1709; The Disparate Economic And Political Impact of Weather And Climate

Guest opinion: Dr. Tim Ball

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 2001 Report claimed that neither the Medieval Warm Period (MWP) nor the Little Ice Age (LIA) occurred. They created the ‘hockey stick’ graph to prove their point. It wasn’t produced specifically to eliminate those climate periods but to show that today was warmer than “ever” before and that most of the increase occurred in the 20th century. Their nemesis was a graph presented in the 1990 Report (Figure1).

clip_image002

Figure 1: Graph 7c from the 1990 IPCC Report

The dotted line on the graph is the average temperature of the Northern Hemisphere for the last 1000 years. The ‘hockey stick’ allowed them to claim the 20th century as anomalous. They had to eliminate the natural temperature increase from the nadir of the LIA in 1680. They also rejected historical evidence of the events, but the facts don’t go away. Their scientific manipulations were exposed, although few understood or realized the gravity. Others refuse to face facts, as Paul Ehrlich’s mindless review of Mark Steyn’s book attests. However, few are familiar with the historic evidence because most don’t read history, fewer read climate history and most don’t know how much climate changes. If you are 80 years old, you have lived through four climate changes; the warming from 1900 to 1940, the cooling from 1940 to 1980, the warming from 1980 to 2000 and the slight cooling from 2000 to the present. There are individual years within each period that had a significant impact. The summer of 1934, the winter of 1936, the winter of 1947 and so on.

Historic Reports

The year 1709 is one that stands out during the LIA. It was a particularly cold year in a long cold spell. Gabriele Bella (1733 -99) painted his vision of people cavorting on a frozen lagoon in 1708 (Figure 1).

clip_image004

Figure 1; Ven(ice)? 1708

People were painfully aware of the cold conditions. To help them cope the Reverend John Shower gave and published a sermon in 1695 titled, “Winter Meditations: or, a Sermon concerning Frost, and Snow, and Winds, &c.” He produced a second edition in 1709 (Figure 2).

clip_image006

Figure 2. John Shower’s Sermon.

England was hard hit in what they called The Great Frost. The impact was greater in France where they called it Le Grand Hiver. Estimates place related deaths in France, mostly due to famine, to 600,000 by the end of 1710. Of course, the famine did not affect Francoise-Marie de Bourbon, Duchess of Orleans, who only complained of the cold. She wrote,

“I am sitting by a roaring fire, have a screen before the door, which is closed, so that I can sit here with a sable fur piece around my neck and my feet in a bearskin sack and I am still shivering with cold and can barely hold the pen. Never in my life have I seen a winter such as this one,”

 

Today we call these “first world problems.” The Duchess died of natural causes in 1749 so missed a likely unnatural death during the French Revolution. The death would have been at the hands of descendants of the peasants who suffered and died while she shivered. Here was what was happening to them, according to a report from Beaune in Burgundy.

“Travelers died in the countryside, livestock in the stables, wild animals in the woods; nearly all the birds died, wine froze in barrels and public fires were lit to warm the poor,”

Naturalists were measuring and observing the conditions. William Derham, a contributor to the Royal Society Philosophical Transactions, recorded a low of -12°C on the night of January 5, 1709. The low temperatures were wide scale because,

 

People across Europe awoke on 6 January 1709 to find the temperature had plummeted. A three-week freeze was followed by a brief thaw – and then the mercury plunged again and stayed there. From Scandinavia in the north to Italy in the south, and from Russia in the east to the west coast of France, everything turned to ice. The sea froze. Lakes and rivers froze, and the soil froze to a depth of a metre or more. Livestock died from cold in their barns, chicken’s combs froze and fell off, trees exploded and travellers froze to death on the roads. It was the coldest winter in 500 years.

 

IPCC and ‘hockey stick’ supporters attacked claims about the invalidity of their work saying the MWP and the LIA were, at best, regional. This was based partly on the fact that 7c was for the Northern Hemisphere. However, much historic evidence shows they were global. For example, in New York for April 5, 1709,

The cold is so intense that water thrown upon the ground at noon freezes immediately in NYC.

Notice the comment that “trees exploded”. What does it mean? Derham produced a summary later in the year when he wrote.

Fish froze in the rivers, game lay down in the fields and died, and small birds perished by the million. The loss of tender herbs and exotic fruit trees was no surprise, but even hardy native oaks and ash trees succumbed.

 

Economic Impact

International trade was stretching around the world as the rich and powerful reached out for opportunities. Creation of the Hudson’s Bay Company in 1670 was a good example. In 1690, the Company London warehouse was full of furs but they were all gone and demand significantly increased after 1710. The furs were for the Duchess of Orleans and her English counterparts. The profits were for the English Royal family and a few select investors. With colonial expansion import of an increasing variety of products created financial opportunities. Every wealthy person wanted part of the trade but also the latest most exclusive item to signify their wealth. Consider the following,

The pineapple made its way to England in the 17th century and by the 18th century, being seen with one was an instant indicator of wealth — a single pineapple could cost the equivalent of $8,000 today. In fact, the fruit was so desirable and rare that consumers often rented a pineapple for the night to show off to fellow party-goers.

Mahogany (Swietenia mahagoni) from the West Indies, especially Jamaica, was one exotic product trying to establish itself in furniture of the houses of the powerful (Figure 3).

clip_image008

Figure 3: Swietenia mahagoni

Most of the furniture in Royal and aristocratic homes across Europe was made from European Walnut (Juglans regia) Figure 4. Walnut, especially Burl Walnut with its fantastic colors and patterns, is still the wood of choice for luxury cars like a Rolls Royce.

clip_image010

Figure 4; European walnut

Naturally, there was resistance to imports of mahogany from Central America by walnut producers. Before1709, walnut was the wood of choice for furniture makers in Europe and the wealthy. It is hard to imagine that few people had even basic furniture. Samuel Pepys’ diaries give a good insight into the amount and value of furniture. He clearly measures his financial and social success by the furniture he can afford. In southern England, where walnut was introduced, along with chestnut trees, during the warmer Roman period, it was not as plentiful but still very much desired.

Estimates claim that the frost killed half the walnut trees. The trees “exploded” when the sap froze and destroyed the cell structure causing large slits in the trunk. Loss of the resource didn’t force an immediate change because furniture producers let the wood mature for up to five years after it was cut; they had a stockpile. This shrunk and forced change when in 1720 France banned exports of walnut. As a result, in 1721 English furniture producers appreciated reduction of tariffs on mahogany from Jamaica under the Naval Stores Act.

The English furniture producers needed a suitable replacement and began pushing for change.

they realised mahogany’s unique properties – its ability to hold finer detail than walnut and its higher comparative strength.

 

The final stage occurred in 1733 when Sir Robert Walpole (1676 – 1745) eliminated all taxes on imported timber. Walpole is considered the first prime minister. His power and wealth were expressed in the construction of Houghton Hall (Figure 5).

clip_image012

Figure 5: Palladian Architecture of Houghton Hall, Home of Sir Robert Walpole

Much of the furniture, including Walpole’s desk and dining table, are made of mahogany (Figure 6). The furniture and designs from Houghton are so highly regarded that a modern Houghton Furniture Company continues the tradition.

clip_image014

Figure 6: Houghton Hall Dining Room

Maybe when the oil company cheque arrives, I will be able to afford such luxuries, but I still will not be able to vote for who leads the country. Canada has a new Prime Minister, chosen by a Liberal Party that received only 39 percent of the vote. It is a continuance of the aristocratic patronage practiced by the Duchess of Orleans and Walpole. The Liberal Party chose the Prime Minister because they know what is best for the citizens. His energy policies for Canada parallel those of Ontario so the people will be left out in the cold once again.

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

179 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Bruce
November 18, 2015 7:10 am

The slide into the LIA that the 1990 IPCC chart showed is also known as the ages of exploration and (European) colonial expansion. Cooling logically would have been one significant factor spurring overseas exploration and settlement.
In addition, the end or the Roman warm period and slide into the cold Dark Ages corresponded with barbarian invasions of the Roman Mediterranean world. Not hard to see climate as a driver of world history and migration.

ulriclyons
November 18, 2015 7:16 am

“The year 1709 is one that stands out during the LIA. It was a particularly cold year in a long cold spell.”
West Europe temperatures were in fact generally very warm from 1706 for over 30 years, apart from the occasional seasonal severe cold hit like Jan-Feb-Mar 1709, and winter 1715-16. There are useful heliocentric analogues for both of those events in the colder than normal Feb-Mar 1888, and Jan-Feb 1895. http://climexp.knmi.nl/data/tcet.dat

November 18, 2015 7:25 am

I wonder how many millions of deaths there will be when next we get a winter like 1709 in the UK. Power failures, blackouts, no heating, no transport. It doesn’t bear thinking about.

ulriclyons
Reply to  Phillip Bratby
November 18, 2015 7:32 am

Not as many as millions hopefully, but Jan-Mar 2017 and Jan-Mar 2020 will be severe.

Caligula Jones
Reply to  Phillip Bratby
November 18, 2015 9:24 am

Well, if Greece is a good indication, something like this will happen:
1) government will raise taxes on heating oil (in this case to cure global warming)
2) people will burn diesel oil as a replacement, causing huge air quality problems
3) government will raise taxes on diesel oil, not lower taxes on heating oil (that would make sense, of course)
4) people will burn wood and garbage
Etc.

MarkW
Reply to  Caligula Jones
November 18, 2015 10:55 am

5) govt will raise taxes on wood and garbage
6) people will burn politicians

E.M.Smith
Editor
Reply to  Caligula Jones
November 19, 2015 3:10 pm

:
As they are rich in fat due to pork barrel hogging, it is best that they be rendered first and the copious fats used. Treatment with 1% lye and 19% alcohol yields bioDiesel, a great heating oil, for those wishing a “green” solution.
/drysarc; of course… but the tech is accurate… and bioDiesel does not smoke as much …

richard verney
November 18, 2015 7:34 am

It would be good for Tonyb to come along and give us a little insight into the variability of Northern European climate during this period.
Tony has thoroughly reviewed historical texts from a wide range of sources from which, ignoring the RWP and MWP, it appears that the warmest decade in Central England was the 1530s/40s. It appears that that decade was warmer than the most recent decade. Temperatures peaked in the 1540/41 period accompanied by a 9 month drought.
There is a relationship between rainfall and temperature, since this part of the water cycle cools the atmosphere, at least close to the surface. Thus when we see warm temperatures this may be due in part simply to a lack of rainfall/drier than usual conditions. There was a recent article suggesting that much of the variation in the Australian temperatures can be explained by variation in rainfall patterns, and thus not due to rising CO2. I linked that article sometime ago on another post.

climatereason
Editor
Reply to  richard verney
November 18, 2015 9:57 am

Richatd
Thanks. I posted a comment very early in the thread in which Phil jones himself confirms the Variability of the climate at the time including the very warm 1730’s and the bitterly cold 1740 winter which caused him to realise that natural variability was greater than he had originally believed. See my comment here for a link to his paper.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/11/18/1709-the-disparate-economic-and-political-impact-of-weather-and-climate/#comment-http://judithcurry.com/2015/11/16/400-years-of-warming/#comment-744128
Regarding your comments about winter, I am currently talking to the Met office about the observed decline in CET whereby we have lost entirely the half a degree hump in the late 1990’s that caused such panic.
I have a number of graphics that show the evolution of the various seasons over the last few decades.so if interested contact me direct on tonyATclimatereasondotcom
Tonyb

joeldshore
November 18, 2015 7:42 am

An oversimplification at best. What was actually said ( http://www.grida.no/publications/other/ipcc_tar/ ), for example, in the summary for policymakers was:

The data show a relatively warm period associated with the 11th to 14th centuries and a relatively cool period associated with the 15th to 19th centuries in the Northern Hemisphere. However, evidence does not support these“Medieval Warm Period” and “Little Ice Age” periods, respectively, as being globally synchronous. As Figure 5 indicates, the rate and duration of warming of the Northern Hemisphere in
the 20th century appears to have been unprecedented during the millennium, and it cannot simply be considered as a recovery from the “Little Ice Age” of the 15th to 19th centuries. These analyses are complemented by sensitivity analysis of the spatial representativeness of available palaeoclimatic data, indicating that the warmth of the recent decade is outside the 95% confidence interval of temperature uncertainty, even during the warmest periods of the last millennium. Moreover, several different analyses have now been completed, each suggesting that the Northern Hemisphere temperatures of the past decade
have been warmer than any other time in the past six to ten centuries.

Their nemesis was a graph presented in the 1990 Report (Figure1).

In the same way that the nemesis for Galileo’s Theory was Ptolemy. The graph shown in the 1990 report was never claimed to be anything but a rough sketch, based mainly on temperatures in Europe, not the entire northern hemisphere. Furthermore, that graph didn’t even go beyond the first half of the 20th century and hence missed much of the modern rise in temperatures. If you append that data on, you get the conclusion that by the late 20th century, temperatures are higher than the Medieval warm period.
So, as usual, Tim Ball’s diatribe here is based only very loosely on actual fact.

Caligula Jones
Reply to  joeldshore
November 18, 2015 11:41 am

You didn’t even take a breath when you read “available palaeoclimatic data”?
How much palaeoclimatic data can you get in the southern hemisphere, compared to the nothern?
And as mentioned above, maybe its because they simply didn’t LOOK.

Gloateus Maximus
Reply to  joeldshore
November 18, 2015 5:27 pm

As usual, your diatribe here is based upon nothing at all.
Overwhelming evidence from every source shows that the LIA and MWP were global in scope, just as were the Dark Ages Cold Period which preceded the MWP, the Roman WP which preceded the DACP, the Greek Dark Ages CP and the Minoan WP, as well as the Holocene Climatic Optimum. All of those warm periods were warmer than the present.

joeldshore
Reply to  joeldshore
November 18, 2015 5:55 pm

Gloateus Maximus: If by “global in scope”, you mean that some time during a several century period dubbed the LIA, a particular place had relatively cold temperatures and that some time during a several century period dubbed the MWP, a particular place had relatively warm temperatures, then yes, these were global in scope. However, because the cold and warm were not very synchronous from place-to-place, the LIA and MWP seem to be a broad a shallow dip and peak on the global scale.
As for your claim that “all of those warm periods were warmer than the present,” it seems to be based more on motivated reasoning than scientific analysis.

Gloateus Maximus
Reply to  joeldshore
November 18, 2015 8:29 pm

That the Minoan WP was warmer than the Roman WP, that the Roman WP was warmer than the Medieval WP and that the Medieval WP was warmer than the Modern WP are facts, that is, observations based upon the paleoclimatic data.
But as a climastrologist, a trough-feeding bureaucratic computer gamer, scientific facts mean nothing to you.
Happily, after Jan 2017, your anti-human cult will be swept into the garbage can of history.

Reply to  joeldshore
November 18, 2015 7:06 pm

GM says:
As usual, your diatribe here is based upon nothing at all.
I’d agree. There are lots of similar charts to the one below, showing that previous global warming episodes were warmer than now:
http://jonova.s3.amazonaws.com/graphs/lappi/gisp-last-10000-new.png
Here’s more ice core data:comment image
And just to show how silly the “dangerous AGW” hoax is getting, here’s an animation with some needed perspective”
http://www.greenworldtrust.org.uk/Science/Images/ice-HS/noaa_gisp2_icecore_anim_adj.gif

joeldshore
Reply to  dbstealey
November 19, 2015 12:09 pm

You guys do understand that central Greenland is not the whole world don’t you? I also would challenge you to show me where in Alley’s paper that data that was plotted actually comes from. I don’t see any graph in Alley’s paper that is available here: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277379199000621
As usual, the fake skeptics are showing how they uncritically accept any piece of data that seems to support their ideological viewpoint, without any attempt to find out where the data comes from and what its limitations might be.

Gloateus Maximus
Reply to  dbstealey
November 19, 2015 12:50 pm

Joel,
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/10/31/new-paper-shows-medieval-warm-period-was-global-in-scope/
Not just Greenland, but the reconstructed CET shows the Medieval WP warmer than the late 20th century warming, as does evidence from all around the world.

joeldshore
Reply to  dbstealey
November 19, 2015 1:52 pm

One of the issues with the Greenland data is apparently that the last data point is from the year ~1855, not the current climate (See http://hot-topic.co.nz/easterbrooks-wrong-again/ ).

joeldshore
Reply to  dbstealey
November 19, 2015 2:00 pm

Gloateus:
Your claims still don’t address the synchronicity issue. For example, it could conceivably be (not saying that it is!) that the temperature in China was warmer in the period 1050-1100AD than it is today, and the temperature in Northern Europe was warmer in the period 1250-1300AD than it is today, and the temperature in the Western U.S. was warmer in the period 900-950AD than it is today. However, it does not follow from this that the average global (or even Northern Hemisperic) temperature during any time during the period 900-1300AD is warmer than today, because today the warming appears to be much more synchronous than it was during the vague multi-century period that is referred to as the MWP.

joeldshore
November 18, 2015 7:44 am

Sorry…in my above comment, the first quotation from Tim Ball was accidently omitted:

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 2001 Report claimed that neither the Medieval Warm Period (MWP) nor the Little Ice Age (LIA) occurred.

Maureen Matthew
November 18, 2015 7:57 am

What I think would be an interesting study for some graduate student would be to search the records of the Royal Navy and the Hudson’s Bay Company to examine climate trends. These two organizations documented everything. The Royal Navy had a worldwide presence so their records could show conditions around the world. I can’t find the reference, but I seem to recall that one researcher was looking at the reports of Royal Navy vessels trying to go through the Northwest Passage in the early 1800s.
HBC was mainly in Canada, but had extensive outposts throughout and the Factors were responsible for documenting many things. In fact the quality of the furs brought in would be one indicator of temperatures (colder winters produce better furs) – if Mann can use a couple of trees for his hockey stick then the quality of furs should also be used,
But it is highly unlikely that any graduate student would receive any funding to do such research – so this is just wishful thinking.

joeldshore
November 18, 2015 8:01 am

One can actually read the context in which the graph from the first IPCC report occurred here: http://ipcc.ch/ipccreports/far/wg_I/ipcc_far_wg_I_chapter_07.pdf It is Figure 7.1 in that chapter. Note that the caption calls it (and the other two graphs in this figure) “schematic diagrams of global temperature variations” and the text itself notes that for changes since the end of the last glaciation “it is still not clear whether all the fluctuations indicated were truly global”. (They do say that the Little Ice Age lasted several centuries and was “global in extent” but don’t comment on the specific issue of the exact synchronicity between different locations.)
By the way, as a more minor quibble, the horizontal dotted line shown in the figure is said in the caption to “nominally represent[] conditions near the beginning of the twentieth century”. It is not said to represent what Tim Ball says it does (“the average temperature of the Northern Hemisphere for the last 1000 years”).

RockyRoad
November 18, 2015 8:17 am

Tim, great article, an interesting perspective.
One minor quibble: I’d suggest updating this sentence: “This was based partly on the fact that 7c was for the Northern Hemisphere” to “This was based partly on the fact that Graph 7c applies to the Northern Hemisphere”

François
November 18, 2015 8:53 am

It is a bit warm in France these days; apparently, in the rest of the world also; I know it disturbs you. I think you have a problem, we all have on, you just pretend not to notice.,

Alan Robertson
Reply to  François
November 18, 2015 10:24 am

François,
Misinterpretation of your words is not due to translation issues. Your writing style is so general and noncommittal, that your words could be understood in many contexts. If you have something specific to say, then say it (please.) Otherwise, why should anyone use their precious time, guessing what your meaning might be?

Stephen Richards
Reply to  François
November 18, 2015 1:08 pm

François, Il fait chaud en France mais li fait froid aussi. Il n’y a pas de longtemps que la temperature ici du sud-ouest a touché -19C et elle n’a pas dépassée -5 pendant 6 jour. Il a fait aussi chaud cette année. J’ai ramassé mes dernière frais cette semaine. C’est vrai que les autumn sont plus chaud que normale récemment mais les hiver ont été plus froid. Préparez vous pour un hiver comme 1956. Ill s’arrive.

Reply to  François
November 18, 2015 9:02 pm

The reason for that above average warmth which you have experienced was that there was a steady flow of surface winds blowing from North Africa, across the Mediterranean, and into Europe. These surface winds blew steady for several months, and finally stopped several weeks ago. After that, the surface winds came from the warmer southwest off of the Atlantic and then east across the top half of France. This is still the case now and is part of the reason why the region is above average in temps…http://earth.nullschool.net/#current/wind/surface/level/orthographic=5.97,39.02,819

François
November 18, 2015 8:56 am

Sorry, your American system made a couple of mistake in my spelling.FM

troe
November 18, 2015 8:58 am

Those pushing weak and unpopular points often resort to fraud. After all it’s for a good cause right.

Samuel C. Cogar
November 18, 2015 9:03 am

The following cited paper is a really good read on the subject being discussed.
First I would like to inform everyone that the originally published paper did not include the preface “disclaimer” of …… Note to general public:
Thus I have to assume that political pressure was threatened against the author(s) and said “disclaimer” was then included out of fear of retribution by the proponents of CAGW.
THE LITTLE ICE AGE IN EUROPE
http://www2.sunysuffolk.edu/mandias/lia/little_ice_age.html

November 18, 2015 9:04 am

Good essay. However, Tim’s understanding of Canadian politics seems a little lacking. Under our Westminster Parliamentary Monarchy, our governor general (Queen Elizabeth II’s representative to Canada) selects the prime minister. Of course, the selection is normally narrowed down to a single person, he leader of the party with the most seats in Parliament. However, to suggest that the Liberal party selected the prime minister is simply wrong (while sometimes it does happen when a leader resigns mid term, that was not the case with our current prime minister). More Canadians voted for the party lead by the new prime minister than voted for any other party. Some people don’t like this setup. But it is the way it works in a 3 party representative democracy. Our current prime minister promised to reform the system, but what are the odds he will when the current system is what allowed him to have the power he does with only 39% of the vote? When I look at other countries with direct representation, they always have unstable governments with crazy mishmash coalitions. I, for one, don’t want that. While it cheeses me off that Jean Chretien had, and Justin Trudeau has, majority governments with less than 50% support, I enjoyed the government of Stephen Harper, even though he didn’t have 50% support. It is the way our system works, and it seems to work as good as any other system.

Monroe
November 18, 2015 9:34 am

Warmer is not a problem.

H.R.
Reply to  Monroe
November 18, 2015 1:21 pm

I’m a strong supporter of Global Warming, Monroe. It is expensive to travel to warmer climes during the winter months. With a bit of luck, we might break the glacial/interglacial cycle that’s been going on for the past couple million or so years and stay warm for a few hundred-thousand years. But I’m not holding my breath. The geological record is against me,

Kokoweef
November 18, 2015 9:42 am

We should call them “previous climate change deniers”

Eugene WR Gallun
November 18, 2015 11:13 am

Dr. Tim Ball
i enjoy your articles. Good stuff for people like me who “can’t do the math”.
This article does not talk down to climate skeptics but rather talks up to alarmists who are woefully ignorant of even the basics of climate history and climate science. Historical facts and climate data presented enjoyably — who could ask for more?
Eugene WR Gallun

Knute
November 18, 2015 12:39 pm

http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2015/11/clip_image002_thumb5.jpg?w=1203&h=585
Number one smoking gun in the CAGW hoax.
It was warmer, was even warmer during the Minoan period.
Free tshirts with a logo for all skeptics.
Maybe even a full page ad in the NYTs with the logo.
The IPCC preyed on everyone’s trust.
Gore purposely deceived the public in his movie.
A big fat lie.
Liars need to be embarrassed.
Believers need to be ashamed.
Dragging any well meaning scientist into a discussion about the relevance of CO2 or any other version of some totally meaningless variable is a trick of the trade.
The skill of the con artist.
Well lookie here this new fangled vacuum cleaner.
::: you look and see that that it doesn’t have suck power … its a POS ::::
And the con artist continues
But look at the sleek new design.
See the gel grip handle.
The touch to turn on technology.
The remote control potential of it’s program.

Marcus
November 18, 2015 12:44 pm

Are you really that stupid or are you just practicing to be a liberal politician ??????

November 18, 2015 12:46 pm

Gabriele Bella (1733 -99) painted his vision of people cavorting on a frozen lagoon in 1708..

Is that right? How did someone born after 1708 paint a picture of what happened in 1708?

H.R.
Reply to  TomB
November 18, 2015 1:10 pm

TomB,
If you’d like to try it yourself, you can paint your vision of people cavorting on a frozen lagoon in 1708.
I must confess, that jumped out at me too when I first read through the post. Then I realized a vision wasn’t the same thing as a recollection. For some artists, that’s all they do; paint their visions. Other’s spend their time painting what they actually see or have seen.
Hope that helped you through the time warp thingy ;o)

Mike the Morlock
Reply to  TomB
November 18, 2015 2:47 pm

Sigh, Its normal you talk to anyone left from the time
(People tended to keep diaries more back then along with sketches. In truth sometimes in the past records are more accurate because of this.)
http://edsitement.neh.gov/emanuel-leutzes-symbolic-scene-washington-crossing-delaware
Like this one.

Reply to  TomB
November 18, 2015 9:07 pm

Maybe he had a mother and father who talked to him about how hard it was in the olden days.

H.R.
Reply to  goldminor
November 19, 2015 4:54 am

goldminor,
Yup. They probably told him how they had to walk two miles to school, barefoot, through 3 feet of snow, uphill both ways ;o)

Mike the Morlock
Reply to  Knute
November 18, 2015 3:09 pm

Knute Friend,
Note coral island. NOT meant to last. Erosion, Its the people on the islands themselves who are destroying them. Simply by being there. Walk, kick up dust -blows off where? ocean.
Now if they want to dump this C.C. and ask if we can ship them X number of freighters of dirt.. hell yes
I don’t think anyone would disagree once presented with the “economic benefits”
The Chinese are building islands we should follow suit
michael

November 18, 2015 2:17 pm

@J Murphy, when this settled science was occurring during 2001/till now basically, they were not slicing and dicing words. In effect they said and meant with out having to explain it that neither the LIA or MWP happened. It was local and not world wide. According to the IPCC.
Otherwise, regardless, why aren’t they answering the data that provides ample evidence that these events occurred world wide in context of both temperature and co2 levels? What you did is deflection. Ah, naw, that’s not what they said. Really? Then why haven’t they answered? They’ve had 10 or 12 years to do so. However, they keep going to the government’s with the same line. CAGW! Tell I’m wrong here.

Mike the Morlock
November 18, 2015 2:18 pm

Dr. Tim Ball.
Good.( I would have liked better citation of William Derham’s temperature records but that is because I have not been able to find them myself. Do you have a ” Primary Source? Even if it it is a Library that is difficult to access. )
Many people still don’t understand how overwhelming the little ice age was.
You could spend years documenting the effects in North & South America, Asia that matches Europe.
For Climate Scientists with arguments that the little Ice Age was local in effect, yes perhaps, for a year or two at best, but past that explain the mechanism that would cause a regional “Climate Change” past that. You claim to be Climate Scientists after all. Fish or Cut Bait.
Regional C.C does not last fifty to a hundred years . Are alarmist really this stupid or do they take a pill in the morning
michael

Gloateus Maximus
November 18, 2015 2:18 pm

For extreme WX in the USA, check out the 1930s and ’40s. A number of states recorded their highest and lowest temperatures in those decades. But, the US, like Britain, also suffered severe winters in the 1960s and ’70s.
The past 40 years have been nothing special, so the “climate change” null hypothesis can’t be rejected.

Reply to  Gloateus Maximus
November 18, 2015 2:56 pm

I’d suggest people use TheWayBackMachine to check those periods for their local area.
“The temps, they’ve been a changin’.” 😎

Gloateus Maximus
Reply to  Gunga Din
November 18, 2015 4:51 pm

True. Some state records have been changed or attempted to be changed. And when the same record recurred in the same state, the more recent date is always given. Texas & OK in the 1930s and ’90s are examples.

Trausti Jónsson
November 18, 2015 3:21 pm

Please note that the winter and spring of 1709 were noteably warm and favourable in Iceland

Verified by MonsterInsights