Dueling press releases – one says GHG's 'caused' end of last ice age, other says 'lead factor'

I noticed these press releases for the new “ramp up to Paris” paper at Eurekalert today. One is from Boston College, the other is from Oregon State University. The headlines seem about as far apart as the schools themselves.

You’d think that authors of the same paper could get their PR straight.

GHG-cause-duel

The certainty of the theory as they present it is typical of alarmist PR’s but the conclusion, trying to link boulder deposition to CO2 levels seems a bit rocky at best. They claim to be able to resolve when boulders were uncovered from ice and link that to CO2 levels, and thus prove CO2 levels caused the end of the ice age. Of course, nether press release tells you the paper title, the DOI, or links to the journal, because as we’ve seen so many times, the paper itself is just a ticket to media coverage, and isn’t important enough to be part of the story that will be foisted upon the public.  I’ve posted both of them below for comparison in the sequence presented above in the screencap.


 

As Ice Age ended, greenhouse gas rise was lead factor in melting of Earth’s glaciers

New findings have implications for recent carbon dioxide rise and melting glaciers

Improved dating methods reveal that the rise in carbon dioxide levels was the primary cause of the simultaneous melting of glaciers around the globe during the last Ice Age. The new finding has implications for rising levels of man-made greenhouse gases and retreating glaciers today. CREDIT Courtesy: National Science Foundation
Improved dating methods reveal that the rise in carbon dioxide levels was the primary cause of the simultaneous melting of glaciers around the globe during the last Ice Age. The new finding has implications for rising levels of man-made greenhouse gases and retreating glaciers today.Courtesy: National Science Foundation

BOSTON COLLEGE

Chestnut Hill, MA (Aug. 21, 2015) – A fresh look at some old rocks has solved a crucial mystery of the last Ice Age, yielding an important new finding that connects to the global retreat of glaciers caused by climate change today, according to a new study by a team of climate scientists.

For decades, researchers examining the glacial meltdown that ended 11,000 years ago took into account a number of contributing factors, particularly regional influences such as solar radiation, ice sheets and ocean currents.

But a reexamination of more than 1,000 previously studied glacial boulders has produced a more accurate timetable for the pre-historic meltdown and pinpoints the rise in carbon dioxide – then naturally occurring – as the primary driving factor in the simultaneous global retreat of glaciers at the close of the last Ice Age, the researchers report in the journal Nature Communications.

“Glaciers are very sensitive to temperature. When you get the world’s glaciers retreating all at the same time, you need a broad, global reason for why the world’s thermostat is going up,” said Boston College Assistant Professor of Earth and Environmental Sciences Jeremy Shakun. “The only factor that explains glaciers melting all around the world in unison during the end of the Ice Age is the rise in greenhouse gases.”

The researchers found that regional factors caused differences in the precise timing and pace of glacier retreat from one place to another, but carbon dioxide was the major driver of the overall global meltdown, said Shakun, a co-author of the report “Regional and global forcing of glacier retreat during the last deglaciation.”

“This is a lot like today,” said Shakun. “In any given decade you can always find some areas where glaciers are holding steady or even advancing, but the big picture across the world and over the long run is clear – carbon dioxide is making the ice melt.”

While 11,000 years ago may seem far too distant for a point of comparison, it was only a moment ago in geological time. The team’s findings fix even greater certainty on scientific conclusions that the dramatic increase in manmade greenhouse gases will eradicate many of the world’s glaciers by the end of this century.

“This has relevance to today since we’ve already raised CO2 by more than it increased at the end of the Ice Age, and we’re on track to go up much higher this century — which adds credence to the view that most of the world’s glaciers will be largely gone within the next few centuries, with negative consequences such as rising sea level and depleted water resources,” said Shakun.

The team reexamined samples taken from boulders that were left by the retreating glaciers, said Shakun, who was joined in the research by experts from Oregon State University, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Purdue University and the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colo.

Each boulder has been exposed to cosmic radiation since the glaciers melted, an exposure that produces the isotope Beryllium-10 in the boulder. Measuring the levels of the isotope in boulder samples allows scientists to determine when glaciers melted and first uncovered the boulders.

Scientists have been using this process called surface exposure dating for more than two decades to determine when glaciers retreated, Shakun said. His team examined samples collected by multiple research teams over the years and applied an improved methodology that increased the accuracy of the boulder ages.

The team then compared their new exposure ages to the timing of the rise of carbon dioxide concentration in the atmosphere, a development recorded in air bubbles taken from ice cores. Combined with computer models, the analysis eliminated regional factors as the primary explanations for glacial melting across the globe at the end of the Ice Age. The single leading global factor that did explain the global retreat of glaciers was rising carbon dioxide levels in the air.

“Our study really removes any doubt as to the leading cause of the decline of the glaciers by 11,000 years ago – it was the rising levels of carbon dioxide in the Earth’s atmosphere,” said Shakun.

Carbon dioxide levels rose from approximately 180 parts per million to 280 parts per million at the end of the last Ice Age, which spanned nearly 7,000 years. Following more than a century of industrialization, carbon dioxide levels have now risen to approximately 400 parts per million.

“This tells us we are orchestrating something akin to the end of an Ice Age, but much faster. As the amount of carbon dioxide continues to increase, glaciers around the world will retreat,” said Shakun.

###


Greenhouse gases caused glacial retreat during last Ice Age

OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY

Alpine moraines such as this one in Montana have boulders that can be uncovered by melting glaciers, providing data to help study past climate change. CREDIT (Photo courtesy of Oregon State University)
Alpine moraines such as this one in Montana have boulders that can be uncovered by melting glaciers, providing data to help study past climate change. Photo courtesy of Oregon State University

CORVALLIS, Ore. – A recalculation of the dates at which boulders were uncovered by melting glaciers at the end of the last Ice Age has conclusively shown that the glacial retreat was due to rising levels of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases, as opposed to other types of forces.

Carbon dioxide levels are now significantly higher than they were at that time, as a result of the Industrial Revolution and other human activities since then. Because of that, the study confirms predictions of future glacial retreat, and that most of the world’s glaciers may disappear in the next few centuries.

The findings were published today in Nature Communications by researchers from Oregon State University, Boston College and other institutions. They erase some of the uncertainties about glacial melting that had been due to a misinterpretation of data from some of these boulders, which were exposed to the atmosphere more than 11,500 years ago.

“This shows that at the end of the last Ice Age, it was only the increase in carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases that could have caused the loss of glaciers around the world at the same time,” said Peter Clark, a professor in the OSU College of Earth, Ocean and Atmospheric Sciences, and co-author on the study.

“This study validates predictions that future glacial loss will occur due to the ongoing increase in greenhouse gas levels from human activities,” Clark said. “We could lose 80-90 percent of the world’s glaciers in the next several centuries if greenhouse gases continue to rise at the current rate.”

Glacial loss in the future will contribute to rising sea levels and, in some cases, have impacts on local water supplies.

As the last Ice Age ended during a period of about 7,000 years, starting around 19,000 years ago, the levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere increased from 180 parts per million to 280 parts per million. But just in the past 150 years, they have surged from 280 to about 400 parts per million, far higher than what was required to put an end to the last Ice Age.

The new findings, Clark said, were based on a recalculation of the ages at which more than 1,100 glacial boulders from 159 glacial moraines around the world were exposed to the atmosphere after being buried for thousands of years under ice.

The exposure of the boulders to cosmic rays produced cosmogenic nuclides, which had been previously measured and used to date the event. But advances have been made in how to calibrate ages based on that data. Based on the new calculations, the rise in carbon dioxide levels – determined from ancient ice cores -matches up nicely with the time at which glacial retreat took place.

“There had been a long-standing mystery about why these boulders were uncovered at the time they were, because it didn’t properly match the increase in greenhouse gases,” said Jeremy Shakun, a professor at Boston College and lead author on the study. “We found that the previous ages assigned to this event were inaccurate. The data now show that as soon as the greenhouse gas levels began to rise, the glaciers began to melt and retreat.”

There are other forces that can also cause glacial melting on a local or regional scale, the researchers noted, such as changes in the Earth’s orbit around the sun, or shifts in ocean heat distribution. These factors probably did have localized effects. But the scientists determined that only the change in greenhouse gas levels could have explained the broader global retreat of glaciers all at the same time.

In the study of climate change, glaciers have always been of considerable interest, because their long-term behavior is a more reliable barometer that helps sort out the ups-and-downs caused by year-to-year weather variability, including short-term shifts in temperature and precipitation.

###

Other collaborators on this research were from the University of Wisconsin, Purdue University, and the National Center for Atmospheric Research. The work was supported by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the National Science Foundation.

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

206 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
ralfellis
August 21, 2015 12:14 pm

Quote:
“The researchers found that … carbon dioxide was the major follower of the overall global meltdown, said Shakun, a co-author of the report.”
There, fix that for them….
R

August 21, 2015 12:14 pm

IT IS VERY EVIDENT THAT CO2 DOES NOT ! LEAD THE TEMPERATURE.
The simplistic reason being if CO2 did lead the temperature and a positive feedback is at work and if this feedback as they are claiming now is the control knob for the climate what (taken into consideration what AGW is saying now) stopped this process once it got started to not keep going? In other words what forces (which AGW theory claims apparently there are none) stopped the climate from a run a way state. In other words more CO2 warmer temperature leads to more CO2 hence an even warmer temperature.
Why once this process got going according to AGW theory did it not keep going if CO2 positive feedbacks are the control knob for the climate? What force or process has stopped this from happening in the past?
If as AGW theory claims CO2 is the all climatic control factor why then in the past when a situation similar to what we have today according to AGW did not keep going on and on?
Remember AGW says CO2 and only CO2 rules the climate.

co2islife
Reply to  Salvatore Del Prete
August 26, 2015 2:21 am

Remember AGW says CO2 and only CO2 rules the climate.

That is another smoking gun. The AGW theory has no “off switch.” The AGW theory runs counter to 600 million years of geologic history when CO2 got as high as 7000 ppm. They also don’t seem to understand that CO2 absorption of IR isn’t linear with concentration. Large changes in CO2 from this level mean very little.

Roderic Fabian
August 21, 2015 12:15 pm

Temperatures during the last ice age were about 6 degrees lower than during interglacial periods. CO2 levels, according to ice cores, were down around 180 ppm during the glacial period. If falling CO2 caused that cooling then we should have seen an increase of global temps of about 6 degrees as the CO2 levels went from 270 to 400 in modern times, but we’ve only seen about 0.8 degrees. CO2 could not have been the main cause of the cooling at the beginning of the ice age nor the warming at the end of it as the change in CO2 could only have produced a fraction of that change.in temperature.

Louis Hunt
August 21, 2015 12:25 pm

“Carbon dioxide levels rose from approximately 180 parts per million to 280 parts per million at the end of the last Ice Age, which spanned nearly 7,000 years.”
Why does correlation with a rise in CO2 “conclusively” prove causation? That’s a scientific no-no. And what caused CO2 to suddenly increase 7000 years into an Ice Age? I must have missed their explanation. Did it come from warming oceans? But that would mean the oceans had to warm first. Did it come from melting permafrost? But that would have the same objection. Did it come from fires, volcanoes, alien SUVs, or what?
On the positive side, this study’s conclusion means we can avoid the next Ice Age by keeping CO2 levels high. Isn’t that a good reason to resist decreasing carbon dioxide in the atmosphere below current levels? I think it’s a darn good reason on top of the fact that the climate seems to be quite optimum at current levels, whether it has anything to do with CO2 or not.

Reply to  Louis Hunt
August 21, 2015 12:26 pm

This study is a joke.

Louis Hunt
Reply to  Salvatore Del Prete
August 21, 2015 12:47 pm

Yes it is. But if warmists want to insist that this study is correct, then we should insist, based on the same study, that CO2 levels be kept high to avoid the next Ice Age. Turnabout is fail play.

Merovign
August 21, 2015 12:55 pm

Seriously, how does this entire field not chew its own leg off in an attempt to escape?

kim
Reply to  Merovign
August 21, 2015 1:13 pm

Yes, they are trapped. We’ll feel sorry for them someday. There were forces far bigger than they understood at work on the science.
===============

Tom J
Reply to  kim
August 21, 2015 2:12 pm

You hit the nail on the head. Very sophisticated insight.

Jon
Reply to  kim
August 21, 2015 4:39 pm

Yes Kim – money and power, As usual even ‘good’ scientists are trapped by a society run by greed and fear 🙁

August 21, 2015 1:01 pm

There seems to be a lot of snow falling around Banff in Canada at the moment …. fickle weather, eh?

Justthinkin
Reply to  bobburban
August 21, 2015 2:51 pm

“There seems to be a lot of snow falling around Banff in Canada at the moment …. fickle weather, eh?”
Wellllll. Let us not forget that Banff is at about 5,000′ elevation….so of course the lower temp will cause snow instead of rain. And anyways….there are no glaciers around there to worry about! OH WAIT. (from some guy 2 hrs. east of there). But what would I know about local wx conditions compared to the climate warming science gods?

David, UK
August 21, 2015 1:16 pm

Jesus, talk about confusing cause and effect.

Tom J
August 21, 2015 1:48 pm

‘As the last Ice Age ended during a period of about 7,000 years, starting around 19,000 years ago, the levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere increased from 180 parts per million to 280 parts per million. But just in the past 150 years, they have surged from 280 to about 400 parts per million, far higher than what was required to put an end to the last Ice Age.’
Interesting how blasé these researchers are about a CO2 level of 180 ppm but then absolutely freak out about a level of 400 ppm. As I understand it 180 ppm is a mere 20-30 ppm above the level at which all life on this planet would have ceased to exist. And, compared to levels for the majority of the planet’s existence, an astoundingly low number. Why don’t they put that in their press release?

Michael
August 21, 2015 2:05 pm

Why do these things climate things always need to be recalculated? Why can’t they calculate them correctly the first time? My Mac and PC both have calculators – I just don’t understand what is going wrong?

Reply to  Michael
August 22, 2015 2:12 pm

science advances. why couldnt galileo measure the speed of light accurately the first time

Michael
Reply to  Steven Mosher
August 23, 2015 3:47 am

Galileo didnt have a PC or Mac – what is the excuse this time?

Fred Zimmerman
August 21, 2015 2:33 pm

YOUTUBE
Tree Death in Vermont video 1..(poor audio) Just watch dead trees!
Patrice Lopatin
Patrice Lopatin

August 21, 2015 2:34 pm

1) Correlation is not causation. (well known)
2) Temperature leads CO2 by about 1,000 years. (well known)
3) OK, I’ll humor them for a moment, but if greenhouse gasses caused the Holocene warm-up, what caused the green-house gasses to increase? It certainly wasn’t the paltry 5,000,000 humans living in caves and mud-huts! So it must have been natural! Furthermore, there has been no “runaway” positive feedback causing the earth to melt! Not this interglacial, and not the 4 previous interglacials! Paleo data says that temperatures have been higher in the past. There are no SCARY positive feedbacks! In fact, looking at the paleo data suggests very strongly that there are strong NEGATIVE feedbacks. It must be so, or the temperature would just have run away!
Sorry… we’re just not buying what they’re selling.

Reply to  wallensworth
August 22, 2015 2:11 pm

Temperature leads CO2 by about 1,000 years. (well known)
actually this fact was PREDICTED by AGW theory

looncraz
Reply to  Steven Mosher
August 22, 2015 4:06 pm

You’re trolling, right? Or being sarcastic?
AGW boldly, and wrongly, predicts that CO2 should lead temperature… but temperature greatly leads CO2, and drives it by the nose.
What we are seeing today is MWP 2.0.

Gamecock
August 21, 2015 2:36 pm

In climate science, CO2 causes hot and cold, drought and flood, at the same time. Alternative realities at the same time are not contradictions in climate science.
“But a reexamination of more than 1,000 previously studied glacial boulders”
I’m always amazed at how stupid people used to be, that reexamination produces different results.

August 21, 2015 2:39 pm

My take, There’s an “H” of lot Man doesn’t know about Life and the world we live in. The wise one’s admit that and want to learn more. The fools don’t. They already know.

Reply to  Gunga Din
August 21, 2015 3:01 pm

Did it ever occur to these guys that ice retreat and subsequent greening of large areas would cause an explosion of animal life, from insects on up, and that could drive rapid CO2 rise? Presumably that would stabilize as plant life took up the extra CO2, and reached a post-glacial equilibrium. I have no idea of this speculation is correct, but it seems at least as plausible as the theory in these papers…

Reply to  Taylor Pohlman
August 21, 2015 3:30 pm

Equilibrium without Man’s control and taxes? Not possible.

jones
August 21, 2015 2:45 pm

comment image

Justthinkin
Reply to  jones
August 21, 2015 3:00 pm

+100

Gary Pearse
August 21, 2015 3:00 pm

Steven Mosher
August 21, 2015 at 9:53 am
So the Milankovich orbital change got us into the glacial, but its completed cycle doesn’t bring us back out of it!! Its got to be CO2!! They are saying (and you supporting) that it is the only global forcing that can explain the meltback. Do thermal catastrophists think the Milankovich cycle is only a regional thing? Like they think the LIA and MWP and all the other warm and cold periods are regional? Abductive reasoning, eh?
Okay lets go with the new idea and forget about ice corps actual data. So what caused the rise in CO2 in concert with the ice meltback – surely a 100ppm rise which was not caused by humans is a bit of a heresy only a few minutes ago ”geologically”. And while we are at it, what reduced it down the 100ppm or whatever it was to 165 ppm in the first place to initiate the recent glacial? Also, if the 100ppm+ raised the temperature 4C or so and the next 100ppm added by the Industrial Rev raised it by 0.8C, can we deduce that the next 100ppm will raise by another 0.2 -0.4, and the next 100ppm raise it to 0.1 and after that we can gas ourselves with 8000ppm like in a submarine? So do they realize the same thing will come along and the CO2 is going to suddenly go down again all by itself like it did before and slip us into the next ice age? It has, after all done it time and again.
Anyway, that should close the circle on your abductive reasoning. This paper’s authors’ reasoning has been abducted by something, I’m sure.

Phlogiston
August 21, 2015 3:47 pm

There is one very clear and simple reason why climate related science has ceased to be science.
In scientific investigation there is needs to be some uncertainty and degree of freedom as to what will be found, what answer will be obtained.
If the answer is 100% known on advance, it robs the process of scientific meaning.
Climate “research” is a pantomime analogous to this well known Far Side cartoon about the horse hospital and the single prescription to every possible ailment:
Far Side
The reason that climate science is not science is that, way before any climate question is considered or posed, the answer is known; it is CO2.
Thus it is the fact that the “science is settled” (answer is always and only CO2) that means that climate science in its current form can never be real science.

August 21, 2015 4:12 pm

Complete and utter nonsense. Carbon dioxide had nothing to do with glacier melting. First, numerous observations if Pleistocene ice melting show that carbon dioxide follows instead of leading ice melt. They claim that according to their boulder observations the reverse is true. It is quite unlikely that their re-examination of a few boulders will nullify the fact that all through Pleistocene carbon dioxide increase followed rather than preceded the occurrence of ice melting. Secondly, it is quite impossible for melting to take place then both carbon dioxide and water vapor are simultaneously in the air. According to MGT – Miskilczi greenhouse theory – these two greenhouse gases form an optimal joint absorption window in the infrared whose optical thickness is 1.87. This value comes from radiosonde measurements. If you now add carbon dioxide to the atmosphere as these fakers claim happened here water vapor will start to diminish, rain out, and the original optical thickness is restored. The result is that despite an addition of carbon dioxide no warming takes place because reduction of water vapor has lowered the absorptivity of the atmosphere. This is not just a theory but is happening right now to us and explains why we have a hiatus. Hiatus or stoppage of warming when atmospheric carbon dioxide is increasing invalidates the Arrhenius greenhouse theory that is constantly touted as cause of the anthropogenic greenhouse warming or AGW. In these press releases they attempt to tell us two falsehoods: first, that carbon dioxide increase precedes instead of following ice melt. And second that the warming it creates is greenhouse warming. The latter is quite impossible according to MGT as I pointed out. The existence of the hiatus poroves it. I give them a zero for knowing climate science which they pretend to be practicing here.

August 21, 2015 4:46 pm

“As Ice Age ended, greenhouse gas rise was lead factor in melting of Earth’s glaciers”…released after extensive Pal Review, just in time for the Paris Fest.

Evan Jones
Editor
August 21, 2015 4:49 pm

Roll over, Milanko.

Phlogiston
August 21, 2015 5:38 pm

Shakun is a criminal con artist, simple as that, I hope I live to see him behind bars.

GregK
August 21, 2015 6:41 pm

““This shows that at the end of the last Ice Age, it was only the increase in carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases that could have caused the loss of glaciers around the world at the same time,” said Peter Clark, a professor in the OSU College of Earth, Ocean and Atmospheric Sciences, and co-author on the study.”
Rubbish caused by the academic requirement to publish or perish.
So the CO2 Fairy waved her magic wand, CO2 increased and glaciers melted.
Where’s temperature in this scenario?
Errrmm……as soon as temperatures started to rise, leading to an increase in CO2, glaciers started to retreat depositing moraine as they did so. So there should be a rough correlation [not causation] between moraine deposition and CO2 levels

August 21, 2015 9:35 pm

The press releases imply there were predictions. The peer-reviewed article mentions none of them. If there were none then the alarms raised by the press releases lack bases in science.
The institutions that issued the press releases stood to gain by implying there were predictions when, it appears, there weren’t any. Will this set of facts motivate prosecution of apparently guilty parties under the Obama administration? Would they motivate prosecution of apparently guilty parties under a Hillary Clinton administration? Sorry to say, I don’t think so.

phlogiston
August 21, 2015 11:07 pm

Where this is going is very clear.
With the LIA and the MWP out of the way, the next target of the AGW establishment is ice ages themselves.
“Ice ages? What ice ages?”
A BBC documentary the other night had David Attenborough talking about the glacial period as having “ended” 12,000 years ago.
Umm – David – no it hasn’t ended.
The end of the Holocene may not be very far away.
The Pleistocene glacial epoch is actually deepening in amplitude (especially after the MPR) with the latest Wisconsin glaciation being the deepest yet.

Don B
August 22, 2015 5:55 am

Oregon State University has no climate credibility.
OS was the home of the Marcott abomination. Several years ago, OS forced George Taylor out of his position for telling the truth about Pacific NW snowpack (it was cyclical, and had nothing to do with CO2) and for being politically incorrect enough to show that natural variability had a role to play in climate change.
I say this sadly, as an OS alumnus.

Reply to  Don B
August 22, 2015 6:32 pm

At least the OSU guy throws in more of the honest qualifiers (could, ifs, in some cases) than the Boston College guy.
I took an atmospheric sciences class as an elective (for an easy A) at OSU. The professor was a pretty good. He did his weather prediction at the end of each class when time allowed (based on pressure contours at a certain elevation); he was correct almost all of the time (compared to about 50% for the T.V. guy … it was springtime in Oregon).
Too bad about George Taylor. Too bad about OSU.
I didn’t notice it at the time (long ago) but OSU pushed me from the ignorant left that most high school kids are, to a kid that started to vote republican more than otherwise.

Verified by MonsterInsights