Revised Holocene temperature record affirms role of greenhouse gases in recent millennia
RUTGERS UNIVERSITY
Scientists have resolved a key climate change mystery, showing that the annual global temperature today is the warmest of the past 10,000 years – contrary to recent research, according to a Rutgers-led study in the journal Nature.
The long-standing mystery is called the “Holocene temperature conundrum,” with some skeptics contending that climate model predictions of future warming must be wrong. The scientists say their findings will challenge long-held views on the temperature history in the Holocene era, which began about 12,000 years ago.
“Our reconstruction shows that the first half of the Holocene was colder than in industrial times due to the cooling effects of remnant ice sheets from the previous glacial period – contrary to previous reconstructions of global temperatures,” said lead author Samantha Bova, a postdoctoral researcher associate in the lab of co-author Yair Rosenthal, a Distinguished Professor in the Department of Marine and Coastal Sciences and Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences at Rutgers University-New Brunswick. “The late Holocene warming was indeed caused by the increase in greenhouse gases, as predicted by climate models, and that eliminates any doubts about the key role of carbon dioxide in global warming.”
Scientists used marine calcareous (calcium carbonate-containing) fossils from foraminifers – single-celled organisms that live at the ocean surface – to reconstruct the temperature histories of the two most recent warm intervals on Earth. They are the Last Interglacial period from 128,000 to 115,000 years ago and the Holocene. To get the fossils, the scientists collected a core of bottom sediments near the mouth of the Sepik River off northern Papua New Guinea during the Rutgers-led Expedition 363 of the International Ocean Discovery Program. The core features rapidly accumulating sediments that allowed the scientists to recreate the temperature history of the western Pacific warm pool, which closely tracks changes in global temperatures.
How temperature evolved during the Last Interglacial and Holocene eras is controversial. Some data suggest that the average annual global temperature during modern times does not exceed the warmth in the Holocene’s early warm period, called the “Holocene thermal maximum,” which was followed by global cooling. Meanwhile, climate models strongly suggest that global temperatures have risen throughout the past 10,000 years.
“The apparent discrepancy between climate models and data has cast doubts among skeptics about the role of greenhouse gases in climate change during the Holocene and possibly in the future,” Rosenthal said. “We found that post-industrial warming has indeed accelerated the long and steady trend of warming throughout the past 10,000 years. Our study also underscores the importance of seasonal changes, specifically Northern Hemisphere summers, in driving many climate systems. Our method can, for the first time, use seasonal temperatures to come up with annual averages.”
###
Rutgers-affiliated co-authors include Shital P. Godad, a former Rutgers researcher now at National Taiwan University. Scientists at The Ohio State University and Nanjing Normal University contributed to the study.
Oh hully gee! One proxy set in one place, and all the contradictory series of various proxies are now meaningless! Shades of Mann and his treemometer, both for inadequate depth and arrogance.
Science, made to order. Just like Mann’s fraudulent hockey stick.
Worse than they thought.
“Our reconstruction shows that the first half of the Holocene was colder than in industrial times due to the cooling effects of remnant ice sheets from the previous glacial period”
Really? Then explain this.
“eliminates any doubts about the key role of CO2 in global warming”. Uh, no, I still have doubts….sorry…..but not to worry – you still get paid.
This science article looks like crafting similar to the hockey stick by M. Mann that ran counter to all the other scientific approaches and results!
They needed a fix, and they will use it to ignore all the other original studies that shows something else, just like they did with the hockey stick…
How to save science from the destruction of contemporary politics?
The first lines of the abstract says it all, and why they had to craft it:
<<
Abstract
Proxy reconstructions from marine sediment cores indicate peak temperatures in the first half of the last and current interglacial periods (the thermal maxima of the Holocene epoch, 10,000 to 6,000 years ago, and the last interglacial period, 128,000 to 123,000 years ago) that arguably exceed modern warmth1,2,3. By contrast, climate models simulate monotonic warming throughout both periods4,5,6,7. This substantial model–data discrepancy undermines confidence in both proxy reconstructions and climate models, and inhibits a mechanistic understanding of recent climate change.
>>
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-03155-x
Weird, get funding and go find the answer you need to fit the agenda of the funders…
Large, mature forests found under currently retreating glaciers. Roman sliver mines revealed under currently retreating glaciers. Wine grapes were grown at latitudes where that is not currently possible. Hannibal crossed the Alps, with Elephants, where that is not possible today.
You don’t need to be a scientist to understand empirical evidence.
“Our reconstruction shows that the first half of the Holocene was colder than in industrial times”. Of course — has anyone ever disagreed with that? It’s always been well accepted that temps ramped up during the first half of the Holocene to a peak and have been ramping back down since. These folks are going to be very surprised when we continue to slide into the next ice age.
From Eureka Alert: “Meanwhile, climate models strongly suggest that global temperatures have risen throughout the past 10,000 years.”
In other words, the models show that temperatures started to climb, and continued to do so for 9,950 years before anthropogenic CO2 emissions became significant! Therefore, one should expect an abrupt, significant increase in temperatures after 1950. Yet, most of the increase of the last 100 years was before 1950! Similarly, without the Holocene maximum, one would expect a slow gradual increase in sea level until the mid-20th Century, and then have an abrupt, significant increase. That isn’t what has been observed:
From Climate Etc.; Judith Curry
Typical of today’s climate “scientists”: keep massaging the data until it gives the results you’re looking for.
I’ll see their one study and raise them 1,241.
https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/viewer?mid=1akI_yGSUlO_qEvrmrIYv9kHknq4&ll=-3.81666561775622e-14%2C-3.7229869544256076&z=2
Cicular logic?
H
They measured temperatures at the site of the Pacific Warm Pool, which they say closely matches global temperatures.
It might be sloppy wording, but what the heck is meant?
If they knew that temperatures from this region matched temperatures elsewhere, why measure them again? Geoff S
I thought “climate models” required enormous computing power and long run times to project the next 100 years or so. But apparently these folks have run said models for the two most recent interglacials (~20k years) to compare with their core data?
Right. That’s why farmers are flourishing in Greenland again.
THAT’S IT!!! I’m gonna become a scientist! So then, when I open my mouth, science comes gushing out in all it’s glory!
Marxist scientism; reach a conclusion then torture your facts until they agree with your narrative!
How much longer do we have to put up with crazy Progessive and Marxist religious fanatics preaching their nihilistic anti-human dogma?
I had always been taught that a State religion was a very bad idea. I guess if you try to make the State into God it’s permissible for leftist idiots! But I repeat myself!
How is Marxism different from the slavery of old? It’s got lots of new platitudes and sounds reasonable to people with little experience in the real world like children and college professors; but you still have a privileged elite ruling over the masses who must be kept weak and ignorant to prevent rebellions and uprisings!
Climastrology is just the latest branch of Marxist scientism designed to convince humans to give up their freedom and prosperity for the benefit of a few, privileged and self centered sociopaths!
Sorry for the rant, Charles! Thank you so much for all you and Anthony do to keep us informed! WUWT is truly one of the largest pearls strewn about the pigpen that the internet has become!
Marcott (2013) was (almost) right all along:
http://www.realclimate.org/images/Marcott.png
Samatha has helpfully produced a simplified version of her paper that ordinary folk who read the Daily Mail (UK) can understand:
That settles it.
Climate and historical reconstruction seem to be the order of the day. In 30 years no one will know the truth and that’s the purpose.
These proxies have the same calibration issues as other proxies: the measurements of interest are way outside of the calibration range. Thus, the calibration uncertainty is not a reasonable estimate of the uncertainty in the range of the measurements of interest.
If we get rid of all that contradictory stuff… we can prove CO2 is the warming influence.
And we won’t have to do anything more for our government funding than add the tag line, “CO2/GW.
😒
Well developed raised beaches (evidence of higher sea level when they were formed) on the presently icebound north coast of Greenland (meaning they have been pounded by extensive open seas) have chunks of driftwood from Alaska and Siberia that date 6000 to 8000ybp, lying on the beach. Whatsupwiththat?
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/10/081020095850.htm
This alone totally debunks the Rutgers study unequivocally, as do a goodly number of other proxies (speliotherms, etc.).
BTW as a geologist, I would not have chosen the mouth of a river with headwaters at over 7000ft as a locale for an Indian Ocean sample site.The water may have cooled the ocean surface locally. Ignorance? Or the tradition among GW zealots of cherry-picking proxy sites and samples. Remember Mann selected only ONE Siberian yamal tree sample from a major series collected by Russian scientists! He also chose bristlecone pines (known to have been unsuitable for paleoclimatological studies) and heavily weighted their hockey stickiness in his statistical wizardry. Need we mention his use of the Tiljander Lake (Finland) series, 1) from a section that had been contaminated and disturbed by industry and settlement of the area and, 2) improperly used it upside down to enhance the hockey stick plot despite being told by the scientist who originally created this series!
This is the late Dr. Stephen Schneider’s legacy – coaching Climate Wroughters to underplay uncertainty, give the press a compelling unequivocal narrative and hopefully with enough honesty that their consciences aren’t overly troubled! (It’s for a good cause).
Here we show that previous global reconstructions of temperature in the Holocene and the last interglacial period reflect the evolution of seasonal, rather than annual, temperatures and we develop a method of transforming them to mean annual temperatures.
What does this mean, and does it seem plausible?
Oh yeah, Hannibal (of the Carthagian Army) wouldn’t have been able to get his troops with its elephants and horses over today’s snow-filled Alps as he did in 213 BC on his surprise attack on Rome! History also debunks the new cold Holocene theory.
I think the gross amorality of the West’s néomarxistes and the fake science and media that supports it can’t be sustained. Am I being too hopeful here?
And every time there has been a Thermal Optimum (Maximum), A Civilisation bloomed.
Or did it. Really?
Every attempt at civilisation failed, every attempt and EVERY TIME, because “The Climate Changed”
Oh yeah. So what exactly was The Timeline on those attempts?
Because, every place where these attempts occurred are now = Deserts
And Deserts have High Temperatures
Notta lot of energy and thus = Cold Places, but high temps non-the-less.
Simple minds confuse temp with energy, we must make allowances, UNLESS they determine to trash this Civilational Attempt based on that braindead assumption.
And that’s what they’re trying to do. Quite successfully it seems, so far.
Anyway:
Is it really beyond the bound that the Optimum Temperature was NOT the Optimum Temperature – that the higher-than-usual temperature coincided with the decline and daeth of all those Civilational Attempts
Then, Rocket Scientists within the wider citizenry will notice and may then ## enquire, wtf did CO2 have to do with it all?
Then and now.
## I really hope they do, otherwise The Fat Lady (haha get a load of them on that ship **) – The Fat Lady will finish her rehearsals and start singing in earnest and then – ‘Curtains’ briefly followed by:
tada de dah “That’s All Folks“
** Justin Tyme 4 edit – its a Japanese whaling ship and they only do Whaling for The Science.
My bad