Guest essay by Tony Brown
Section 1 Summary of a previous article;
A short while ago I published an article on ‘Noticeable climate change’ during the past 500 years, based on historical observation and instrumental records. To understand the context of this current article –the purpose of which is to extend and amplify this earlier work- it is linked to below and a brief recap of its findings has been made in the following paragraphs.
http://judithcurry.com/2013/06/26/noticeable-climate-change/
The referenced study noted that our climate changes frequently when calculated on an annual and decadal basis, in fact virtually no decade is like its predecessor or successor. Sometimes the change is fairly small but is often so ‘noticeable’ that humanity and nature will be affected. Figure 1 below illustrates this effect, where the brown verticals represent annual temperatures, the green is decadal and the red line represents fifty year steps.
Figure 1; Annual, Decadal and 50 year periods from CET
The analysis is based on Central England Temperature (CET) to 1659 which is the world’s longest instrumental record, and my own reconstruction from that date to 1538. CET is said by a number of scientists to be a reasonable (but by no means perfect) proxy for global and to a greater extent Northern Hemispheric temperatures. In considering the historic instrumental temperature record and the paleo proxy reconstructions (shown in figure 2) that cover much longer periods, we should heed Hubert Lamb’s maxim that ‘We can understand the (temperature) tendency but not the precision’ so whilst accuracy to tenths of a degree is impossible, determining the general shape and direction of temperature travel is reasonable. Certainty in determining great historical temperature precision lies only in models.
In then providing figure 2 below we can observe a number of results that can most usefully be summed up by repeating the conclusions from the original article;
Figure 2-paleo reconstructions plus CET in annual, decadal and 50 year steps
These conclusions were;
*By any criteria, climate change is frequent, indeed the ‘norm’. Variability of our climate on a decadal basis is considerable and is even greater on an annual basis.
*These decadal episodes of variability appear greater in the past than in modern times as can be seen in the sharp drops, then recovery, during the LIA episodes.
*However, there are tight 50 year ‘paleo’ boundaries, with the frequent oscillations currently on a slightly rising trend from the start of the instrumental temperature record in 1659, albeit with a sharp reversal in the last decade.
*There are some hints of a similar rise to broadly equivalent modern levels around 1540 in the reconstructed CET.
*Rising temperatures reflect the relative dearth of ‘old fashioned’ winters in the second half of the record, as well as changes in other seasons. Summers have the tightest boundaries, appreciably lower than the other seasons.
*Humans need to make substantial accommodation to cope with even relatively short periods of ‘different to normal’ weather. Consequently it might be useful for the authorities to consider ‘noticeable’ climate change as covering decadal rather than 30 year periods
*Paleoclimate reconstructions (figure 2) capture long term climate variability of 50 years and more quite well, but fail to pick up the much more variable fine grain of annual and decadal variability. Consequently a false picture of apparent climate stability in the past is portrayed.
* As paleoclimate reconstructions are usually only measured against global instrumental temperature records commencing 1880 they do not find any of the ‘hockey stick’ effects that can be seen in the older instrumental temperature records.
*When instrumental records are not available, the historic observed record of the past millennium is likely to be a valuable aid to the development of paleoclimate reconstructions using proxies.
Section 2 An examination of the ‘hockey stick.’
The so called ‘spaghetti’ graphs used in figure 2 above are interesting, but their range of variability (excepting Moberg et al) remain almost as limited as their iconic predecessor the ‘Hockey stick’ produced by Dr Michael Mann et al and from which the IPCC third assessment report graphic from 2001 was derived.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hockey_stick_graph
Consequently in view of its continued importance and to demonstrate the strengths and shortcomings of his model, and many of those that followed, it is reproduced below (red line) together with Hubert Lamb’s early pre computer graphic (blue line) that was the inspiration for the IPCC’s global temperature chart used in their first 1990 assessment. This is overlaid on to the CET data already referenced: light blue line 50 year segments and brown line for decadal information. It is all rebased to zero anomaly. The yellow shading illustrates the significant differences between the Mann and Lamb reconstructions and graphically illustrates the 1000 year long period of climate stability depicted by Dr Mann as compared to the much more variable climate researched by Lamb.
Figure 3
In order to be able to make an easy visual comparison, in the next graph we have removed the 1990 IPCC graph and rebased CET, so the anomalies match with Dr Mann’s reconstruction which –until the modern instrumental record is inserted at the end- runs between minus 0.2 and minus 0.5C anomaly-somewhat cooler than CET.
Figure 4 CET rebased with Mann et al 1998
The difference between a warm period such as the 1730 decade at plus 0.4C and a cold decade such as 1690 at some minus 1.4C anomaly measured via instruments can be seen to be far greater than the variations that any of the paleo reconstructions in figure 2 pick up . The Mann et al Hockey Stick (Figure 4) also illustrates very limited variability throughout its 1000 year long proxy reconstruction. The relatively short and intense perturbations noted above since 1538 are however again well captured in CET instrumental records and observations.
Section 3 Pros and cons of Paleo temperature proxy reconstructions.
Such proxy material as tree rings cannot be as accurate as instrumental records or detailed reconstructions using a variety of observational material-but there are nevertheless a number of obvious consequences that those who debate climate as either ‘realists’ or ‘sceptics’ need to face when considering this data;
*The first is that Dr Mann’s graphic (as do many of the other paleos) make a pretty god job of picking up the relatively limited temperature variability we can observe over a 40/50 year or longer period . This is confirmed when comparing the data with the CET 50 year instrumental ‘paleo’ (the horizontal blue line.) This is with the notable exception of the coldest period of the Little Ice age around 1690 and the subsequent recovery in the following decades, providing the most notable hockey stick in the record.
*The CET comparison to the global instrumental record (shown from 1900 in figure 4) is pretty good as is its comparison to the 50 year paleo records. Britain as a temperate country will have different climate characteristics/variability than the tropics or countries at other latitudes but it can be seen that CET provides a useful long term record validation, although Lamb’s maxim should be borne firmly in mind and precise accuracy and correlation at all times is impossible.
*The variability shown in the uptick from 1900 looks unusual only because an instrumental temperature record-which captures variability-is now used, whereas the long term paleo reconstruction proxies previously used, do not have this ability to capture short term variability and thereby present an impression of a ‘stable’ climate. The uptick is therefore purely an artefact of changes in methodology as a ‘paleo’ apple is swapped for an ‘instrumental’ orange.
*The 40/50 year paleo reconstructions (figures 2, 3 and 4 ) fail to capture the decadal variability (orange lines) let alone the annual range (shown in figure 2 as a brown vertical line). They consequently fail to ‘see’ such notable events as the great warming centred on 1730, the recovery around 1830 from the coldest decade (1810) since the depths of the LIA in 1690, and the final bursts of the LIA in 1840 and 1890. Looking further back, the paleo reconstructions also do not replicate the considerable drop to the depths of the LIA around 1690, the (reconstructed) warmth around 1630, the period of well documented cold at the beginning of the 17th century and the sharp (reconstructed) rise around 1540 to something apparently approaching the temperatures at the end of the 20th century. In particular the paleo proxy reconstructions represent the severe perturbations of the various periods of the Little Ice age as merely shallow downwards blips, whilst the astonishing recovery around 1690 featuring the largest hockey stick in the record is a corresponding shallow upwards blip
*if the paleo proxy reconstruction can miss these considerable perturbation downwards, some doubt is thereby introduced as to whether they would catch other similar perturbations in the opposite direction most notably during the so called medieval warm period.
*it confirms that the instrumental temperature record shows an upward trend (with various reverses and advances) from the start of the CET instrumental record in 1659 making the 1880 start point for the instrumental global record used by GISS appear to be merely a staging post in the upwards trend, rather than the starting post.
*The sharp downwards trend in Britain from 2000 currently causing such concern to the Met Office can be seen in historical context as merely another episode of ‘noticeable climate change’ readily captured in the instrumental record, but this time that of cooling rather than warming.
*At around the year 2000 the real world CET data diverges from the composite global temperature comprising of tens of thousands of averaged and smoothed records. Amongst these are those showing cooling, warming and stasis which seem to be roughly cancelling each other out to create a ‘pause‘ in warming that is currently the subject of much debate.
The very limited deviation from the considerable climate stability illustrated throughout the paleo reconstructions -including the Mann et al 1998 ‘hockey stick’- is difficult to corroborate with actual instrumental or historic evidence. Similarly the continual downwards trend in temperature from the start of the Mann et al records from 1000AD to 1900 does not seem to be validated by other data.
Section 4 Comparison of paleo to Glacier movements
In this final graph we have calculated historic glacier movements during the last 3000 years. (See note 1) Over it we have inserted the Mann et al 1998 data covering the past 1000 years together with the decadal record from CET back to 1538.
Fig 5-3000 year Glacier movements with CET decadal/50 year steps and Mann et al 1998
A closed blue horizontal line at the top of the graph equates to a period of glacial retreat (warmth) and a closed blue line at foot of graph demonstrates glacier advance (cold)
That glacial movements can be surprisingly short lived can be seen in the century long glacier advance around 1200 to 1300 AD, and to a lesser extent the 30 year retreat around 1730. Such short changes as noted in this latter period may be relatively common, but the records are unlikely to exist to be able to trace them in earlier times.
The small temperature deviations from the ‘norm’ shown in paleo proxy reconstructions- including that of Mann et al 1998-seem most unlikely to be of a scale that can precipitate glacier movements of any consequence. Several consecutive warm cold decades that can be noted in the instrumental records will however likely start such movements which will be accentuated if the prevailing characteristic of warmth or cold lasts for some time. In the case of the MWP this period of warmth lasted around 450 years . (Clearly however brief Warm periods can occur during a general glacial retreat and brief cold periods during glacial advance.)
That the paleo reconstructions somewhat accurately capture long term variability makes this feature useful. However, they appear to comprise of a very coarse sieve that allows the real world of constant noticeable climate change with considerable temperature swings that affects us all to slip through unnoticed. This makes the use of paleo reconstructions as the basis for far reaching policy changes somewhat problematic and counter intuitive as it is based on a belief that the past comprised of a relatively unchanging climate. A belief that is contradicted when the real world annual and decadal record is closely examined..
That CET appears to be a good –but not perfect- proxy of global temperatures can be seen in the paleo and instrumental record. There is a considerable body of literature from a number of leading climate scientists and related organisations that suggest that CET appears to be a reasonable but by no means perfect proxy for temperatures far beyond the shores of England. The author is preparing a piece for peer review entitled; ‘ Is CET indicative of Global or Northern Hemispheric temperatures?’
A future article will concentrate on the far greater extremes that can be noted in our historic weather events than in the modern record, perhaps not surprising in view of its observed greater variability and considerable historic perturbations.
A future article will also delve further back from the CET reconstruction to 1538 detailed in Part 1 of ‘The long slow thaw?’
http://judithcurry.com/2011/12/01/the-long-slow-thaw/
Early analysis suggests some evidence of a period around 1500 around as warm as 2000 and a sharp, but as yet not fully researched deterioration in the few decades prior to that which appears to have some corroboration in the glacier data which was researched separately. Beyond that period work continues in assembling the necessary historic and scientific material to enable the continuation of the reconstruction with some worthwhile degree of accuracy .
In looking at the disparity between paleo records and instrumental observed records It would be useful to see historical climatologists and modellers work more closely with each other in order that the past climate states and their variability can be more accurately depicted.
References and Notes.
Note 1 Glacier records have been painstakingly researched by numerous glaciologists and historians over many years. Their sources include church records, commissions of inquiries into glacier disasters, taxes on farms affected by glaciers, town records, population records, illustrations and lithographs, observations by travellers and scientists, scientific papers, historic articles on glaciers from contemporary sources in English, French, German and Italian, correlation with wine and grain harvest dates, alpine clubs, mountaineers and tree line/plant growth records amongst other sources. See references under.
References
‘The Little Ice Age’ by Professor Brian Fagan
‘History and climate’ edited by P D jones
‘Little ice ages ancient and modern Volume 1 and Volume 2’ Jean Grove
‘Climate history past and present’ Hubert Lamb
‘Times of feast, times of famine –a history of climate since the year 1000’ E Le Roy Ladurie
‘Paleoclimatology, reconstructing climates of the quaternary’ Raymond Bradley
‘Little Ice Age’ Michael E Mann Volume 1, The Earth system: physical and chemical dimensions of global environmental change,
http://www.meteo.psu.edu/holocene/public_html/shared/articles/littleiceage.pdf
P154 on Groves, Jones, Matthews research.
Barclay et al
http://web.cortland.edu/barclayd/publications/2009_QuatRes.pdf
Glaciers around 1640; fragments of reports are available for the period, such as the 1955 study by Guichonnet which suggested three Chamonix glaciers had reached a maximum by 1640 then retreated by small amounts. No doubt other detailed information will become available as more archival material is discovered.
The World glacier monitoring service records the more recent history of glaciation mostly over the last 150 years
http://www.grid.unep.ch/glaciers/pdfs/glaciers.pdf
Tony Brown’s approach is wrong and does not work.
D.I. Thanks! The links under “Climate History” are the ones I formerly had bookmarked (until my computer died last summer). I directed my AGW believer friends to these historical accounts every time the media called an extreme weather event “unprecedented,” “1 in 500 years,” “never recorded,” etc.
Visually translating your own analytical framework into mine, then I evaluate your method of analysis as translating into a fall in GMT between the years 2007 and 2100 of somewhere between 0.1C and 0.2C — if it were to be translated into my own framework; i.e. Beta Blocker’s CET Pattern Picker .
OK, using my simplistic analytical framework as the documentation method; and taking a somewhat subjective look at your own prediction and at how it is being generated, let’s identify your prediction as being “0.3 C fall in GMT by 2100” as carried within the Beta Blocker Analysis Framework.
As documented on the pattern picker form, “0.3 C fall in GMT by 2100” would carry an Expected Probability of Realization (EPOR) of “High”.
My next question for you is this: If you were to use my simplistic approach to documenting the basis of your prediction, using the pattern picker form as your data entry sheet, what values — “H”, M”, or “L” — would you put down for each of these Postulated Factors?
GHGs, Direct
GHGs, Amplified
AEROSOLS
PARTICULATES
HEAT BUFFERS
LATENT HEAT
SOLAR / TSI
CLOUDS
ALBEDO
FEEDBACKS
OSCILLATIONS
INTERNAL VARIATION
More questions will follow once you have made your choices for H, M, or L.
Tony Brown
Great article . Do you have a similar graph as the first graph for CET WINTER only. Have you done any analysis on the winter data in terms of cycles.?
In reply to Chuck L,
There are other sites that cover historical weather events, but I too have lost them.
I cannot understand why Anthony Watts hasn’t created an ‘Historical Weather’ page so people can see that whatever happens, It is not ‘Unprecedented’.
TonyB:
BetaBlocker :
Salvatore Del Prete says:
August 16, 2013 at 12:36 pm (replying to)
All: Let me “push” the question – perhaps a bit further than any of the three of you are willing to go even.
Let us assume that the CET thermometer record is both adequate for its purposes of recoding temperature, accurate enough to be useable over along period of time, and that local conditions around this thermometer have not changed very much between the year 800 (600 BC ? even, if one were try to include the Roman Warm Period) and today. Further, assume that the CET record is adequate to show the world’s “average” temperatures as well. ( Funny, isn’t it that we “have” to make all of those very important, very wide-ranging, very explicit “assumptions” about something as basic as a single, unmoved “thermometer” when one tree ring sample from one tree was enough to remove the Medieval Warming Period from the entire world.)
If a “curve” – not defined as either a sine wave with a fixed period and single amplitude though! or even a sum of sine waves – and NOT a straight line – were extended through the average of the CET using an 11 year solar sunspot as a smoothing interval, when would the MWP, LIA, Dark Ages, and RWP show up as high and low points?
1) That is, can we establish when these periods actually occurred, and how long their peaks and troughs lasted, accurately with this thermometer record laid on top of other proxies?
2) If such a curve can be laid on the CET record, its latest rise will of course be visible, and must be extrapolated into the future. Not an exact science, else we would have profitable fortune tellers in abundance, but does the 2000-2010 temperature “flat spot” occur as a slowing point on the long term rise from the LIA (perhaps to peak one or more 66 year periods later in 2050-2060, 2120-2130)?
Or do today’s 2000-2010 high temperatures lay at the top of the Modern Warming Period, and we will start sliding downhill into the NIA? (Next Ice Age)
That could well be so. (Or not.) Even if GMT is generally headed down, what will the overall GMT trend pattern look like as the years progress towards 2040, and then what will it look like after 2040?
The alarmists generally use 2100 as their standard reference year in marking an end point for their long-term GMT and sea level predictions; but of course, almost no one who is reading these predictions today will be alive in 2100.
Chuck L says:
August 16, 2013 at 7:15 am
Do you mean this: http://booty.org.uk/booty.weather/climate/11000_4000BC.htm ?
RACook
You ask some good questions.
In this article I posted only one graph
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/05/08/the-curious-case-of-rising-co2-and-falling-temperatures/
CET is graphed against co2 levels but it’s format more clearly shows the temperature ‘shape.’
The answer to question 1) is yes.
As for question 2)
I am ambivalent as to whether there is good correlation with sunspot numbers. It certainly matches better than co2 but is by no means perfect. Perhaps it is one of a number of drivers which needs to work in conjunction with jet streams and ocean current and ocean warmth.
As can be seen in the graph linked to above, the cet is currently heading sharply downwards. So laying a curve on it will not extrapolate the rise as the rise is no longer happening. Is that temporary? It would be extraordinary of, after 350 years of rising, the temperature should now be on a downward curve.
So are we turning down from the peak of the modern warm period or are we witnessing merely a blip?
Tonyb
Herkimer
Here is a link to my various graphs
http://climatereason.com/Graphs/
There are two that show CET seasonal temperatures, one in decadal and the other in 50 year steps
Tonyb
“Section 4 Comparison of paleo to Glacier movements”
That glacier plot makes sense in its general picture, including indirectly showing the Medieval Warm Period and Roman Warm Period in it. Such is rather binary, though. For the past thousand years, finer curvatures in trends can be seen in Kirkby’s comparisons for glacier advance/retreat versus temperature reconstructions (and cosmic ray forcings), as illustrated in http://s24.postimg.org/rbbws9o85/overview.gif
.
As for the question of whether we will this century be going much down from the high of the Modern Warm Period, the answer is yes. Like Salvatore Del Prete implied, there have been a number of cold LIA-like events over the past 7500 years (like Dr. Abdussamatov’s publications have observed), and we are due for another in coming decades. The 20th century high of solar activity (relatively extreme for the Holocene up until after solar cycle 22 of 1986-1996 ended) was about as intense as the sun seems to ever get in this period of geological history. The 21st century can be expected to be with lower solar activity, less deflection of cloud-seeding galactic cosmic rays, higher average cloud cover, a more reflective planetary albedo, and a cooler planet.
.
Really the big question for me, once aware of all in http://s24.postimg.org/rbbws9o85/overview.gif and much else, is whether or not coming cooling in the 21st century will end with a somewhat brief LIA-like event, or, via amplification of cooling through further albedo change from snow cover rise then, continue far longer into a non-little Ice Age afterwards.
.
Studies can be found claiming the end of this interglacial is due around this century or millennium and other studies claiming it is impossible, but the latter are by CAGW-movement types with related assumptions. The ice age scare of the 1960s-1970s actually occurred for a reason, and that was before enviropolitical agendas much encouraged dishonesty.
On Wikipedia’s CET graphic, there are possibly six historical examples of a rising temperature trend being followed by a sudden steep drop, then followed by another rising trend, with the overall trend over 350 years being gradually up at a rate of approximately ~0.3C per century.
CET Patterns, 1659-2007, Wikipedia Graph
The patterns of CET rise and fall which happened between 1659 and about 1880 happened before the modern industrial era, and in some periods produced bursts of temperature rise occurring over a thirty-year period which approximated a rate of +2.9 C per century.
If instead of attempting to make precise predictions for CET based on some kind of very detailed technical analysis, could we accurately state that the future tops of the CET peaks will follow the previous tops of the CET peaks, generally upward; and that the future bottoms of the CET troughs will follow the previous bottoms of the troughs, also generally upward — without attempting to predict any specific periodicity inside the overall upward CET trend pattern?
Assuming that natural variation is responsible for CET trend patterns between 1659 and 1880, assigning causation to the post-1880 CET trend patterns is the next sticky wicket. How different are the post-1880 trend patterns from previous CET patterns? How different will future CET trend patterns be from pre-2007 historical patterns, and for what reasons?
I’ve had some very slight involvement with Tony’s work, as translator of agricultural records. Certain things struck me. Firstly, while I was not surprised that certain docs may never been translated – till recent times, scholars would have been familiar with the rough local Latin and seen little point in translating – I was surprised that there is so little interest in these docs at a time when climate is the sexy topic and main event everywhere you turn. Disagree with Tony’s conclusions all you like…but why avert the eyes and block the ears in such a suspiciously hurried fashion?
Also, while a translator is usually just puzzling over funny localisms and abbreviations, you do take time to ponder. The clerks whose words one reads tend to gloss over mass tragedy from war, returning plague etc except as these events affect prices and labour availability. In the 14th century, there was just no point in dramatising the misery which was everywhere, but every point in safeguarding the agriculture which stood between medieval humans and complete tragedy. Yet the sense of terror over climate comes through the dry words. While some of the weather described in the period after the Black Death put me in mind of harsh Australian conditions in the 1930s or 1990s, it was just impossible to ignore the descent into hostile and cold conditions just after 1400. A tiny blip in a hockey stick handle just won’t cut it.
Tony has not suggested I say this, but is it not odd that he works largely unsupported? I’m not suggesting he get his own private jet for Pachauri-style commutes, but maybe some bus fare or something? A few more resources and a little more official interest? (Hope I’m not embarrassing you, Tony. I’m not arguing that you are right, just that people should be more curious as to whether you might be right.)
Mosomoso
I am expecting a large cheque from big oil at any time. If it doesn’t come I will have to lay off my large team of highly paid researchers. You may have to send back one of your company cars I’m afraid
Seriously, there are many of us trying in different ways to unravel climate, I do it by looking into past history, others try to sort out why certain types of weather occurred.
One thing is for certain and that is that our knowledge of our past, present and future climate is currently at a very limited level. It is somewhat concerning that certain national governments seem to be in a panic over what appears to be perfectly normal variations in climate and using imperfect information on which to make important decisions that will impact on all of us.
The hockey stick and its derivatives remains a powerful influence on leaders as it is so graphic and certain. Trouble is these paleo reconstructions appear to be incorrect. Of course the climate was variable in the past but how do we get our alternative message in front of those people with influence?
Tonyb
Well, I for one don’t need a graph to tell me that. Just take a look around you, here in NY, it is drastically going back and forth from 80-60 degrees or 100-70 degrees. Now if anyone thinks that is normal they have completely lost their minds as far as I am concerned
shras789
I hesitate to ask, since I wonder about your ability to judge, but what exactly do you mean by “normal.”
I know you don’t need no stinkin’ data, but let’s see what you have to say.
Always enjoy your articles, Tony.
mosomoso is also correct. When one reads these archives, one gains as much or more insight into what actually happened as the recorded temperature data.
Thx Tony, must say the annual and the decadal climate variability shown in the
CET record indicates climate’s surprising variability. Looking at these compared
to the 50 year periods , climate variability’s greater in the LIA than now and, heh,
where’s that ol’ Hockey Stick? Reminds me of a joke I read somewhere …
Pilot to billionaire in Billionaire’s private jet: ‘We’re just about ter fly over France.’
Billionaire ter pilot: ‘Fergit the countries, jest concentrate on the continents.’
Beth the serf.
Note 1 of Tony’s post references sources for glacier advances, church and
town records, taxes on farms, harvest dates etc. The CET record is well cross
referenced by historical observations, this from Geoffrey Blainey’s ‘A Short History
of the World.’ (2000)
Referring to the LIA: ‘For the typical labouring family in some regions of Europe
and China, lean years were punctuated with an occasional year of abundance…
The climate was colder, and Baltic Ports such as Riga were closed by ice more
often.’ ( p 416.) ‘ Farms on the foothills of the Alps were devastated by cold
seasons and the advance of glaciers. ‘ Glaciers, more formidable around 1600,
reached the houses of villages on the lower slopes and crushed them…Small
processions of villagers, led by a priest or even a bishop, went to the edge of
a glacier and prayed that it might halt. (p 417)
Indeed figure 1 does show greater temperature variability back in the LIA than now in the CET record (like a 1976 National Geographic global cooling article suggested, for cooling as opposed to warming, and like a recent study of storm frequency in the LIA compared to the MWP observed).
Thanks Tony, nice work. I particularly like the way you remind us of Lamb’s dictum re temperature records – wise man that he was.
I had occasion a while back to research weather data for a smallish area of the US, following an absurd claim someone made to the effect that only the official records (about 100 years) were reliable enough to provide sound evidence. With little difficulty, as the area had been settled and farmed for about 300 years, I found on the internet diaries, newspapers, municipal records, crop data and various other sources that went back to the earliest days of settlement. No doubt someone who lived there could unearth even more material which has not been put online.
It is true that this stuff doesn’t have the granularity of the CEI, or the (shorter) US Weather Service data. But it was not difficult to build up a pretty good picture of wet and dry years, warm and cool years, floods, droughts, and quite a bit of temperature and rainfall data kept by weather obsessed farmers from the earliest times.
More power to your arm. It’s a pity that some of the loot splashed around on computer models and the like isn’t made available for the kind of work that you do.
mosomoso mentions the sense of terror over climate in the 14th century.
H Zinsser’s book, ‘Rats, lice and History’ refers to epidemics of dancing
mania in the Middle Ages, known as St John’s dance or St Vitas’ dance,
that became common during and after the Black Death and presenting
none of the characteristics of epidemic infectious diseases of the nervous
system. They seem more like ‘mass hysteria brought on by terror and
despair, in populations oppressed, famished, and wretched to a degree
almost unimaginable today. ‘
In K Popper, ‘Open Society and Its Enemies’ 1945. Vol 2 p25)
shras789
Please look at the first part of the article which referenced variability from decade to decade which in itself is highly variable. The annual variability is much greater. There is really no such thing as ‘normal’ although as humans we like to believe there is weather ‘typical’ to a particular season.
A glance through the records we have from our forefathers dating back to the domesday book from nearly 1000 years ago demonstrate astonishing changes from one year to the next. Todays climate is very benign compared to many parts of the past. We need to look longer back than a few years or our own lifetimes experience.
tonyb
Thank you, Tony Brown, for sharing so generously all your hard work. You are a treasure.
*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!
HAPPY BIRTHDAY, TONY B!
(a bit belated)
Best wishes for a year full of joy!
Janice
*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!
In honor of your birthday, history with scenery of your beautiful,
and much beloved, I know,
England
As we discussed a couple of months ago (v. a v. hydropower), her magnificent history of grand accomplishments makes it pardonable, I hope, that those of us whose ancestors forsook her shores long ago forget that England is relatively small land.
Tonyb says:
August 16, 2013 at 4:07 pm
Mosomoso
I am expecting a large cheque from big oil at any time. If it doesn’t come I will have to lay off my large team of highly paid researchers. You may have to send back one of your company cars I’m afraid
Seriously, there are many of us trying in different ways to unravel climate, I do it by looking into past history, others try to sort out why certain types of weather occurred.
One thing is for certain and that is that our knowledge of our past, present and future climate is currently at a very limited level. It is somewhat concerning that certain national governments seem to be in a panic over what appears to be perfectly normal variations in climate and using imperfect information on which to make important decisions that will impact on all of us.
The hockey stick and its derivatives remains a powerful influence on leaders as it is so graphic and certain. Trouble is these paleo reconstructions appear to be incorrect. Of course the climate was variable in the past but how do we get our alternative message in front of those people with influence?
Tonyb
An awful lot in this comment. It is very detailed.
” Seriously, there are many of us trying in different ways to unravel climate, I do it by looking into past history, others try to sort out why certain types of weather occurred” This is where Hubert Lamb started and finished. It how Joe Bastardi improves his commercial foecasts.
The biggest problem, and one that will only get bigger, is finding data on which one can rely. Personally I hate the use of anomolies and would much prefer to see absolute temps but I am also aware of the calibration issues around absolute.
The Beta Blocker approach is an interesting one “I think temps will rise. What do you think? ” but at the end of the day it is only going to be a guess in the same way that the models are only a guess. Whether those guesses are educated or not is immateriel.