Antarctica Warmer 1,000 Years Ago… Now, *That’s* An Inconvenient Truth!

Guest re-blogging by David Middleton

From No Tricks Zone:

No Tricks Zone

The paper:

Lüning, S., M. Gałka, F. Vahrenholt (2019): The Medieval Climate Anomaly in Antarctica. Palaeogeogr., Palaeoclimatol., Palaeoecol., doi:10.1016/j.palaeo.2019.109251

The full paper can be downloaded here: The Medieval Climate Anomaly in Antarctica.

Figure 4 from Lüning, et al 2019
Advertisements

165 thoughts on “Antarctica Warmer 1,000 Years Ago… Now, *That’s* An Inconvenient Truth!

  1. But, but, but, . . .I thought Saint Michael Mann and associates did away with that inconvenient Medieval Warm Period?

      • That map has long intrigued me, and I’ve done a bit of reading on that topic, along with papers regarding a likely cometary impact tied in to the Younger Dryas 12,800 years ago. In addition to the anomaly of the Piri Reis map, the past several decades of archeological excavations at the Gobekli Tepe site in eastern Turkey, putting that site’s age in roughly the same period as the Younger Dryas “climate change”… it seems to me that there may well have been a fairly advanced, fairly widespread human civilization in existence long before archeological “consensus” of the start of human agriculture, writing, religion, urbanization, etc. only four or so thousand years B.P. Our current “civilization winning streak” may only be our latest iteration… we are the ancestral remnants of the humans that managed to survive the comet-induced Younger Dryas! In any event, some fascinating geological and archeological evidence hints at this scenario.

        • JMichna – July 22, 2019 at 7:08 am

          …….. the Piri Reis map, the past several decades of archeological excavations at the Gobekli Tepe site in eastern Turkey, putting that site’s age in roughly the same period as the Younger Dryas “climate change”… it seems to me that there may well have been a fairly advanced, fairly widespread human civilization in existence long before archeological “consensus” of the start of human agriculture, writing, religion, urbanization, etc.

          BINGO, BINGO

          Oh my my, …. proof positive that “great minds think alike”.

          J Michna, I agree 100%, ….. an earlier, more intelligent, greater advanced civilization had to have inhabited the earth in order to explain most all of the historical archeological sites, such as, just to name a few: Gobekli Tepe, stone ruins of Puma Punku, Great Pyramid of Giza, the Sphinx, stonework of Machu Picchu, etc.

          Utter silliness of those who think/claim that the Egyptians constructed the Great Pyramid or that the Incas built Machu Picchu.

        • I think that much interesting archeology remains to be found, most under about 200 feet of sea water at present. Some interesting stuff of the coast of India.

        • Are these your own theories or are there book(s) that explore this possibility (earlier advanced civilizations)?

          • EAB – July 22, 2019 at 3:54 pm

            Are these your own theories or are there book(s) that explore this possibility (earlier advanced civilizations)?

            EAB, call them theories iffen you want to, ….. but they are the result of ….. common sense thinking, logical reasoning and intelligent deductions. The 1st clue of an ancient civilization is “where are the tools that had to have been used for construction”?

            Search the internet for photographs of Gobekli Tepe, Puma Punku, Great Pyramid and Machu Picchu and then explain how that stonework was fashioned via use of a …… copper chisels and wooden mallets.

            Anyway, I don’t know about published books on said theories except for the “unrealistic” science fiction publications ……. but there is lots of published/internet info/data out there about “unexplained” and/or ”unexplainable” physical items, remnants and constructions/structures that had to have been a “product” of an “intelligent” culture that our present culture has no knowledge of other than the aforesaid.

            Check these out: Mysterious Prehistoric Artifacts (Photos)

          • EAB,
            Some of Graham Hancock’s books cover this topic. You can see his evolving thoughts on the matter if you read his stuff in chronological order, as written. “Fingerprints of the Gods: A Quest for the Beginning and the End A Quest for the Beginning and the End,” “Gobekli Tepe: Genesis of the Gods: The Temple of the Watchers and the Discovery of Eden,” “Magicians of the Gods: The Forgotten Wisdom of Earth’s Lost Civilization,” and “America Before: The Key to Earth’s Lost Civilization” would be a decent selection to read. Be forewarned, some of it can be tedious, but it’s worth slogging through in my opinion. Though Hancock is a journalist, and not an archeologist nor anthropologist, he provides extensive reference materials and sources in his books, so you can dig as deeply as you wish.

    • The Wikipedia article on Medieval Climate Anomaly (redirects to ‘Medieval Warm Period’) has a very clear graph illustrating this warm period. It is very obvious and you can’t miss it.

      • This graph is about Antarctica. that graph is about north america and northern hemisphere. but yeah, you can’t miss it.

      • Yes Peter, you are missing a flux capacitor and the 2020 copy of Nature magazine’s 2019 science story round up section.
        And, as we have all come to realise, looking into the future with absolute predictable certainty is just one of the great gifts given to us by AGW alarmists and modern media.

    • If any of ya wanna debate the climate issue, look around i promise ya humankind has done nothing but destroy the ebvirinment. Any of ya that think different or wish to argue this point go ahead. Drink the water from any source other than treated or bottled. Explain in detqil any argument you have instead of manipulating numbers on either side.

      • Robert, the manipulation of numbers is not coming from the skeptics side, we just simply use your false arguments and analysis and point them out to you.

      • Let me give a quick example here Robert.

        Let us assume for a moment that I live purely in a location that we shall call ‘my lounge room’.

        Assume that at one stage my lounge room was spotless like a catalogue photo.

        Then I started throwing my washed clothes onto the lounge instead of folding them, storing half read books on the floor and putting off the vacuuming till next weekend.

        You could say that in this situation I had changed my ebvirinment (sic).

        However the climate in my lounge room would be exactly the same for all practical purposes and would remain exactly the same until either outside forces came into play (say the depth of winter kicking in) or I created a new heat source into the system (say by setting fire to the coffee table).

        Climate and ebvirinment (sic) are not the same thing within the terms of your argument. I have successfully drunk non treated and non bottled water. What am I proving? That ‘Climate Change ™’ does not exist? What are you claiming? That humankind can no longer drink non treated/non bottled water? Sorry to break this to you, but for a significant part of the world over a significant part of human history it has not been safe to drink non treated water. One of the claims regarding the consumption of ale in human history was that even before germ theory was developed people recognised that ale was safer to drink. In fact rather than belittling humankind for their apparent evil, I think you should thank – possibly by drinking a refreshing glass of the substance in question – humankind for having the industrial skill to provide treaded water on a city wide scale so that you are not instead pants down in the small room dying from cholera.

        As for manipulating numbers? 97% of Climate Scientists are now angry at you.

        • At my house we get our water from a well. It is completely untreated as is the water of many of my neighbors. Been drinking untreated water for decades.

          • Ahhhh, but you are drinking TREATED water from your well. It’s been TREATED, i.e. filtered through feet, yards, probably even miles of soil, sand and rock. It may even be water from the last Ice Age depending on the aquifer you’re drawing your water from.

          • Amen to that. My folks well water is the best ! Drinkinking it 4 over 120 yrs in Nebraska ! How bout them plastic bottles that store water comes in ?

        • Craig,

          Thank you for this post. I was going to try and explain exactly this to Robert but could not find the right ebivirinment (sic) to do so… I cannot stop laughing my day has been made.

      • Destroying the environment is a different issue to anthropogenic CO2 causing climate change.

        If you want to debate the climate issue, stick to the topic.

      • I recall from my yoof of hill walking & mountain climbing, I was taught to avoid drinking any water from a low lying source, because it would be full of the urine & poop of cows, sheep, wildlife, what the hell throw in the Abominable Snowman too, I suppose that’s why these days one can browse a booklet/catalogue for the great outdoors, & buy “carbon” water filters, NB, the filters are not there to filter out carbon, it’s the evil, wicked, nasty, planet killing, carbon that does the filtering, has done for donkeys years! Mind you, I’ve heard rumours that the Greenalists are developing a filter to remove carbon from such devices, called “Alice filters”, take a few drinks via one & you’d soon be in wonderland! 😉 some SARC!

          • That’s why I was taught to carry some Chlorine tablets & a portable water filtration system, like a activated charcoal (carbon) based system when hiking/walking! The chlorine kills the bacteria, the carbon filters out the chlorine! (No I don’t work for a walter filtration company of any discription!) AtB 😉

          • Absolutely true ANYWHERE in the Sierra Nevada Mountains. Humans have changed the natural environment the same way bears and wolves have. We are part of the natural history of our planet.

          • I drink from mountain streams here in the Adirondacks all the time. Just don’t drink from the low side of a beaver pond.

      • There has never been a treated water supply in my home. The water I drink straight from the tap has less taste and dissolved solids in it than the bottled “spring water” sold on supermarket shelves.

        I have drunk the water – untreated – from high-country streams in Australia and New Zealand many times.

        • There has never been a treated water supply in my home.

          Treated or filtered, which are you referring too?

          If “non filtered” then source must be “rain/snowmelt water” most of the time

          • It’s called a well or a natural spring, not treated or filtered. Keep the outhouse, septic system and the livestock down hill/far away from the well head/spring to maintain potable water. Most of us non city folk grew up on them.

          • The source of virtually all the planet’s terrestrial water is rain, snow (or ice) melt. A natural distillation process, precipitation of water evaporated from ocean water.

          • It’s called a well or a natural spring,

            That’s what I figured, ..… which mans that your H2O supply is “filtered”.

            cheers

        • Hopefully for you, the squirrels and raccoons weren’t pissing upstream from where you drink.

        • I think a little research would convince you that treated water, to remove deadly bacteria and other microbes has dramatically improved the lives of billions of people. And, water without dissolved minerals adds nothing to your need for minerals.

      • well I drink my rainwater direct from the tanks..can I suggest you stop drinking the koolaid?

      • You are off topic but let’s talk about untreated water nonetheless. If you go hiking up in the mountains and drink untreated pristine water from snowmelt you stand a good chance of getting Giardia among other things. It isn’t from humans but from the wild animals that reside there. These animals and their water born diseases have been living there long before humans were around in meaningful numbers. I’ll be the first to agree that the increase in population has caused additional problems. I think science can solve those problems. I think this is a better solution that getting rid of all the people. Obviously you think all the people are the problem. If that is what you think then start with yourself.

        • Every time I’ve hiked up near the Continental Divide in Glacier Park I’ve filled my water bag directly from the small streams up there. I’ve never had a bad experience from it except people exclaiming, “Your not going to drink that are you?”.
          Once I was up there eating some late season huckleberries off the bushes and a bunch of Japanese tourist came by. I explained that I was surprised to find the ripe hucks up there because the season was past only a little lower down. I expected them to join in sampling some of the berries, but they just looked at me like I was some sort of native savage.

      • There is an easy way to solve this, alternate breathing days. On odd numbered days, starting tomorrow, July 23rd, global warming purists will not breath for 24 hours. On July 24 the problems will be solved and we can all go back to doing what we were doing, before this nonsense reared its ugly head.

      • Another troll who believes that any change, if it’s caused by man is evil.
        He also believes that the entire world looks like the big city that he lives in.

      • Yes, humans have wrecked the environment but that is totally different from climate change. Pollution of rivers and streams with toxic chemicals, hormone mimetics like RoundUp and other agricultural chemicals, fertilizer runoff, heavy metal toxins, habitat destruction ALL are bad and real. What is NOT real is “human caused climate change” or, if you prefer, a climate catastrophe due to human caused climate change. Nonsense.

        Yes, focus on the real: reduce habitat destruction and pollution and dumping plastics into the ocean, etc…REAL issues. Leave the [snip~mod]dictatorship agenda (climate change hoax, Agenda 2030) in the trashbin of history.

        Reply: Behave. We do have a minimum level of decorum required.~mod

      • I drink my well water. Many homes here have well water. I drink water from a road side spring in town, as do many others.

        I breath the air here in town and I have not have the flu or a cold in fifteen years.

      • With whom would we debate? And, what would be the topic? Please frame it in a statement form.

      • I don’t want to debate the climate issue with you but I would like to state for your information in case you are not already aware that you have an extreme bias. Your statement ” i promise ya humankind has done nothing but destroy the ebvirinment” shows you are not objective when looking at the evidence.

        If you start from that position then your are only going to find things that back it up and you’ll completely ignore anything that opposes your viewpoint.

      • As weird as it sounds, even to me ; New York City water is cleaner and better tasting than most bottled water.

      • Alexander died from drinking the river water on a dare to prove he was a god. We here drink beer and whiskey instead of wine because the little ice age made wine here impractical. Franklin said that beer was proof god loved us because no city had a good water source. All were the toilet. Mann’s compatriots use the end of that little ice age to define the start of man made global warming. Pandering for grant money.

      • I would invite you to drink the untreated water of the Pacific Northwest, gaze upon the growing forest and cleaner air. Man does pollute, but there is no evidence of a climate change, merely weather. Models are garage in, and that garage is the economics of federally funded research

    • Yes,

      When Global Warming Advocates lie, it’s called a “Typographic Error”
      When Global Warming Skeptics produce a Typographic Error it’s called a lie.

    • I checked some temps in Antarctica on windy.com the other day. I found a -94f. How much colder should it be? Global warming is better than the alternative.

  2. It is no surprise that earlier in the neoglaciation things were warmer. Also the southern hemisphere lags the northern hemisphere by some decades or hundreds of years. It seems that the neoglaciation has finished. This is a good thing, but maybe we should not overdo the lovely warming.

  3. “Tony Heller & Dr Tim Ball invited to the Australian Senate by Queensland Senator Malcolm Roberts”

    • Its an old video, 2 years ago before Senator Roberts got caught up in the citizenship debacle and had to leave parliament along with a few others tripped with the same problem. However, Senator Roberts is back in parliament to continue his work thanks to being re-elected 2 months ago and we shall see how he pursues this matter of corruption in the Australian CSIRO and BOM.

  4. Hard to see from that abstract how the Medieval climate relates to the data they present. Those data seem to relate to changes in the last 50 years or so.

  5. Been looking for the article. There are lots of yeh/nay articles about Antarctica temperature reconstructions, fraught with blending different proxies into a smoothie and some force fitting to Northern Hemisphere proxies as a “thing” people love/hate. Call me unimpressed till I can lay eyes on the study telling us what ingredients were used and how to come up with their version of the Antarctic Temperature Smoothie.

    • “I can lay eyes on the study telling us what ingredients were used”
      Well, you’ll have to scrutinise carefully anything that comes from NoTricksZone. The graph featured here is actually extracted from a panel of plots, without subtitle. That result isn’t from the Luning study at all, but from a 2017 paper by Stenni et al. The conclusions of Luning et al are mixed; they don’t say anywhere that “Antarctica Warmer 1,000 Years Ago”. They say:
      “A generally warm MCA compared to the subsequent Little Ice Age (LIA) was found for the Subantarctic Islands south of the Antarctic Convergence, the Antarctic Peninsula, Victoria Land and central West Antarctica. A somewhat less clear MCA warm signal was detected for the majority of East Antarctica. MCA cooling occurred in the Ross Ice Shelf region, and probably in the Weddell Sea and on Filchner-Ronne Ice Shelf.”

      You probably could have got a similar spatial mix of ups and downs over any period.

      • Nick ,For some one who works with graphs ans considers them selves science savvy the red spikes are hotter and the blue spikes going down are colder .
        Nick you are being disingenuous and attacking the web sight and not the content
        Enough said
        Graham

      • It is from the paper.

        Figure 4 from the paper… See right hand panel…

        The image posted on No Tricks Zone and Jo Nova is the right-hand panel rotated 90 degrees.

        • Nick’s worthless nitpick is that the “Whole Antarctica” graph is from Stenni et. al., 2017 and not original research presented in this paper.

          “…You probably could have got a similar spatial mix of ups and downs over any period…”

          Except they didn’t.

      • From the paper…

        Until recently, the Antarctic Peninsula and West Antarctica were among the most rapidly warming regions on Earth. Between the 1950s and 1990s temperatures on the Antarctic Peninsula increased by more than 0.3 °C/decade (Stenni et al., 2017; Turner et al., 2016; Vaughan et al., 2003), with even higher warming rates reported for Byrd Station in West Antarctica (Bromwich et al., 2013; Bunde et al., 2014; Nicolas and Bromwich, 2014). Since the late 1990s, however, this warming has essentially stalled. Rapid cooling of nearly 0.5 °C per decade occurred on the Antarctic Peninsula (Favier et al., 2017; Fernandoy et al., 2018; Turner et al., 2016). This already impacted the cryosphere in parts of the Antarctic Peninsula, including slow-down of glacier recession, surface mass gains of the peripheral glaciers and a thinning of the active layer of permafrost in the northern Antarctic Peninsula islands (Engel et al., 2018; Oliva et al., 2017; Seehaus et al., 2018). At the same time, temperatures in West Antarctica over the past two decades appear to have plateaued or slightly cooled (Bromwich et al., 2013; Jones et al., 2016; Steig et al., 2009).

        From the paper…

        On a century scale, no significant statistical warming trend can be found for most Antarctic stations (Ludescher et al., 2016). Antarctic temperatures appear to be still well within the range of natural variability. Natural climate factors such as multidecadal ocean cycles still dominate over anthropogenic climate drivers, such as CO2 (Chylek et al., 2010; Favier et al., 2017; Jones et al., 2016; Ludescher et al., 2016; Smith and Polvani, 2017; Steig et al., 2013; Turner et al., 2016).

        From the paper…

        Climate models still fail to replicate the continent-scale absence of 20th century warming in Antarctica (Abram et al., 2016; Goosse, 2017; Jones et al., 2016; Stenni et al., 2017). Similar discrepancies between simulated and reconstructed temperature development exist on a Holocene scale (Ackerley et al., 2017).

        From the paper…

        Although variable, several palaeoclimatic patterns have been identified. 1) MCA warming was found for the Subantarctic Islands south of the Antarctic Convergence, the Antarctic Peninsula, Victoria Land and central West Antarctica. 2) A somewhat noisier MCA warming signal was detected for the majority of East Antarctica. 3) MCA cooling occurred in the Ross Ice Shelf region, and probably in the Weddell Sea and on Filchner-Ronne Ice Shelf. 4) Spatial distribution of MCA cooling and warming follows modern dipole patterns. Future studies will have to further refine and test these patterns, in particular for data-poor areas outside the Antarctic Peninsula. In particular marine cores are needed to complement the ice core data (Fig. 1).

        From the paper…

        The MCA forms the final part of a long warm phase that dominated the first millennium CE and ended 1250 CE with the onset of significant cooling in the transition to the Little Ice Age (LIA). Overall timing of the MCA and LIA in Antarctica matches the climate development of the Northern Hemisphere. Natural variability still overwhelms the forced response in the recent Antarctic climate development, and models appear to not fully represent this natural variability. Multiple evidence points to a significant solar influence on Antarctic climate which may be worth testing in future model scenarios in greater detail.

        You’re right… The title of the post should be:

        Almost All of Antarctica Warmer 1,000 Years Ago, Natural Variability Dominates the Antarctic Climate Signal… And the Climate Models Suck!

  6. In terms of agw the role of antarctica has been the fear of sea level rise by way of dramatic ice disintegration events. The case can be made that these events that have occurred in the current warm period can’t be explained as atmospheric phenomena. Therefore atmospheric temperature trends, even for a thousand years, may not be as relevant as it may appear to be in the context of catastrophic ice melt and sea level rise. Two links below.

    https://tambonthongchai.com/2019/07/16/antarctica-slr/

    https://tambonthongchai.com/2019/06/27/antarctica/

    • Given the mass of the ice-sheet has increased (as reported above) then what’s with this misleading and unscientific language of, “… catastrophic ice melt and sea level rise. …”?

      New and improved ‘truth’, contains 78% more BS!

    • I tried that link and logged into to my ScienceDirect account. Said I had to purchase for $37.50 because I am not a “subscribed” user.

  7. If Al the Gorebull regrew that beard he wore a while back, he’d look less like a windup toy.

    Okay, so it was warmer down south 10 centuries ago and the Earth didn’t explode or go into a circle of fire.

    Is that warmer temps data possibly related to the reason for the Vikings getting frozen out of Greenland? Just askin’. My cat is wondering if all the cod went north because the South was too warm. (If that seems like a specious question, it isn’t. Wind patterns matter.)

    • Always love seeing a bird blender burning down. I think of the avian lives saved.

      I hope the generator’s owner will be required to reimburse the fire department(s) responding to the fire. The landowners should pay their fair share also if they were given rent of any sort for allowing the construction of those useless monstrosities.

  8. I’m not convinced that blending all those proxies leads to a meaningful graph of temperatures for “whole Antarctica”. But if that synthesized plot has any real-world meaning, it shows that the MCA (formerly known as the MWP), which they identify as lasting from 1000 to 1200 AD, was just the tail-end of a 600-year (plus) warm period.

    Not the MWP we know and love from the NH.

  9. Antarctic temperature hasn’t changed much, that is not unexpected. For obvious reasons the Antarctic is expected to be far less sensitive to global over-heating than the Arctic. Apart from giving you an excuse to throw mud at Al Gore, what is inconvenient about it? Further, I don’t see any significnat Medieval warm period signal in the data. The Whole Antarctica plot shows zip.

    • Well of course you don’t see it you are ideologically blind and are therefore unable to see anthing that doesn’t fit your world view.

    • Why should we not laugh at Gore? He made a fatuous prediction about an ice-free Arctic and promoted the greatest scientific fr@ud of all time, while enriching himself enormously by peddling carbon credits.

    • Loydo got 1 out of 3 correct! A miracle!

      You are correct about Antarctica not “playing well” with the rest of Earth’s weather and climatic systems. It’s been largely isolated since the Early Oligocene .

      Where your wheels came off…

      The Medieval Climate Anomaly is Antarctica’s version of the Medieval Warm Period. Like everything else Antarctic, it’s a bit out of phase with the rest of the planet.

      What’s “inconvenient”? From the paper…

      Until recently, the Antarctic Peninsula and West Antarctica were among the most rapidly warming regions on Earth. Between the 1950s and 1990s temperatures on the Antarctic Peninsula increased by more than 0.3 °C/decade (Stenni et al., 2017; Turner et al., 2016; Vaughan et al., 2003), with even higher warming rates reported for Byrd Station in West Antarctica (Bromwich et al., 2013; Bunde et al., 2014; Nicolas and Bromwich, 2014). Since the late 1990s, however, this warming has essentially stalled. Rapid cooling of nearly 0.5 °C per decade occurred on the Antarctic Peninsula (Favier et al., 2017; Fernandoy et al., 2018; Turner et al., 2016). This already impacted the cryosphere in parts of the Antarctic Peninsula, including slow-down of glacier recession, surface mass gains of the peripheral glaciers and a thinning of the active layer of permafrost in the northern Antarctic Peninsula islands (Engel et al., 2018; Oliva et al., 2017; Seehaus et al., 2018). At the same time, temperatures in West Antarctica over the past two decades appear to have plateaued or slightly cooled (Bromwich et al., 2013; Jones et al., 2016; Steig et al., 2009).

      From the paper…

      On a century scale, no significant statistical warming trend can be found for most Antarctic stations (Ludescher et al., 2016). Antarctic temperatures appear to be still well within the range of natural variability. Natural climate factors such as multidecadal ocean cycles still dominate over anthropogenic climate drivers, such as CO2 (Chylek et al., 2010; Favier et al., 2017; Jones et al., 2016; Ludescher et al., 2016; Smith and Polvani, 2017; Steig et al., 2013; Turner et al., 2016).

      From the paper…

      Climate models still fail to replicate the continent-scale absence of 20th century warming in Antarctica (Abram et al., 2016; Goosse, 2017; Jones et al., 2016; Stenni et al., 2017). Similar discrepancies between simulated and reconstructed temperature development exist on a Holocene scale (Ackerley et al., 2017).

      From the paper…

      Although variable, several palaeoclimatic patterns have been identified. 1) MCA warming was found for the Subantarctic Islands south of the Antarctic Convergence, the Antarctic Peninsula, Victoria Land and central West Antarctica. 2) A somewhat noisier MCA warming signal was detected for the majority of East Antarctica. 3) MCA cooling occurred in the Ross Ice Shelf region, and probably in the Weddell Sea and on Filchner-Ronne Ice Shelf. 4) Spatial distribution of MCA cooling and warming follows modern dipole patterns. Future studies will have to further refine and test these patterns, in particular for data-poor areas outside the Antarctic Peninsula. In particular marine cores are needed to complement the ice core data (Fig. 1).

      From the paper…

      The MCA forms the final part of a long warm phase that dominated the first millennium CE and ended 1250 CE with the onset of significant cooling in the transition to the Little Ice Age (LIA). Overall timing of the MCA and LIA in Antarctica matches the climate development of the Northern Hemisphere. Natural variability still overwhelms the forced response in the recent Antarctic climate development, and models appear to not fully represent this natural variability. Multiple evidence points to a significant solar influence on Antarctic climate which may be worth testing in future model scenarios in greater detail.

      You’re right… The title of the post should be:

      Almost All of Antarctica Warmer 1,000 Years Ago, Natural Variability Dominates the Antarctic Climate Signal… And the Climate Models Suck!

      Why drag Saint Albert and the Gorethodox Church of Junk Science into this?
      1. I needed a catchy featured image.
      2. He wrote a book, An Inconvenient Truth.
      3. Antarctica is ignoring the climate models.
      4. Al Gore said something really stupid about Antarctica… I’ll look it up, when I have a chance.
      5. Catastrophic sea level rise, due to catastrophic melting/collapse of the Antarctic ice sheet is the most catastrophic Warmunist lie/myth.

    • ah yes well the msm and funded scientists views expressed recently in Aus suggests climate emergency down sth and lots n lots!!! of money ships and people are needed to go study it..
      this paper suggests otherwise
      as a taxpayer and a skeptic Id prefer this paper got some media time
      of course it wont
      its “off meme”

    • I’m fascinated how Loydo goes from cooling, to not warming as much.
      It’s almost as if he is once again desperate to change the subject.

  10. With all these thousands and thousands studies we cannot verify , it’s impossible to say which are correct and which are wrong, so better wait and see. But at the end ,we must replace fossils by renewable sources to get energy in the future, the sooner the better. So stop arguing and start doing something !

    • The future is a long time!
      There is plenty of time before we run out of fossil fuels – at least several centuries, and panicking now before we have enough data is almost certain to result in going the wrong way.
      This is a case of festina lente.

    • if it cant BE verified then its NOT a decent study its just a claim and theres little reason to replace reliable fuel with expensive UNreliables in such a bums rush as were getting now.

  11. One thing the graphs do show is the importance of comparing proxies from several areas since there is one (RICE) which is roughly opposite to the others. If that had been the only one used there would have been a very different conclusion – think bristle- cone pines!

  12. Name ANYONE who tracked weather at Antarctica 1,000 years ago. Name ANYONE who knew Antarctica exited 1,000 years ago. Speculation is STILL theory.

    • δ18O ratios in ice cores and sediment cores are effective paleo-thermometers, particularly when they can be calibrated to modern instrumental data. Salinity and the volume of ice locked up in glaciers and ice sheets can affect the conversion from δ18O to temperature; but this is not a factor over the Holocene. The snow accumulation rate in ice cores tells you how precipitation has changed over time. Many other geochemical isotope ratios are related to weather conditions at the time of deposition.

  13. And in another thousand years it will be colder than it was today. Pretty simple, and no need whatsoever for any long-winded, boring speeches from Al-Buffoon!

  14. So the thing that strikes me about this is how it challenges Mann’s view that the Medieval Warm period was a local event rather than a global event

    • That’s not just “Mann’s view.” The paucity of Southern Hemisphere data, apart from Antarctic ice cores has made it difficult to determine how or if the Medieval Warm Period manifested globally. It’s clearly a Northern Hemisphere event, most pronounced in the North Atlantic, much like the Pleistocene Dansgaard-Oeschger and Heinrich events. This paper indicates that it was also a Southern Hemisphere event, albeit not exactly in sync with the Northern Hemisphere.

      • If there was a Antarctic Medieval Warm “event” wouldn’t it show up in the Whole Antarctica graph?

          • Actually it clearly doesn’t. There is a fairly steady, if somewhat noisy, decline in temperature from the start of the data until the very end where there is a slight up-tick. I am not saying there is no effect, there does seem to be a bit of see-sawing between different regions, but net warming as a Whole insignificant.

            Some things make you go blind, stop it.

          • Learn how to read words and graphs.

            The Medieval Climate Anomaly is Antarctica’s version of the Medieval Warm Period. Like almost everything else Antarctic, it’s a bit out of phase with the rest of the world.

            From the paper…

            Although variable, several palaeoclimatic patterns have been identified. 1) MCA warming was found for the Subantarctic Islands south of the Antarctic Convergence, the Antarctic Peninsula, Victoria Land and central West Antarctica. 2) A somewhat noisier MCA warming signal was detected for the majority of East Antarctica. 3) MCA cooling occurred in the Ross Ice Shelf region, and probably in the Weddell Sea and on Filchner-Ronne Ice Shelf. 4) Spatial distribution of MCA cooling and warming follows modern dipole patterns. Future studies will have to further refine and test these patterns, in particular for data-poor areas outside the Antarctic Peninsula. In particular marine cores are needed to complement the ice core data (Fig. 1).

            From the paper…

            The MCA forms the final part of a long warm phase that dominated the first millennium CE and ended 1250 CE with the onset of significant cooling in the transition to the Little Ice Age (LIA). Overall timing of the MCA and LIA in Antarctica matches the climate development of the Northern Hemisphere. Natural variability still overwhelms the forced response in the recent Antarctic climate development, and models appear to not fully represent this natural variability. Multiple evidence points to a significant solar influence on Antarctic climate which may be worth testing in future model scenarios in greater detail.

  15. It is also an inconvenient truth that the earth was 3 degrees Celsius warmer 12,000 years ago. Two distinctly different issues are being conflated to confuse people into believing that the only way to save the earth is to seize corporate monies through the Carbon Exchange. Those two issues? First, the ridiculously pedantic argument that our climate changes- as if it ever hasn’t. What they conveniently leave out is the fact that we currently are experiencing one of several warming periods within an Ice Age that began 2.5 million years ago. That Ice Age will not have ended until there is no longer ice at either pole. That’s right, that’s where we are headed- no ice at either pole. BUT, that will not happen within the lifetime of anyone living today or for thousands of years and it is silly to make climate observations during ones lifetime and attempt to extrapolate the results to predict the future. Second issue, the absolutely unfounded, unscientific and unproven argument that climate change is a function of anthropomorphic activity. How then do we explain the proven fact that 11,000 years ago, during an even warmer period, the earth was 3 degrees Celsius WARMER than today? Do we perhaps blame that on Cro-Magnon and Neanderthalian flatulence? This unscientific conflation of two completely separate issues has only one goal which has NOTHING to do with saving the world!

    • Oh it is MUCH more ominous that simply stealing corporate money for carbon exchanges. Agenda 2030 plays into all this as do any and all forms of “green new deals”. The real agenda is POWER as well as money. Tax carbon and you can tax literally all of modern life. Via taxation and regulation you can control nearly every aspect of EVERYONE’S life. You gain control of what car they can buy or IF they can even own a car (the Irish PM is now seeking to ban cars in Ireland, rendering life in rural communities impossible, forcing them to all move to megacities ala Agenda 2030). You control access to food, especially meat. You control housing, home size, and location (again forcing people to move out of rural areas into easily controllable and monitorable big cities). You control use of any and all electronics because that creates carbon! It’s all about control, control, control and tracking your evey move, every purchase…all under the guise of controlling carbon emission.

      • All too true. The climate change plan is to justify extending government control. Every decision would be justified by saying it is for our own good. We are just being protected.

    • Thank you! We all know that the Earth is a dynamic active planet. Why is is so hard to believe that change is normal. In fact, without change, we wouldn’t be able to grow and expand our comprehension of the natural world. As far as the panic about global warming, blame it on the media. True scientists always have an open mind, willing to explore options. The media gets stuck on an idea and likes to sensationalize to make more money.

  16. Antarctica is not a continent,but an ice ring ,and the Sun determines climate change,not man. 7 previous ice ages according to ‘science’ was man responsible? It is also silly to believe man can stop climate change, seems more like a way to control people with more taxes, regulation and loss of freedoms. Screw Al gore , his arctic ice shelves never did melt .

  17. Antarctica is not a continent,but an ice ring ,and the Sun determines climate change,not man. 7 previous ice ages according to ‘science’ was man responsible? It is also silly to believe man can stop climate change, seems more like a way to control people with more taxes, regulation and loss of freedoms.

  18. So sick of this issue and the harm it has done to the younger generations. The earth has been warming for tens of thousands of years since the end of the LAST Ice Age. Evidence abounds that the planet has been Water World and an Ice Cube many times over. The left has seized upon a natural phenomena to justify it’s capitalist killing agenda. Get the rest of the world up to western standards of emissions and environmental stewardship before focusing exclusively on us. I can’t get a straw in a restaurant even though our straws don’t end up in the ocean. It is Chinese dumping that is responsible. Take their straws away!

  19. Another nail in the coffin for, only Greenland was warm 1000 years ago. That’s what I’ve heard university educated people insist, that everywhere surrounding the Greenland Vikings was freezing. They offer no mechanism for retaining the heat in Greenland while the rest of the N. Hemisphere was cold, they can’t accept their religious upbringing was wrong. Make no mistake, it is their religion, Christianity was abolished for them as a choice before they were born. It’s only people from older generations that remember going to church as children, with a few exceptions. I used to wonder what it was like for the older people living in Rome, living through the period before and after the fall, when all those Roman ruins we see went from being in regular use to complete abandonment. If your older like me, you can see it happening with local churches, or maybe if your an older person who was born in Detroit you’ve seen it with a whole city.

    • People of an older generation can also remember the last climate “emergency” in the 1970’s, how the Earth was going into a new Ice Age. That was a lie, just like CAGW.

        • You’re quite correct – there was no climate “emergency” in the 1970’s, just as there isn’t one today. There was, however, a big scare about global cooling. I was there and I remember it very well.

          Unfortunately for you, there are hundreds of newspaper articles from that time on the impending global cooling. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKTEIDH_qfU

          • I earned my degree in geology (Earth Science) in frigid Connecticut during That 70’s Climate Crisis Show.  This was very real…

            1975-03-01

            That 70s

            1974 TIME magazine article…

            The full text of the article can be accessed through Steve Goddard’s Real Science.

            There’s also Newsweek

            newsweek20cooling

            Dan Gainor compiled a great timeline of media alarmism (both warming and cooling) in his Fire and Ice essay.

            This 1975 magazine cover and article were very real…

            Energy and Climate: Studies in Geophysics was a 1977 National Academies publication. It featured what appears to be the same temperature graph, clearly demonstrating a mid-20th century cooling trend…

            The mid-20th Century cooling trend is clearly present in the instrumental record, at least in the northern hemisphere…

            According to the models Gorebal Warming saved us from The Ice Age Cometh

            That70climate

            https://youtu.be/L_861us8D9M

            So, why are the warmists so obsessed with denying this? Is the mid-20th century cooling period so “inconvenient” that it has to be erased from history like the Medieval Warm Period?

            Historical geology…

            Suggestion that changing carbon dioxide content of the atmosphere could be a major factor in climate change dates from 1861, when it was proposed by British physicist John Tyndall.

            […]

            Unfortunately we cannot estimate accurately changes of past CO2 content of either atmosphere or oceans, nor is there any firm quantitative basis for estimating the the magnitude of drop in carbon dioxide content necessary to trigger glaciation.  Moreover the entire concept of an atmospheric greenhouse effect is controversial, for the rate of ocean-atmosphere equalization is uncertain.

            Dott, Robert H. & Roger L. Batten.  Evolution of the Earth.  McGraw-Hill, Inc.  Second Edition 1976.  p. 441.

            Meteorology…

            FORECASTING THE FUTURE. We can now try to decide if we are now in an interglacial stage, with other glacials to follow, or if the world has finally emerged from the Cenozoic Ice Age. According to the Milankovitch theory, fluctuations of radiation of the type shown in Fig. 16-18 must continue and therefore future glacial stages will continue. According to the theory just described, as long as the North and South Poles retain their present thermally isolated locations, the polar latitudes will be frigid; and as the Arctic Ocean keeps oscillating between ice-free and ice-covered states, glacial-interglacial climates will continue.

            Finally, regardless of which theory one subscribes to, as long as we see no fundamental change in the late Cenozoic climate trend, and the presence of ice on Greenland and Antarctica indicates that no change has occurred, we can expect that the fluctuations of the past million years will continue.

            Donn, William L. Meteorology. 4th Edition. McGraw-Hill 1975. pp 463-464

            Physical geography…

            The atmosphere’s blanketing effect over the earth’s surface has been compared to the functioning of a greenhouse.  Short-wave sunlight passes as easily through the glass of the greenhouse as through the atmosphere.  Because glass is opaque to the long-wave radiation from the warm interior of the greenhouse, it hinders the escape of energy.

            As a planet, the earth is not warming or cooling appreciably on the average, because it loses as much radiant energy as it gains.

            Kolenkow, Robert J., Reid A. Bryson, Douglas B. Carter, R. Keith Julian, Robert A. Muller, Theodore M. Oberlander, Robert P. Sharp & M. Gordon Wolman. Physical geography today : a portrait of a planet.  Del Mar, Calif. : CRM Books, [1974]. p. 64.

             

          • David Middleton: Thank you for rubbing Loydo’s nose in his lies.

            There has been a determined and concerted effort to erase the Great Cooling Scare of the 1970’s from the Internet.

          • Back then, there were only a handful of PhD’s writing papers about contemporaneous climate change. There really was no consensus. There was an active debate about which might have a greater affect on temperatures:

            1. Cooling due to anthropogenic aerosols.
            2. Warming due to anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions.

            The fact that the 1970’s were the end of a 35 year cooling period made global cooling the headline.

        • There’s no climate “emergency” now either… this fake crisis saved us from that fake crisis…

          The only thing separating us from “The Ice Age Cometh” is the warming they say can only be explained by CO2.

        • Loydo, you are either trying to gaslight us, or you are fairly young, and do not remember the 1970’s. Ice age cometh, all the time.

  20. The Climate Alarmists made the transition from an impending ice age which didn’t happen forty years ago to rising oceans and desertification of habitable areas which didn’t happen by their “end times” predictions either so they should have no problem going back to impending ice age if things keep cooling off. Like the Heaven’s Gate fanatics, if the world doesn’t end on the scheduled date, reset the date. They, of course, ultimately resolved the problem to everyone’s satisfaction and relief.

    • As a matter of fact… this fake crisis saved us from that fake crisis…

      The only thing separating us from “The Ice Age Cometh” is the warming they say can only be explained by CO2.

  21. Imagine if, I dont know, there is an actual reason why the temperature raised a thousand years ago. Lets say, with a meteor that released CO2 into the atmosphere, or
    perhaps a large volcano. You all are so quick to deny antheopogenic climate change just based on the fact that the earth has experienced fluctuations in temperature in the past, without actually asking whether there was a cause to these temperature fluctuations in the past.

    It has been proven that a large meteor or a large volcano can cause these types of temperature fluctuations.

    If you examine the relevant data, it shows there is a strong correlation between measurable CO2 and methane output with current temperature increase. This is the only relevant fact.

    This isnt rocket science people.

  22. Love the misinformation on this website. A quote from one of the authors of the paper :

    I don’t want anyone to leave thinking that this is evidence that CO2 doesn’t affect climate,” Stott cautioned. “It does, but the important point is that CO2 is not the beginning and end of climate change.” […] “In addition, the authors’ model showed how changed ocean conditions may have been responsible for the release of CO2 from the ocean into the atmosphere, also accelerating the warming.”

    “The outgassing of this significant greenhouse gas [CO2], then contributed to warming globally.”

    “That warmed things up locally and shrank the sea ice back toward Antarctica, uncapping the Southern Ocean and freeing much of its carbon dioxide to begin warming the whole world.”

  23. We’re experiencing a polar shift. It isn’t man destroying our planet, but rather our planet going through a gradual process. As scientists are aware, poles are rapidly moving. As this happens, the planet’s Ozone weakens. A weaker Ozone lets in more UV rays, which cause glacial melt, higher cancer rates, and etc.

    Eventually our poles will settle, the Ozone will strengthen significantly, and our planet will cool down a lot (another possible ice age of the many Earth has already experienced).

    The process takes hundreds to thousands of years, while the human attention span is lucky to last longer than a week. Which is why we keep freaking out about the end of the world…

    Relax. Our planet will be fine. In the meantime, focus on surviving through the intense temperature fluctuations that we’ll be enduring.

  24. Eh… before we all get excited..

    This report is due on 15 October 2019.

    Why are we worrying about it already?

  25. Iam new to this fantastic site and as an uneducated, knuckle dragging prison guard I would like to say THANK you gents for the enlightenment and entertainment!

Comments are closed.