
@crispin — this station shows about 1 C of warming in Wellington since 1970:
http://berkeleyearth.lbl.gov/stations/6435
@mattN — if it is true that there were 7 such periods in the last 26k years, as you say, then perhaps the climate is more sensitive to external forcings than is currently appreciated. perhaps then it will also be more sensitive to CO2 forcing than is currently appreciated.
sunshinehours1
“All of Western Canada is colder in the last 5 years than the previous 5 years by about about .7C.”
then that certainly settles it, does it? there definitely is no human influence on climate because its been colder in sunshine’s backyard for the last few years. qed
why didn’t you speak up sooner, and everyone could have gone home or out for a swim?
so, what problem should we focus on next?
Actually I have no problem with individual proxy studies. The people who do this work are careful and serious people who go out in the field and measure stuff. They know exactly where their data comes from and understand its limits. They usually have a very good appreciation for uncertainty. The results of most individual proxy studies tell us something small but interesting about the past. They usually show nothing alarming going on.
The people I have no respect for are the ones who take the results of these individual proxy studies and feed them through various statistical data manglers to produce global climate reconstructions. These people take the good meat of individual proxy studies; mix it with unpatatable statistical ingredients; and mash it together to produce the hockey stick shaped sausages which are required to feed the political climate crusade.
No two trees are alike.. They all have different access to food (sunlight), water and soil conditions.. Young, old, sick or just plain genetically worn out.. Such is life..
You could find a example of anything you want in any given forest.
Look at it this way.. You want to show growth, study the dominate tall trees.. You want to show stunted growth study the ones that had to survive in the shade of the dominate ones.. Its a mix and match where its possible to come to any conclusion..
I guess thats why climate scientists love $$$ their tree rings..
You don’t have to read too far into the Climate Audit review to realise exactly how shameless this paper is. Why is it that it is left to bloggers to point out all of the nefarious machinations?
Where is the scientific community on this? Its ok to demonstrate utter contempt for scientific method?
Another drive by publication for citation index:
Continental-scale temperature variability during the past two millennia
Moinuddin Ahmed,1 Kevin J. Anchukaitis,2, 3 Asfawossen Asrat,4 Hemant P. Borgaonkar,5 Martina Braida,6 Brendan M. Buckley,2 Ulf Büntgen,7 Brian M. Chase,8, 9 Duncan A. Christie,10, 11 Edward R. Cook,2 Mark A. J. Curran,12, 13 Henry F. Diaz,14 Jan Esper,15 Ze-Xin Fan,16 Narayan P. Gaire,17 Quansheng Ge,18 Joëlle Gergis,19 J Fidel González-Rouco,20 Hugues Goosse,21 Stefan W. Grab,22 Nicholas Graham,23 Rochelle Graham,23 Martin Grosjean,24 Sami T. Hanhijärvi,25 Darrell S. Kaufman,26 Thorsten Kiefer,27 Katsuhiko Kimura,28 Atte A. Korhola,25 Paul J. Krusic,29 Antonio Lara,10, 11 Anne-Marie Lézine,30 Fredrik C. Ljungqvist,31 Andrew M. Lorrey,32 Jürg Luterbacher,33 Valérie Masson-Delmotte,34 Danny McCarroll,35 Joseph R. McConnell,36 Nicholas P. McKay,26 Mariano S. Morales,37 Andrew D. Moy,12, 13 Robert Mulvaney,38 Ignacio A. Mundo,37 Takeshi Nakatsuka,39 David J. Nash,22, 40 Raphael Neukom,7 Sharon E. Nicholson,41 Hans Oerter,42 Jonathan G. Palmer,43, 44 Steven J. Phipps,44, 45 Maria R. Prieto,35 Andres Rivera,46 Masaki Sano,39 Mirko Severi,47 Timothy M. Shanahan,48 Xuemei Shao,18 Feng Shi,49 Michael Sigl,36 Jason E. Smerdon,2 Olga N. Solomina,50 Eric J. Steig,51 Barbara Stenni,6 Meloth Thamban,52 Valerie Trouet,53 Chris S.M. Turney,44 Mohammed Umer,4, 61 Tas van Ommen,12, 13 Dirk Verschuren,54 Andre E. Viau,55 Ricardo Villalba,37 Bo M. Vinther,56 Lucien von Gunten,27 Sebastian Wagner,57 Eugene R. Wahl,58 Heinz Wanner,24 Johannes P. Werner,33 James W.C. White,59 Koh Yasue60 & Eduardo Zorita57
Gergis, Valerie Masson Delmotte, Eric Steig, Wahl…
Recent warming reversed the long-term cooling; during the period ad 1971–2000, the area-weighted average reconstructed temperature was higher than any other time in nearly 1,400 years.
=============
so, 1400 years ago temperatures were warmer than today without any CO2. thus, this paper proves that current temperatures are withing the range of natural variability.
if anything, the paper proves:
1. that CO2 is not required for temperatures to be warmer than today.
2. that warmer temperatures did not cause polar bears to go extinct.
3. that warmer temperatures did not cause people to go extinct.
Unless of course you believe that 1400 years ago warmer temperatures caused the Great Flood and that humanity and polar bears were saved by Noah’s Ark.
What next? A Climate Science Paper (TM) Peer Reviewer proving that except for Noah all life on earth would have been wiped out 1400 years ago in the Great Warming?
To attribute the European 2003 heat wave to global warming betrays a serious lack of understanding of meteorology. Let’s quote the late Professor Marcel Leroux in Dynamic Analysis of Weather and Climate, Springer 2010
“There is nothing exceptional about this type of situation, since it occurs regularly at lower latitudes during this season in the eastern Atlantic and over the Mediterranean. (…) The summers of 1998, 1995, 1994, 1985, 1983, 1976, 1964, 1947, 1921 (with only a quarter of the usual rainfall), 1901, 1900 etc. were equally hot, or locally even hotter. In France in 2003, 70 records – out of 180 – were broken, but all-time records remained unchallenged. The national record is still held by Toulouse, where, on August 8 1923, a temperature of 44° C was recorded. The (drier) summer of 1976 is remembered everywhere in France as the symbolic ‘summer of drought’. The summer of 2003 created new national records in Portugal, Germany and Switzerland. In Britain, that summer is still outranked by those of 1976 and 1995, when the very hot spells lasted longer.
Consequently, and indisputably (as long as we observe actual phenomena), the cause of the heatwave was the presence of an anticyclonic agglutination. (…) It was (…) caused by:
– the concentration and deceleration of low-level anticyclonic air from the north, i.e. coming from the Arctic and transported in the form of an MPH, and
– the rapid diurnal warming of that air, at high pressure 1020-1025 hPa.”
In French:
http://ddata.over-blog.com/xxxyyy/2/32/25/79/Leroux—Aout-2003.pdf
1400 years ago was not a good time in history. cold weather had brought about the fall of the Roman empire as starving barbarians from the north overran Roman defenses. It took Europe the better part of 1000 years to recover.
“This period of manmade global warming, which continues today, reversed a natural cooling trend that lasted several hundred years,”
They missed the warming since the Little Ice Age. How low will “scientists” go? Their creds are reaching the level of used car salespersons or MSM journalists.
Stuck on Stupid…
it can not be anything else.. Mother Nature has already shown them to be ignorant of how she works..
Perhaps they care to explain this:
[IMG]http://i36.tinypic.com/axzjt1.jpg[/IMG]
OK, let me try that again:
http://i36.tinypic.com/axzjt1.jpg
@Tom in florida — perhaps you would be so kind as to list a source for your tinypic? how was it derived?
Stan W. says:
April 22, 2013 at 6:44 pm
“@Tom in florida — perhaps you would be so kind as to list a source for your tinypic? how was it derived?”
Stan, I had saved this image last year, from where I do not know. However a similar image can be found here:
http://www.azimuthproject.org/azimuth/show/Younger+Dryas
Tom in Florida says: April 22, 2013 at 7:28 pm
Looks like it is Greenland, Alley 2000:
http://i49.tinypic.com/oji4b7.jpg
A very nice graphic image.
It does not in any way support the ‘hysteria’ of its authors.
A wonderful Pyrenees Mountains ‘line’ visible flanked by the Alps and ‘wedge like’ the
near surface temperature anomalies.
Had the ‘authors’ of the paper undertaken an analysis of the surface wind fields and wind stress, their paper, as such, would never have been published, as currently presented. 🙂
I still do not understand where they think that tree rings, subject to variations in temperature, sunlight, water, nutrients, disease, crowding, etc. are so good at reflecting temperature. From a scientific point of view there are too many variables and thus they suck for the above applications.