By Larry Bell
Dr. Christian Schlüchter’s discovery of 4,000-year-old chunks of wood at the leading edge of a Swiss glacier was clearly not cheered by many members of the global warming doom-and-gloom science orthodoxy.
This finding indicated that the Alps were pretty nearly glacier-free at that time, disproving accepted theories that they only began retreating after the end of the little ice age in the mid-19th century. As he concluded, the region had once been much warmer than today, with “a wild landscape and wide flowing river.”
Dr. Schlüchter’s report might have been more conveniently dismissed by the entrenched global warming establishment were it not for his distinguished reputation as a giant in the field of geology and paleoclimatology who has authored/coauthored more than 250 papers and is a professor emeritus at the University of Bern in Switzerland.
Then he made himself even more unpopular thanks to a recent interview titled “Our Society is Fundamentally Dishonest” which appeared in the Swiss publication Der Bund where he criticized the U.N.-dominated institutional climate science hierarchy for extreme tunnel vision and political contamination.
Following the ancient forest evidence discovery Schlüchter became a target of scorn. As he observes in the interview, “I wasn’t supposed to find that chunk of wood because I didn’t belong to the close-knit circle of Holocene and climate researchers. My findings thus caught many experts off guard: Now an ‘amateur’ had found something that the [more recent time-focused] Holocene and climate experts should have found.”
Other evidence exists that there is really nothing new about dramatic glacier advances and retreats. In fact the Alps were nearly glacier-free again about 2,000 years ago. Schlüchter points out that “the forest line was much higher than it is today; there were hardly any glaciers. Nowhere in the detailed travel accounts from Roman times are glaciers mentioned.”
Schlüchter criticizes his critics for focusing on a time period which is “indeed too short.” His studies and analyses of a Rhone glacier area reveal that “the rock surface had [previously] been ice-free 5,800 of the last 10,000 years.”
More here: http://www.newsmax.com/LarryBell/warming-global-climate/2014/06/17/id/577481/#ixzz355f6L5y2
==============================================================
On Pierre Gosselin’s “No Tricks Zone” we have this:
Distinct solar imprint on climate
What’s more worrisome, Schlüchter’s findings show that cold periods can strike very rapidly. Near the edge of Mont Miné Glacier his team found huge tree trunks and discovered that they all had died in just a single year. The scientists were stunned.
The year of death could be determined to be exactly 8195 years before present. The oxygen isotopes in the Greenland ice show there was a marked cooling around 8200.”
That finding, Schlüchter states, confirmed that the sun is the main driver in climate change.
Today’s “rapid” changes are nothing new
In the interview he casts doubt on the UN projection that the Alps will be almost glacier-free by 2100, reminding us that “the system is extremely dynamic and doesn’t function linearly” and that “extreme, sudden changes have clearly been seen in the past“. History’s record is unequivocal on this.
Schlüchter also doesn’t view today’s climate warming as anything unusual, and poses a number of unanswered questions:
Why did the glaciers retreat in the middle of the 19th century, although the large CO2 increase in the atmosphere came later? Why did the earth ‘tip’ in such a short time into a warming phase? Why did glaciers again advance in 1880s, 1920s and 1980s? […] Sooner or later climate science will have to answer the question why the retreat of the glacier at the end of the Little Ice Age around 1850 was so rapid.”
On science: “Our society is fundamentally dishonest”
CO2 fails to answer many open questions. Already we get the sense that hockey stick climate claims are turning out to be rather sorrowful and unimaginative wives’ tales. He summarizes on the refusal to acknowledge the reality of our past: “Our society in fundamentally dishonest“.
– See more at: http://notrickszone.com/2014/06/09/giant-of-geologyglaciology-christian-schluechter-refutes-co2-feature-interview-throws-climate-science-into-disarray/#sthash.z6pKzqtQ.dpuf
For H Grouse and anyone else who is too cheap to buy a decent pair of reading glasses:
http://i58.tinypic.com/dbqng3.png
RACookPE1978 says:
August 8, 2014 at 2:45 pm
” Therefore, Arctic sea ice is WITHIN “normal””
..
Seriously… if it were within ONE standard deviation, you might be close….but…..nature is not helping your case.
Oh yes, they will all be saying we knew this, we knew that with such incontrovertible evidence. But the efforts to bury it have occupied the Team for over a decade. Mann flattened the hockey stick to get rid of both the LIA and MWP. Marcott tells us that the last decades were the hottest in millennia and they have been chipping at the warm periods to make them less contrasting. Sure, before climate science’s “Golden Age”, these things were known. It is the dishonesty of those who have tried to bury these things more recently that is egregious. Good thing the Holocene research people didn’t get a hold of this tree. This is a timely find
I’ve watched this site since its inception, and I have never seen anyone as consistently wrong as “H Grouse”.
Phil. says:
The probability of a being 2sd below the mean is ~2.2%
So, once in less that 50 years we can expect the same polar ice action? If so, that is very recent history, and it indicates natural variability. This has all happened before, and not that long ago [link is from 1922].
Recall that the predictions were for zero Arctic ice by 2013 or 2014. Like every alarmist prediction, they were wrong. Arctic ice is recovering nicely. This year shows much more Arctic ice than in the recent past.
Dear adherents to the ABC religion.
…
I am shocked that all of you can look at this graph.
http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/files/2014/08/asina_S_stddev_timeseries.png
…
and not see that in FIVE years, we’ve never even come close to the big black line labeled. 1981-2010 average.
…
Not even close
…
Fine, you can be blind to reality, but that is your choice.
…
If you knew statistics you could calculate the probability that in FIVE years, you’d hit the AVERAGE once. just once in five years. I’m not asking much, but it looks like in the past five years, the extent hasn’t even come to within one standard deviation of the average.
…
If you guy want to continue to deny reality, that is your choice, but the data shows that the TREND for Arctic ice is clear, and convincing to anyone with at least a minimal grounding is statistics.
Congratulations, H. Grouse. You are the most successful troll I’ve seen around here in ages. You’ve managed to keep this thread in the weeds for hours.
Also, thanks for the ctrl++ hint: I did not know that.
Even better, you get a big shout- out and a really, really big thanks for providing such great troll training for some of the newer participants. The lessons they will take away from your training are invaluable and will serve them well, down the road.
You are a doubleplus good troll.
dbstealey says:
August 8, 2014 at 3:00 pm
I’ve watched this site since its inception, and I have never seen anyone as consistently wrong as “H Grouse”.
…
And tell me sir, since the inception of this site, can you please show ALL OF US where I’ve made one single “prediction”
…
Not playing your game. I’ll just have fun pointing out facts to you. You can deal with their ramifications.
@ur momisuglyrgb
Thank you for participating in this discussion. You have my utmost respect and I’m sure that is true of the majority of the reader here. Your students will undoubtedly be the leaders of the future. Those from other universities visiting here @ur momisugly WUWT are gaining much more than can be realized. There is hope for the future of science, I hope.
From one of your earlier comments on this thread: quote
“………..Then there are the SPMs in the ARs — which can best be described as a pack of lies dressed up in the misused language of statistics and which are not written by the scientists whose work they supposedly summarize, but rather by a tightly-knit group committed to selling the belief that It Is All Our Fault, whether or not the data supports this. Indeed, in spite of data that does not support this. Where are the honest scientists who call them on this abuse of language? …….. ”
Sir, while you were not part of that particular process (to the best of my knowledge) you are one of the honest and true academics who call them and others on this abuse of science and language. I respect that!
dbstealey says:
August 8, 2014 at 3:00 pm
…
:Arctic ice is recovering nicely.”
…
Hasn’t hit the AVERAGE in five years.
…
If you call that “recovering” I have a job for you at the Bureau of Labor Statistics in Washington DC.
H Grouse:
At August 8, 2014 at 3:05 pm you say
That is blatant falsehood because I have repeatedly asked you to state facts so we can deal with their ramifications but you have not provided the requested facts.
I remind that the requested facts are how many of you are there, who is employing you to troll, and what payment(s) do you obtain for your trolling.
Richard
richardscourtney says:
August 8, 2014 at 3:15 pm
…
Here’s a fact for you to ponder
Sea levels have risen 50 mm in the past 17 years and 10 months.
Sea level rise is composed of three factors.
1) Thermal expansion
2) Melting ice
3) Others
..
Now, as you have said, there hasn’t been any warming in the past 17 years.
…
I enjoy your cognitive dissonance in relation to these stated facts.
H Grouse says:
August 8, 2014 at 3:07 pm
dbstealey says:
August 8, 2014 at 3:00 pm
…
:Arctic ice is recovering nicely.”
…
Hasn’t hit the AVERAGE in five years.
…
If you call that “recovering” I have a job for you at the Bureau of Labor Statistics in Washington DC.
The ice was decreasing till 2012, then it started to increase. It is within 2 sigma band, meaning it is statistically within normal spread. Nothing strange or unusual here. At the same time Antarctic ice have been consistently increasing and now its outside 2 sigma band – meaning this increase is statistically significant.
But none of it matter much. What matters is why should we care?
I asked this question number of times and you never answered me. Why do we care what ice, or glaciers, or sea level, or sea temperature, or many other things do, when we know for a fact that it was much warmer than today and nothing bad had happened?
H Grouse,
Average of what the last thirty years? How about the last ten thousand.
Again not AGW related. You don’t have anything really to say you just move from one non issue to the next and argue nothing of consequence. It’s quite boring.
richardscourtney says:
August 8, 2014 at 3:15 pm
.
“who is employing you to troll, ”
…
PS…if you are unable to discuss facts, and feel the need to resort to ad hominem name calling, (i.e. “troll”)…could you leave us adults to comment and go elsewhere?
You can’t believe everything you read.
I think the wood was placed there by Neanderthals who were burying wood in the ice for future use.
Bob Boder says:
August 8, 2014 at 3:26 pm
…
“Average of what the last thirty years”
…
What are your standards for establishing a baseline. ? 50 years? 100 years? (of course, please include your reasoning for > 30 years)
OK. So, why do you persist in ignoring the ever-increasing, rapidly accelerating Antarctic sea ice extents?
You claim (wrongly!) that crossing a 2 standard deviation line one direction over an entire summer interval means nothing, but then you are at equally wrongly inconsistent that exceeding two standard deviations FOR THREE FULL YEARS the other direction must be ignored! Or perhaps that means your mind does not see either trend correctly.
What is your specific mathematics and physics and thermodynamics and particle physics and radiation physics and heat transfer and fluid flow and engineering: both classwork, laboratories and paid professional experience? Perhaps we are not expressing things in terms you are able to understand.
See, if “not reaching average” even once in five years” portends dire consequences for Arctic sea ice loss as you claim – when we have shown that increased Arctic sea ice loss means a GREATER heat loss from the Arctic ocean at all dates after mid-August these years … Then what does it mean when Antarctic sea ice “normals” are “usually” exceeded at ever increasing amounts since 1994?
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/seaice.anomaly.antarctic.png
What does it mean when two standard deviations (millions of square kilometers!) are exceeded every day for years?
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/seaice.recent.antarctic.png
What does it mean when the Antarctic continent is growing colder each year?
It has fascinated me for years how “experts” totally convinced history is wrong, absolutely certain about the future, remain at a total loss about the present?
H Grouse:
You have yet again avoided the important questions.
I again repeat them.
How many of you are there, who is employing you to troll, and what remuneration(s) are you obtaining for your trolling?
Richard
What evidence have you presented that you are an educated adult capable of learning things in the physical sciences?
Udar says:
August 8, 2014 at 3:24 pm
..
“Nothing strange or unusual here”
…
In a truly stochastic process, the reversion to the mean would indicate that in the past five years, at least ONCE you’d cross the mean.
…
Remember, if you flip a coin five times, and it comes up heads five times in a row, the probability of that happening is 1/32
We use the standards established by the NSIDC, NOAA, DMI, JAXA, NASA-GISS, etc – and the many other national agencies from around the world – as displayed for each day’s measurements here:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/reference-pages/sea-ice-page/
Each agency has an established baseline, and that baseline is displayed in each of the several dozen plots and graphics for the Arctic, worldwide, and Antarctic areas. If you need to ask about each agency’s normals, ask them.
H Grouse
Boring. I Pick 1,000,000 years. Why because it sounds like a fun number to me.
Now what, AGW still has nothing to do with arctic conditions in your time span or mine.
Tell me what is going to happen based on your knowledge, oh thats right you won’t. You know why you won’t because all the BS you spewed has already been run threw the computer models and guess what it comes out as non sense just let your arguments.
RACookPE1978 says:
August 8, 2014 at 3:33 pm ..
.
“you are an educated adult ”
…
Never claimed to be educated, but if you want to continue to debate me, I would be more than happy to oblige. But then, if you don’t want to debate a grade school dropout, then you are free not to.
H Grouse says:
August 8, 2014 at 3:34 pm
Udar says:
August 8, 2014 at 3:24 pm
..
“Nothing strange or unusual here”
…
In a truly stochastic process, the reversion to the mean would indicate that in the past five years, at least ONCE you’d cross the mean.
…
Remember, if you flip a coin five times, and it comes up heads five times in a row, the probability of that happening is 1/32
Come on, Grousee. You really should know better. [Weather] is not a random process. It is chaotic, but it is not random. Natural variations don’t mean “random variations”. It means we are not responsible for them.
But let’s not change the topic here – I repeat, yet again – why should we care, when the article that started this shows conclusively that climate was much warmer in the past and nothing bad happened?