Guest essay by Larry Hamlin
The Los Angeles Times is at it again hyping anti science climate alarmist propaganda trying to conceal the global wide Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age that are supported and justified by hundreds of scientific studies.
This climate alarmist propaganda Times article cites a new “study” that ridiculously attempts to deny these clearly established warm and cool periods in our past.
This alarmist hyped new “study” is addressed in a superb article at the JoNova website demonstrating the complete lack of scientific veracity of this studies claims.
There is nothing I can add to show how politically contrived and inane the claims are from this new “study” beyond the excellent presentation in the JoNova article.
Provided below are excerpts from this excellent article which demonstrate the lack of scientific credibility of the new “study” as well as the politically driven anti science climate alarmism bias of the Times.
Nothing else needs to be said.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
The Irish Times also had another article earlier this year trying to demolish the notion that there was a Little Ice Age at all. It was penned by a well-regarded veteran economic academic, with a political dynastic pedigree, and who is now hugely involved in the official government climate think tank. His utterly risible thesis was that there were merely a few isolated cold pockets here and there but that the reason that the notion that there was a mini Ice Age was because there were a few failed grape harvests and this had knock-on economic effects in England and France! My letter to the editor opposing this nonsense was not published. On a continual basis I am learning that not only did the hype-believing general populace know very little about climate science prior to the emergence of St Greta but that they, along with the media, political and academic classes are now in the grip of hysterical climatemania.
No references provided for the pictures: mot worht discussing this.
OK, who’s ready to sign up for the proxies 1,900 years ago have decadal resolution? Anyone? Buehler? Buehler?
Yeah, proxy resolution is a BIG problem. Some of them wouldn’t even show our entire instrumental record.
I think the warmunnists have grown worried. People around the world are voting out the One World Order types, and they realize that the people coming in are inclined to ignore the big scare, so this sudden push to create urgency, and to try to force action in a very small window. Continue to emphasize all of the failed predictions of the last 20 years, and maybe we can be done with this over-hyped non-crisis.
“This climate alarmist propaganda Times article cites a new “study” that ridiculously attempts to deny these clearly established warm and cool periods in our past.”
This is the real anti-science, And anti-skepticism. “ridiculously attempts to deny” is the language of religion, not science.
In fact the LA Times article was a very reasonable review of evidence. And they pinpointed an issue with a lot of the LIA/MWP talk by “skeptics”; the time period is unspecified, and varies in different places. Now I see above that the expectation of coherence is “science babble”, but it is critical. Every temperature series has its ups and downs. And if you look through every series and identify the peaks as MWP and th troughs as LIA, then sure, you’ll find they are everywhere.
About a week ago, we had one of these articles here claiming LIA and MWP in Antarctica. But the featured graph actually showed a steady decline in temperature over the last 2000 years, interrupted by modern warming. It was actually taken from a different paper which was making exactly that point, that Antarctica was just showing late Holocene decline. But it was presented as a MWP/LIA story. In fact there were a few local peaks around 1400. But that is when the Vikings were freezing in Greenland.
Nick,
Read Hubert Lamb’s “ Climate, History and the Modern World”(1994).
Lamb believed on credible evidence that the MWP temperatures in Europe were 2 plus degrees Celsius warmer than the late 20th Century.
He quotes a Dr. Pugh as saying that ocean temperatures in a part of Scandinavia ( I will check passage and locale) were 4 degrees Celsius warmer than 20th Century.
It is difficult to resist the conclusion that Lamb was sceptical of the greenhouse warming theory then coming into vogue but not accepted in the AR1 findings in 1990.
It is likely that Lamb would not today get a post at the Climate Research Unit at East Anglia.
He was a founder and first Director of that institution.
“He quotes a Dr. Pugh as saying that ocean temperatures in a part of Scandinavia ( I will check passage and locale) were 4 degrees Celsius”
Some of this evidence is of dubious quality. Here is what he actually said:
“Dr L.G.C.E.Pugh of the Medical Research Laboratories, Hampstead, has given his opinion, from studies of the endurance of Channel swimmers and others undertaking similar exploits, that 10 °C would be about the lowest temperature at which a strong person, even if fat, not specially trained for long-distance swimming, could swim the distance mentioned. As the average temperatures in the fjords of that coast in August in modern times have seldom exceeded 6 °C (+3 to +6 °C being more typical), it seems that the water must have been at least 4 °C warmer than this limit in the year in which Thorkel swam it and brought home his sheep.”
So now it is 4°C on the authority of Dr Pugh!
But Lamb didn’t say that either MWP or LIA were global. He stuck to what he had anecdotes about, which were basically Europe, with something of N America, China/Japan, India and the “hither East”.
Well, it all fits then, since every single proxy is of dubious quality.
On the question of coherence it is pretty safe to say if we got an operational definition of what it meant, PAGES isn’t going to be able resolve the issue.
But you’d have to admit that the inference about this being a reliable finger print for anthropogenic warming is a nice try. What next?
An event that lasted for hundreds of years, didn’t start on the same year everywhere on the planet.
In the minds of some, this proves that it didn’t happen.
Nick
The Antarctic and Southern ocean have not warmed in the last half century.
Nor have large parts of South America.
Nor has a large part of the Pacific Ocean.
Nor have parts of Asia and China.
The warming now is just as patchy and selective as in the MWP and other prior warm periods.
The website CO2 science has a database of hundreds if not thousands of peer reviewed papers showing the reality and the global nature of the MWP. Attempting to cast doubt on the MWP is egregious denial.
Nick – “This is the real anti-science, And anti-skepticism. “ridiculously attempts to deny” is the language of religion, not science.”
Let me first say, I am pleased that you continue trying to be civil, even if I am completely surprised at your resistance to the avalanche of facts.
This is blatant denial of science in it’s basest form.
If you believe that Global Warming or Climate Weirding or whatever the warmunists are calling it these days, I hope you are at least familiar with the supposed “scientism” behind it.
As you also said “Every temperature series has its ups and downs.” this is true for the alleged justification made by warmunists.
It is all based on models of (incredibly tortured to match the desired model predictions) data, and why? Because at it’s root, all CLIMATE is a very noisy and chaotic signal that must be filtered. The Models are a (very poor) attempt to winkle a trend out of the noise of the data.
Just because the MWP and LIA brutalize the basis of your religion… er hypothesis, you do not have the scientific basis to ignore data you do not like. Insert the real data, using like proxies, and POOF, the grandiose claims are revealed for the smoke and mirrors they always were.
The Guardian has published an article on a study that found something I pointed out two years ago, that YouTube is full of videos skeptical of climate alarmism.
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/jul/25/most-youtube-climate-change-videos-oppose-the-consensus-view
There are at least a thousand skeptical videos. I have begun collecting them at my Climate Change Debate Education website: (http://ccdedu.blogspot.com) and have about 300 listed at this point. That is a lot of skeptical science. Including a bunch from Judith Curry, Dick Lindzen, Pat Michaels, Will Happer, Roy Spencer and Marc Morano. Morano holds the record with his wonderful 10 million view video.
The Guardian says we skeptics are “hijacking” the science. Utter nonsense. The scientific debate is very real and this blog is a great place to see it.
Laughably, they try to climatesplain previous periods of cooling as being primarily due to volcanic activity, and warmups as the lack of volcanic activity.
Riiiiiiight.
Australia has decommissioned 20% of it’s 31 GW coal fired power stations since 2012. Another large coal plant will be decommissioned in 2 years time bring the total reduction to 24%. There is around 15 GW of Solar and wind farms in service today. There is another 25 GW of Solar and Wind farms currently in various stages of construction. Yet we still get our ill-informed students and school teachers blockading the streets in protest for more action on climate change.
I love how the AGW scientists contradict themselves from paper to paper..
Firstly some say jet streams and storms will get stronger others say the Jet will get weaker and more wavy…but in the context of this article this from Nature
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-019-1060-3
Which states
The observed pattern is consistent with the hypothesis that a weaker temperature gradient led to weaker mid-latitude westerly flow, weaker cyclones and decreased net terrestrial mid-latitude precipitation. Currently, the northern high latitudes are warming at rates nearly double the global average, decreasing the Equator-to-pole temperature gradient to values comparable with those in the early to middle Holocene. If the patterns observed during the Holocene hold for current anthropogenically forced warming, the weaker latitudinal temperature gradient will lead to considerable reductions in mid-latitude water resources.
So this article is suggesting temps in the arctic and N Hemisphere were indeed warmer in the past than now….
Somewhere above I read without surprise:
“Me and the Chinese think the Tmax charts are the best metric for determining past high temperatures. ”
1. This is completely wrong at global level.
2. It is known sice decades that Tmin temperatures grow faster than Tmax.
At global level (no: I don’t mean Illinois or Minnesota during a polar vortex intrusion) the winters and the nights become peu a peu less cold.
Me thinks that globally, we have less ‘more warming’ than much more ‘less cooling’.
So? There’s no evidence that slightly warmer is bad in any way. Skeptics don’t expect climate to be static, unlike alarmist expectations.
What better way is there to measure the warmth in the atmosphere than to use the chart that shows the highest temperatures reached at any one time?
The problem with averaging today is the Climategate Charlatans take the Tmax and Tmin and average them and out comes Science Fiction. So if we want to use real data, not bastardized data, then we have to fall back on the regional unmodified charts to find the truth about how the climate behaves.
The temperature charts NASA Climate and NOAA and the other conspirators produce is not fit for purpose. Anyone who considers them valid is fooling themselves. Read the Climategate emails, the conspiracy to manipulate the surface temperature record is right there in black and white. Quoting their bogus figures is a waste of time.
12 new papers provide robust evidence that the earth was warmer during Medieval times:
https://notrickszone.com/2019/07/29/12-new-papers-provide-robust-evidence-the-earth-was-warmer-during-medieval-times/
Has anyone actually read that Los Angeles Times article?
I just read it and could not find anywhere the denial of the MWP
or the LIA.
The papers:
‘Last phase of the Little Ice Age forced by volcanic eruptions’
In fact the larger eruptions occurred just after the colder LIA winters, and slightly warmed the following N Hem winters.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41561-019-0402-y.epdf
and:
‘No evidence for globally coherent warm and cold periods over the preindustrial Common Era’
I do believe they have ENSO backwards, El Nino episodes normal double in frequency during centennial solar minima.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-019-1401-2.epdf
Isn’t the basic premise of the scary global warming , (climate change) fraud that humans have the amazing ability to set the earths temperature to within a degree or two by cutting back on those evil fossil fuels ?
All we need to do is pay Trillions in more taxes to governments and the communist cover UN .
So who exactly who gets to pretend to set the goldilock temperature and how would it be measured ?
What if Canada wants it a smidge warmer and Nigeria says nah to hot ?
Are there any reputable scientists claiming humans can set the thermostat ? How are the natural variables netted out ?
On the other hand the truth is no one knows and the best thing to do is adapt like we are going to have to anyways .
Save the $trillions and put it to good use . I know all those corporate rent seekers will squeak a bit but so what .
$31 trillion hidden in tax havens now that is a problem .