Thanks to Skeptical Science and ScienceFrontier for making this video possible. We can now see the error of our ways.
Consider this a bonus Friday Funny. h/t to Josh.
Thanks to Skeptical Science and ScienceFrontier for making this video possible. We can now see the error of our ways.
Consider this a bonus Friday Funny. h/t to Josh.
It’s even better if they think its Josh’s. Adds legitimacy I feel!
Goofy. Thanks.
Right.
Can someone tell me how the graph depicted on this video is relevant to the modern day average global temperature.
Did anyone notice that the post-industrial global ave temp has been added to the end of a graph of historical ice-core data from the Greenland dome? ( regional – and at the extreme end of the Earth’s climatic environment ). The vertical axis rather gives it away actually with a scale in the minus 30’s C. Oh, so the Earth is in a “snowball” state is it?
Also it goes back to 8000yr BCE. Do you not know of the Holocene climatic optimum, you know, when the NH was receiving ~40W/m^2 more summer insolation than present and the ocean currents/thermohaline balance was chaotic in the seas around?
No? well it’s called applying science to the discussion.
I’m sorry it may be a laugh – but it is comparing apples with oranges, with bananas.
Great spoof. That’s what those turds sound like.
TB says:
December 7, 2013 at 1:28 am
“Right.
Can someone tell me how the graph depicted on this video is relevant to the modern day average global temperature.”
Life didn’t end when it was warmer.
Actually it flourished.
That’s how it’s relevant.
It’s in the minus 30’s because it’s from Greenland, the rest of the world would be warmer. The important factor is the magnitude of the change, global temps are reflected in the Greenland temps. We use Greenland ice core because that’s where the ice is.
There are several degrees of temp variation despite CO2 being fairly steady over the last 10,000 years — all natural climate change.
Another criticism I’ll accept is that the temp core comes from Greenland, while the CO2 is from EPICA in Antarctica. But still there should be a correlation over the Holocene period which there isn’t. That’s why Al Gore likes to focus on time periods of 100,000’s of years where there is a correlation of CO2 to temp; of course it’s the temp that causes the CO2 change not the other way around, due to the warming of the oceans, which has been pointed out may times.
“Life didn’t end when it was warmer.
Actually it flourished.
That’s how it’s relevant.”
Actually I meant the graph, as it, as I said, compares “apples with oranges with bananas” and the above IMO is not what the author was implying. It attempts to convey a miss-truth. That Industrial warming is comparable with an extreme climatic region on Earth (who anyone with the wit/wont to investigate would find reasons for the variability). To boot, modern times are at a lower level on a scale of minus tens of deg C.
No, you’re right, life isn’t “expected to end when it’s warmer” – just than “life” will experience disruption.
It will still flourish but in different ways (except in the oceans where increasing acidity will have a toll ) – contrary to that that modern man has built this complicated society around.
“It’s in the minus 30′s because it’s from Greenland, the rest of the world would be warmer. The important factor is the magnitude of the change, global temps are reflected in the Greenland temps. We use Greenland ice core because that’s where the ice is.
There are several degrees of temp variation despite CO2 being fairly steady over the last 10,000 years — all natural climate change.”
I know it’s from Greenland (I did say that) and the temp variation is because it’s at an extreme, both in temp, height and region which would have had vast climate fluctuations due to changes in the seas around Greenland ( ice flow, salinity gradient – AMO circulation). Note: it is not Antarctica, which is very much isolated as a frigid climatic region. Greenland is very vulnerable to change and is therefor not comparable with the GLOBE likewise – which is what the deception is behind the “joke”.
CO2 steadiness is irrelevant when the driver is solar. In the absence of anthroprogenic influence the carbon cycle balances out the atmospheric concentration of CO2 to equalise with insolation until that insolation increase/decrease stops/slows.
Natural climate change … yes of course it is – but over scales of 1000’s of years. However in the ~150 years since industrialisation the suns output has varied ~+/- 0.2%. Not 8% as it did through the period of the graph.
TB says:
December 7, 2013 at 3:42 am
“No, you’re right, life isn’t “expected to end when it’s warmer” – just than “life” will experience disruption.
It will still flourish but in different ways (except in the oceans where increasing acidity will have a toll ) – contrary to that that modern man has built this complicated society around.”
Our society is complicated only insofar as we have layers upon layers of useless parasites, called the UN, David Suzuki, a byzantine array of international commissions hiding under every rock you turn.
The basis for human survival is agriculture, and if you’re lucky, you have fuel to burn, and that’s all. Tell me how agriculture suffers when giantic areas of land in Canada and Siberia become more fertile, I’m all ears.
DirkH,
Agriculture would suffer if green zones shift to places with less fertile soil, if long periods of drought occur, if water resources dry up, if increased flooding wipes out crops, and if sea levels rises causing flood and cause salinity in low-lying food-producing areas, like the rice paddies around the Asian deltas (eg, Mekong), which feed millions.
Other places would flourish in a warming world, but stability is safer and cheaper.
Ever notice how alarmists are always sticking the instrumental record onto the end of proxy records and proxy compilations but the second a skeptic does it it’s an invalid procedure?
How about this: we’ll stop when you stop.
Good job Paul Clark! I don’t think anyone has better captured how I “view” global warming.
TB says:
December 7, 2013 at 3:42 am
“I know it’s from Greenland (I did say that) and the temp variation is because it’s at an extreme, both in temp, height and region which would have had vast climate fluctuations due to changes in the seas around Greenland ( ice flow, salinity gradient – AMO circulation). Note: it is not Antarctica, which is very much isolated as a frigid climatic region. Greenland is very vulnerable to change and is therefor not comparable with the GLOBE likewise – which is what the deception is behind the “joke”.”
TB the warmist attempt to talk about greenland as only a limited regional proxy fail to mention that the medieval warm period was true and GLOBAL:
http://www.co2science.org/data/mwp/quantitative.php
http://www.co2science.org/data/mwp/qualitative.php
That the ice core deducted temperature
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/01/24/easterbrook-on-the-magnitude-of-greenland-gisp2-ice-core-data/
“The ratio of 18O to 16O depends on the temperature at the time snow crystals formed, which were later transformed into glacial ice. ”
These are well preserved atmospheric values.
TB says..I know it’s from Greenland (I did say that) and the temp variation is because it’s at an extreme, both in temp, height and region which would have had vast climate fluctuations due to changes in the seas around Greenland ( ice flow, salinity gradient – AMO circulation).
======================================================
So the extremely minor changes in Greenland now mean what? BTW, this past summer was the coolest northern latitudes arctic circle Ts recorded in the satellite era.
Paul Clark, Please do more. Even do some parody’s of the Felix and other silly critical comments, and go to some global graphs, and throw in the silly debunked predictions of disaster and more hurricanes droughts fires etc, with real world observations.
Great job, thanks.
Barry sez
“Wow, SkS never imagined climate changed in the past.”
I am reminded of what climate scientists and the Boyz at non-Skeptical Seance say when caught behaving badly:
“But the e-mails/photos/secret messages/threatening letters to review editors, (pick one) weren’t presented ‘in context'”.
Paul Clark as in woodfortrees Paul Clark? If that is true, I know several CAWG soldiers who will have a stroke when they find out you have turned to the “Dark Side”. Lol
Thank you for all the work you do on your site. 🙂
“Denier land:How deniers view global warming”
I think i’m going to go with “Defierland: How defiers view global warming”
We turn the heat on.
Outside:10°F
Inside:68°F
Nice way to ‘zoom’ in on the point.
As another commenter on another thread mentions,
Thanks for the recent introspective articles and comments.
Here in the Northwest part of North America, we are in a deep freeze. Records are falling everywhere for night and day time low lows. Many of these records go back to the late 1800s. Even the sheep are cold. Now that’s cold!
Oh where oh where has our global warming gone,
Oh where oh where can it be?
With our rivers froze up and our temperatures down long
Oh where, oh where can it be?
By the way, that little ditty started out as a drinking song that was not very complimentary to Germans (way back then all drinking songs engaged in across publand were not very complimentary to Germans). So if we could sing it with a warmer’s accent, we could more closely get the derisive flavor of the lamentable state of the lack of global warming.
To wit: In honor of Suzuki, we have to get our “groove on” and smoke the pipe while eating potato chips in order to do the song justice. Crazy man.
John,
Way to change the subject.
You can see from the links that SkS has often explained that climate has changed in the past. But “they think climate never changed before” it’s an attractive furfy and will probably never die out completely.
Hmm, which would be the better proxie for estimating global climate, temperature reconstructions from Greenland ice cores, or a tree in Yamal?
And just in case someone tells me this is just weather, remember it is the nighttime lows that should be increasing under global warming scenarios with other temperature baselines following. Well guess what? We don’t have enough cloud cover because of the dry air. No humidity. No water vapor. No re-radiated longwave. Poor little CO2, which is being chucked out our chimneys at an alarming rate, has to do its magic all by its little ol’ self. And is failing miserably.
TB,
You suffer from the same fundamental problem as does the IPCC – which stems from the misguided presumptuous primary principle guiding their effort – “…to assess on a comprehensive, objective, open and transparent basis the scientific, technical and socio-economic information relevant to understanding the scientific basis of risk of human-induced climate change…”
Their mission is to investigate and therefore justify “human-induced climate change”. We “deniers” are often hard on the scientists that support that “mission” but when they are asked to prove a preconceived notion, it’s pretty hard for them to look at data that says orherwise.
The difference is that you have a choice when you make things up to justify your “conclusion/consensus” on the causes of climate change – the IPCC doesn’t.
TB,
You suffer from the same fundamental problem as does the IPCC – which stems from the misguided presumptuous primary principle guiding their effort – “…to assess on a comprehensive, objective, open and transparent basis the scientific, technical and socio-economic information relevant to understanding the scientific basis of risk of human-induced climate change…”
Their mission is to investigate and therefore justify “human-induced climate change”. We “deniers” are often hard on the scientists that support that “mission” but when they are asked to prove a preconceived notion, it’s pretty hard for them to look at data that says orherwise.
The difference is that you have a choice when you make things up to justify your “conclusion/consensus” on the causes of climate change – the IPCC doesn’t.
A little moderation of the atmosphere at my house would be nice too….But , have to run the fan so condensation doesn’t form on my windows.
Excelent video, a candidate for a ‘climate minute’
sorry,fingers cold…