From NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT
By Paul Homewood
.
Just about all of the media have been peddling the “Hottest for 125,000 years” claim, which suggests a very concerted effort by the climate establishment in the run up to COP28.
The claim is self evident and baseless nonsense for a number of good reasons:
- There is no such thing as “a global average temperature”
- Even now we have very sparse coverage of temperature measurements. Prior to satellites, we had virtually no data outside of the US, Europe and a few other built up areas
- The temperature record we do have is thoroughly corrupted by UHI, and only dates back to the late 19thC
- Natural variations, including ENSO, volcanic activity etc, can easily cause temperature swings of a degree Celsius from year to year, and decade to decade. But historical proxies don’t have the fine resolution to pick these up, they merely give an idea of average temperatures over decades and even centuries. Consequently you cannot compare one year now with the general climate of, say, 2000 years ago.
But forget about all of these theoretical objections, because the climatic evidence we do have is overwhelming, and it tells us that the climate has been much warmer than now for most of the last 10000 years, since the end of the ice age.
Here are ten powerful, incontrovertible pieces of evidence:
1) Greenland
I agree totally we have had a global temperature increase in the 20thC – but an increase from what? ..Probably an increase from the lowest point in the last 10,000 years.
We started to observe meteorology at the coldest point in the last 10,000 years. – Professor Steffensen
As Professor Steffensen explains in the above video, temperatures in Greenland have been much higher than now for most of the last 8000 years.
2) Arctic
Briner et al 2016
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0277379116300427
Many other studies confirm that the temperature trends found in Greenland ice cores also exist elsewhere around the Arctic. For instance, Briner et al, above. analysed a wide selection of proxies in the Canadian Arctic and Greenland, and identified a long running decline in temperatures over the last 3000 years.
They also found that the Greenland ice sheet has grown since since that time.
3) Russia
Summer temperatures were between 2.5 and 7.0C warmer 7000 years ago in northern Russia:
Other studies indicate that temperatures in central Russia were 2C higher in the late-Atlantic period, about 5000 years ago.
4) The Baltic Region
Temperatures were between 1.0 and 3.5C higher 4500 years ago.
https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-16006-1_2/figures/6
5) Iceland
During the mid-Holocene, some of the present day ice caps in Iceland had completely melted:
.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1571086609013049
Meanwhile, remains of a 3000-year old forest underneath melting Icelandic glaciers confirm the climate used to be much warmer then:
Ancient tree stumps found under Breiðamerkurjökull glacier in Southeast Iceland are confirmed to be roughly 3,000 years old. RÚV reports.
A specialist believes the remarkably well-preserved stumps were part of a massive forest that disappeared after a long period of a warm climate.
https://www.icelandreview.com/news/3000-year-old-trees-excavated-under-glacier/
6) Tree Line Studies
Tree line studies offer strong evidence that temperatures in the White Mountains of California and the Alps were 2 degrees higher than now from 5000 BC to 2200 BC.
HH Lamb: Climate History & The Modern World
Lamb also writes about other tree line studies encompassing the Alps, Carpathians, Rockies, Japan, New Guinea, Australia, New Zealand, East Africa and the Andes. These also show similar results, with a climate that was 2C warmer around 5000 BC.
7) North America
There is ample evidence that Alaskan glaciers were smaller than now in the Middle Ages, easily proven by the remains of forests carbon dated back to then, which are being uncovered as the ice melts.
For instance, the Mendenhall:
There is also evidence that Alaskan glaciers were smaller still prior to 2000 BC, and that most of the glaciers south of 57N were only formed after that time.
HH Lamb wrote:
The rise of world sea level over the last 10 000 years, seen already in fig. 13.27, gives an overall view of the course of deglaciation. It is, however, a trend which must have been lagged on the trend of world temperature in such a way that the highest sea level — which probably occurred around 4000 years ago — should coincide with the end of the period of highest temperature, which reduced the glaciers and ice sheets to their postglacial minimum. It was after 2000–1500 B.c. that most of the present glaciers in the Rocky Mountains south of 57°n were formed ( Matthes 1939) and that major readvance of those in the Alaskan Rockies first took place.
HH Lamb: Climate: Present, Past and Future
8) European Alps
In the same book, Lamb wrote:
And at their subsequent advanced positions — probably around 500 B.C. as well as between A.D. 1650 and 1850 — the glaciers in the Alps regained an extent estimated in the Glockner region at about five times their Bronze Age minimum, when all the smaller ones had disappeared.
This conclusion is backed up by the recent discovery of 4000 year old trees at the edge of a Swiss glacier by the distinguished geologist Dr Christian Schlüchter.
Other research, including the discovery of a Swiss pass, which has been covered by snow for 2000 years, and the exposure of more ancient trees under the Tschierva Glacier in Engadin, in Switzerland, where research suggests that in the time of the Roman Empire, glaciers were smaller than today, and 7,000 years ago they probably weren’t around at all.
9) South America
Ancient plant beds, radiocarbon dated to 5000 years ago, are being uncovered as the Quelccaya glacier recedes in the Peruvian Andes, according to glaciologist Lonnie Thompson, who also
analysed ice cores from another glacier, the Huascarán in the north-central Andes of Peru, and found:
“ the climate was warmest from 8400 to 5200 years before present, and that it cooled gradually, culminating with the Little Ice Age (200 to 500 years before present).”
Other research from the Missouri Botanical Garden, which studies tree lines in the Andes, came to similar conclusions:
During the period from 7500 yr BP to ca. 3000 yr BP temperatures rose about 2°C more, causing another upward shift in the forest line of about 300-400 m higher than today, and thereby reducing the area occupied by páramo. Finally, at about 2900 yr BP, there was a noticeable lowering of the temperature that marked the last downward movement of the forest and páramo belts to their present-day positions.
And as in Alaska, retreating glaciers in Patagonia have been uncovering the remains of forests, which are carbon dated to the late Middle Ages.
10) New Zealand
https://niwa.co.nz/our-science/climate/information-and-resources/clivar/pastclimate
Reconstruction of New Zealand’s past climate by NIWA, using a wide variety of proxies,
indicate a warmer climate than now until about 3000 years ago.
NIWA comment:
The warmest conditions of the present cycle occurred between 10,000 and 6,000 B.P with temperatures about 1°C above modern values. This warmer climate was mild, with light winds and lush forests. Speleothems indicate a lowering of temperature after 7,000 B.P, with a resurgence of small glacial events in the Southern Alps at 5,000 B.P.
Similarities between the New Zealand climate changes during the last millennium using tree rings (Cook et al., 2002) has been compared to the Northern Hemisphere Medieval Warm Period and Little Ice Age (Lamb, 1965).
More direct evidence comes from the Franz Joseph glacier. Historian Brian Fagan described the changes of this glacier in his book “The Little Ice Age”:
In New Zealand the Franz Joseph glacier was “a mere pocket of ice on a frozen snowfield nine centuries ago”…. Then Little Ice Age cooling began and the glacier thrust downslope into the valley below smashing into the great rain forests that flourished there, felling giant trees like matchsticks. By the early 18th Century, Franz Joseph’s face was within 3 km of the Pacific Ocean .
The high tide of glacial advance at Franz Joseph came between the late 17th Century and early 19th Century, just as it did in the European Alps.
This does not directly relate to the early and mid Holocene, but is strong evidence of the LIA and the MWP, which NIWA say was not as warm 3000 years before.
The World Was Hotter
Let’s be absolutely clear.
These events were not “regional” or “transitory”, as Holocene Optimum deniers would like you to believe.
Large scale retreats and advances of glaciers don’t happen as a result of a few years of weather. Neither do advances of tree lines hundreds of feet up mountainsides. The evidence from these events and the likes of ice cores is irrefutable and clearcut.
It is well established from these studies that the Holocene Optimum lasted for thousands of years, during which time there would have been the same sort of climatic cycles we see today, whether short term events such as El Nino, or centuries long ones like the LIA, all bringing warmer and colder intervals. But throughout, the overall climate was still warmer than the current one.
And it is equally apparent that this warmer climate was worldwide. Even where there are no proxies, there is still evidence in places like the Sahara, where the lush climate there a few thousands of years ago is indicative of an expansion of the Tropics resulting from a warmer world.
Anybody who claims that this year is the hottest for 125,000 years is fraudulent.
Rank heresy!! It clearly contradicts His Holiness, Michael Mann, and his blessed revelation of The Hockey Stick!!!
_____________________________________________________
Obvious Bullshit
Your mistype fits well and is likely far more truthful than the article. Today is likely the warmest in the last 125 years.
However, the depth of Peat frozen in permafrost tells a far different story.
Peat, the common Sphagnum Moss, has a growth rate of 0.75″ to 4.75″ per year and requires a fairly warm 5°C (40°F) average temperature but grows best in 10°C-22°C (50F-70F). (not conducive to creating permafrost)
It grows best in moist environments with a fair amount of humidity (unlike permafrost regions)
Arctic Peat can be 4-6 Meters thick (13-20′) at 3/4 inch per year you need a climate of centuries of 50F+ temperatures prior to the onset of the current colder permafrost conditions or you wouldn’t have 20′ of frozen Peat.
But much is now under permafrost….
How can that be! 😉
Perhaps tree can grow under glaciers !
How does it feel inside your head to be an actual idiot, and wrong about everything?
I bet it is not a bit comfortable.
What is incorrect?
It is one thing to do a drive by and claim someone did something incorrectly. It’s another to show the error and what is correct. Insults aside what is !y mistake?
Typical alarmist, slings ad hominems without any proof.
Must be very uncomfortable for you.
And you believe that all 20′ feet of frozen peat grew in which interglacial?
What if 5′ feet date back to the warm period before the current glacial periods?
Yes all that empirical evidence has all been cancelled. What is really disturbing is that vast numbers of people now actually believe that is has never been hotter for 1000’s of years. Mass neurosis. Climate scientists are to blame. In fact, any scientist that does not call it out is to blame. Yes CSIRO and BoM, I’m looking at you.
BOM is doing Priestcraft for the cult. As Eric Hoffer pointed out in the early 1950’s, mass movements tend to act like preaching religions, and tend to act like each other. Greens in general can act like True Believers, which means acting like a radical political party or a new church.
“that vast numbers of people now actually believe that is has never been hotter for 1000’s of years”
They are probably right, for the past 5000 years.
The real problem is the belief that warmer is bad news and that 100 year predictions of climate doom are accurate, after being wrong for the past 50 years in a row
NO !!.. MWP was almost certainly warmer.
Absolutely certainly the RWP was considerably warmer.
Stop being a CLIMATE CHANGE DENIER !
No accurate data to prove that claim or even that the MWP was warmer. A fake global average created by combining various local reconstructions results is a claim of about 0.5 degrees warmer than the past ten years and not warmer than the hot last half of 2023/
The local reconstruction proxy estimates data are not precise global averages and can not prove any warming period in the past 5000 years was warmer than the measured last half of 2023.
Reconstructions from 5000 to 9000 years ago most likely reflect a warmer period than the last six months of 2023, but that is not certain.
You have to learn to analyze data quality rather than jumping to conclusions from rough data simply because they that confirm your biases.
During the MWP, people were farming on Greenland. That is an objective fact. We know they were able to grow crops and raise livestock.
It is too cold to do that now in those same parts of Greenland.
During the RWP, grapes were grown and wine made north of Hadrian’s wall in GB.
It is impossible to grow a crop of grape and make wine north of Hadrian’s wall today.
Hannibal marched at army which included elephants over the Alps into Italy, over a route that is impassable today.
Glaciers in the Alps that were nonexistent during the MWP grew to overtake entire towns in the LIA, and they have still not retreated to where they were even 500 years ago.
There has in any recent year, and certainly not this past year, been nothing close to the sorts of widespread very hot temperatures in the US that were recorded in the 1930s.
“Hannibal marched at army which included elephants over the Alps into Italy”
the elephants were wearing snow shoes 🙂
But climate scientists say that indisputable historical facts are trumped by proxies that they use to determine historical temperatures to the 1/100th of a degree.
Sure, but we don’t know that the
global average temperature was warmer than today. Regional changes in climate are not the same as global ones and changes in, for example, Atlantic Meriodonal Overturning Circulation, can easily explain more temperate climates in Greenland, Great Britain, and Europe without affecting temperatures in Asia, Africa, North America, and Australia. Any claims that global temperatures were warmer (or cooler) by a specific amount hundreds or thousands of years ago during the current interglacial period are just that, claims. There were no hermometers back then or precise proxy temperature data. We do know it was significantly cooler during the glacial periods, but we don’t know how much.
The problem is that the modern GAT is exactly the same – it isn’t ‘global’ by a very wide margin. The datasets take regional temperature records, stitch them together with assumptions and wild guesses, then just average the lot and call it a day. For many reasons I’m against the GAT, I’d much prefer to compare regional temperatures against past regional temperatures and compare the similar product for other regions around the globe. Mashing together desert, urban, tropical rainforest and savannah climates (and others) in one big mess has always struck me as being the stupidest way of doing things but the climate enthusiasts will insist on doing it that way.
“No accurate data”
that’s the story of climate “science”
No data at all for scary predictions of CAGW … wrong since 1979.
Just worst case assumptions and unproven theories.
CAGW has never happened
= no historical CAGW data
The future never has data
No future CAGW data
NO CAGW data = no science
Just leftist climate astrology and excited hand waving and warnings of doom.
“The future never has data”
but.. but… they have models- lots of “data” and 40 variations- just extract whatever data they prefer 🙂
So, explain why the Vikings settled in Greenland during the RWP, and those settlements are now covered in metres of ice?
As you said about confirming biases.
Greenland is
836,000 square miles
or 0.42% of Earth’s surface
The warming in the high latitudes of the N.H. have been significantly more than the global average warming since 1975.
The whole earth is
196.9 MILLION square miles
ROUGHLY ESTIMATED Greenland temperatures based on anecdotes, or even proxies, are NOT suitable for even roughly estimating a global average temperature.
That would be Forrest Gump science
Given that the arctic was much warmer during the MWP and the RWP (that is now beyond dispute to all but the most glued-on church of CliSci members, together with the fact that every other studied area around the world shows warming during those periods, and along with the global temperature patterns we are seeing today, you would have to be a complete moron to argue against that hypothesis without a shred of supporting evidence other than ”I don’t think so”
Sorry, what? The Arctic was warmer during the MWP and RWP? You would have to be a complete moron to argue for that hypothesis with zero supporting evidence. All we know, based on historical accounts, archeology, and proxy data, is that regional climate in certain places in the northern hemisphere (Greenland, Great Britain, some of Europe) were more temperate than today. I have seen no evidence that the Arctic across North America and Russia, was warmer. The climate change catastrophe is a myth but let’s make sure our counterclaims are based on fact, not hyperbole.
Climate change and the northern Russian treeline zoneG.M MacDonald,* K.V Kremenetski, and D.W Beilman
Author information Copyright and License information PMC Disclaimer
Go to:
ABSTRACTThe Russian treeline is a dynamic ecotone typified by steep gradients in summer temperature and regionally variable gradients in albedo and heat flux. The location of the treeline is largely controlled by summer temperatures and growing season length. Temperatures have responded strongly to twentieth-century global warming and will display a magnified response to future warming. Dendroecological studies indicate enhanced conifer recruitment during the twentieth century. However, conifers have not yet recolonized many areas where trees were present during the Medieval Warm period (ca AD 800–1300) or the Holocene Thermal Maximum (HTM; ca 10 000–3000 years ago)
Where now it’s frozen where 3000 years ago trees were growing, seems it was warmer than now:
3000-Year-Old Trees Excavated Under Glacier
Ancient tree stumps found under Breiðamerkurjökull glacier in Southeast Iceland are confirmed to be roughly 3,000 years old. RÚV reports.
Trees under glaciers in Iceland do not prove warmer global temperatures 3,000 years ago. They prove that Iceland was more temperate. It’s an island in the middle of the Atlantic, like Great Britain, hugely affected by Atlantic circulation bringing warm water north from the equator. Certainly Iceland was more hospitable then but it tells us nothing about global temperature trends. Anyone paying attention to current measured rates of warming and sea level rise see nothing to be alarmed about but a temperate Iceland 3,000 years ago doesn’t refute modern warming. The most important lesson is that humans flourished in the modern warm era but managed to survive the late glacial period, too, and have adapted to an extraordinary range of climates and temperatures. There is nothing we need to do to “fight” the mythical monster of “
climate change” “global warming”. So far it’s been really good for us.Lol. What is wrong with you? How much evidence do you need to see showing that it was warmer GLOBALLY during the MWP the RWP and HO
Thank you, Richard, for reminding us to examine the science. Many of us on the skeptic side blindly accept unproven claims, just like the climate alarmists do. There were no thermometers 5,000 years ago, or during the Roman or Medieval Warm periods, just as there were none 125,000 years ago. We have no idea if it was warmer or colder than present during those periods. What we do know is that the current “climate change” is so slow that humans, the most ingenious and adaptable species on the planet, will easily handle it. We don’t need deranged governing elites to do anything other than just shut up and continue to enjoy suckling the taxpayer’s teats.
They should have claimed 124,759 years
Souds more scientific than 125,000
Is proxy data part of your science?
Correction. YOU have no idea.
Trees and stalactites don’t need thermometers. They need unfrozen water.
“They are probably right, for the past 5000 years.”
No, it was hotter in 1934, than it is today. We don’t have to go back 5,000 years to find temperatures as warm as today, much less 125,000 years.
The written temperature recods blows up all these “hottest year evah!” claims.
Temperature Data Mannipulators are the problem, not the temperatures.
Many US states set their maximum heat records in the 1930s but the entire world was not hotter than the last half of 2023.
It is astonishing how many here reject Richard reporting irrefutable facts about the quality and precision of temperature data and proxy temperature data. We don’t know that global temperatures were warmer in the 1930’s. But we also don’t know how much it has warmed globally in the pre-satellite era because almost all the weather stations were affected by urban heat island effects. Quibbling over presumed temperatures during the MWP and RWP and the 1930’s is silly. We’re taking about maybe 0.5 C to 1 C, a ridiculously small amount. The important argument is the current measured rate of warming and sea level rise, both of which are far less than alarmists claim, refuting their claims about the supposed effect of CO2 on both. It might affect warming, but certainly not to the degree they claim. And we know for a fact that humans are great at engineering solutions. The Dutch and others have been reclaiming land from the sea, despite slowly rising sea levels, for hundreds of years. The current warm period is beneficial, not detrimental, to humans; far more beneficial than the maybe 1C cooler average temperatures of the Little Ice Age.
“all the weather stations were affected by urban heat island effects”
Not the ocean measurements and they are 70%
It is a well known fact that the climate was perfect at 3:05pm June 6, 1850, and any change since then was a climate disaster, or even worse.
“but the entire world was not hotter than the last half of 2023.”
You don’t know that. You are speculating and making unsubstantiated assertions.
You make up numbers if you don’t like the official numbers and call that science?
You are still making unsubstantiated assertions.
That’s what Climate Alarmists do.
Warmer in the 2.56 million-year ice age the Earth is in is good, not bad.
4 million more people die from cold-related causes than from heat-related causes each year.
Cool or cold air causes our blood vessels to constrict to conserve heat raising our blood pressure and causing increased strokes and heart attacks in the cooler months, outside of the tropics.
The ice age won’t end until all the natural ice melts.
Tony Heller slams Mann’s hockey schtick again in his latest:
When Did The Glaciers Form?
The Public needs to be exposed to more weather history.
That way they can put things in perspective much better.
Climate Change Alarmists don’t like weather history for that very reason.
Newspapers are a very good source of information on the local weather for any time and place.
History is not the Climate Change Alarmists’ friend.
That’s why Michael Mann tried to distort weather history with his bogus, bastardized “hotter and hotter” Hockey Stick chart.
Tony Heller does that well although old newspapers are not easy to read online.
Yes, Tony Heller is one of the few who looks at the newspaper records.
You ought to see some of the newspaper accounts of the weather in China during the 1930’s. It wasn’t a pretty picture.
I doubt there are many here who look at twitter, but if you do, I recommend following Don Penim who posts articles about historic weather events that really help put the alarmist propaganda into perspective.
He also points out current weather conditions on the planet that you don’t hear about from our narrative driven media monsters. A recent example being the extreme cold gripping Beijing at the moment.
https://www.centredaily.com/news/politics-government/article283514308.html
I, personally, didn’t bother with Twitter when it first appeared because you were limited to just a few words for any comment, and I couldn’t even get warmed up with those kinds of restrictions, so I passed on joining.
I find WUWT is a pretty good substitute.
Climate proxies and historical anecdotes tell us the climate is constantly changing even if they are not perfect real time measurements.
The odds of more than a decade of s steady climate seem remarkably low. One glance at the hockey stick and you know it’s BS. But leftists don’t care — they BS about every subject — why should climate history be an exception?
I have little faith in climate scientists and their proxies- but I have a great deal of faith geologists. As they say- you can read the history of the planet in the rocks. The changes over the long term have been vast- countless orders of magnitude greater than the trivial changes our “leaders” are panicking over- and wrecking the economy.
Hi Tom, I sent a suggested category for all things climate yesterday that anticipates this very nicely. The 5000 year old Tuktuyaktuk tree on Canada’s NW Arctic coast, along with other thind6for this category.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2023/12/24/merry-christmas-happy-new-year-thanks-and-the-future/#comment-3836736
That’s nothing, UN News headlines: “Hottest September on record puts 2023 on track to be warmest year ever”— ever: at any time (Oxford).
Like Reuters the BBC is a tad less categorical: ‘Samantha Burgess […] said that a combination of its [CCCS] data and that of the UN suggested 2023 may be “warmer than anything that the planet has seen for 125,000 years […] that conclusion is based on observations at weather stations, complex computer models of the climate system, and records of the climate far back in time from ice cores and tree rings”‘.
Poor old Copernicus his model was the result of a wealth of careful observational data, nowadays ‘climate change’ data is the result of ‘complex computer models’.
‘complex computer models’ that produce complex computer cr*p!
Isn’t that close to the CCP I’ve been reading about?
Don’t forget they use an AVERAGE of the “complex” tuned computer models.
There is no one model that is in any way consistently correct.
Everybody knows, including the Warministas, that there is zip Global Warming.
If there was warming, these Climate Jihardists would be showing the temperature increase using the temperature records of the many thousands of Temperature recording stations sited all over the world.
To use the argument that there is one world temperature and it has increased is just a cop out, puerile and a timid approach to Science.
As the decades roll on and CO2 rises in sync with a rising population and an increased use of fabulous fossil fuels
…..these Warministas just look more stupid.
All they have now are lies, and the lies are becoming far more common and far more blatant as their desperation grows – despite their best efforts nature is simply not cooperating with their ideology and is doing the opposite to what they’re saying. Up is down, forward is backward, left is right and nothing is as they say it is. There will be a reckoning and it is looming nearer and nearer with every lie that spews forth from their orifices.
The reality is the last six months of 2023 may have been the warmest six months in 5000 years and are almost certainly the warmest six months in a few centuries.
UTTER RUBBISH !!
And where are your contrary data?
What data do you have on temperatures 5000 years ago? Do you have the thermometer readings from around the world? Your statement is ridiculous. It’s all a guess based on proxies that cannot be proven and even if the guess is correct the margin of error is a matter of degrees, not fractions of a degree.
The U.S. temperature chart shows contrary data. It shows it was warmer in the 1930’s, than it is today.
And I have charts from all over the world that show it was just as warm in the Early Twentieth Century as it is today.
I’m sure you’ve seen them, as I have posted them numerous times. The question is: Why don’t you believe the historic, written temperature records that are right in front of your eyes?
US is 1,5% of the world;s surface area
Oceans are 71% of the surface area
The entire world, on average, was not warmer than the p;ast hLF OF 2023.
If you reject the 1930s global data, then the right answer is no one knows.
Mr. Greene: And you have data for the last 5000 yrs on the temp of that 71% surface area? Your comments show that you can see the problem with this, there’s no reliable data on ocean temps to put together your “global” averages, it’s absurd. It’s also an evasion to talk of global temps, there’s not enough data to “average” the globe even today., You read here, you notice comments from AlanJ and Nick Stokes that talk about “global” temps like they are certain? You sound just like them. And they sound cracked.
“Mr. Greene: And you have data for the last 5000 yrs on the temp of that 71% surface area?”
Another good question. Phil Jones used bogus sea surface temperatures to bastardize the global temperature record.
He had no valid data on sea surface temperatures, so he just made it all up. And Mr. Green has no valid data on sea surface temperatures for that period of time, either. He’s blowing smoke.
Well, if noone knows, then why are you claiming the entire world was not warmer that the past half of 2023?
Noone knows, right? That includes you, doesn’t it? So why are you making such claims? If noone knows, then it *is* possible it was warmer in the past than in the last half of 2023. You invalidate your own claim by claiming you know.
How about the undisputed FACT that the Vikings grew barley, oats, and other crops on terrain in Greenland which is now permafrost?
Yeah, how do you refute that?
Your 5,000 year claim.
It is up to you to prove that claim, down to every detail
Yes, it is. And he can’t prove any of it.
You’re spouting utter crap again, Richard. Did Santa bring you a fresh barrel of kool-aid?
I write reasonable conclusions based on available data after analyzing the data quality. I also accept that many climate questions can’t be answered.
That is a logical position based on facts, data and logic.
While you are inventing tales of NOAA cooling 1997 by 5 degrees F. to create more global warming, I publish a daily recommended reading list of conservative articles on climate and energy. On blogs which has had over 680,000 page views. Over 1,100 yesterday.
This article did not qualify because the 125,000 claim is silly and can’t be proven or disproven. Paul Homewood is te best UL climate and energy writer and his Friday Conservative Woman article on on my blogs reading list today.
This Homewood article was far too long and seemed like a lot of work to refute a silly leftist 125,000 claim that deserves only ridicule.
Most certainly your logical position is not based on facts, data or logic. If you dispute the data from ice core readings, then you don’t have any argument, you have no way whatsoever to prove historical data is right or wrong, apart from your bias.
Ice cor data may be useful for CO2 but is Antarctica a useful proxy for the global average temperature?
Antarctica since the 1970s has had a completely different climate pattern unrelated to the rest of the world. No warming.
The ice core proxies reveal three things:
(1) Climate change is constant
(2) The 100,000 year Milankovitch cycles
(3) A slow natural long term climate trend where the ratio of ocean CO2 and atmospheric CO2 changes along with changes in ocean temperatures, with no apparent effect of total ocean plsd atmospheric CO2.
Yes, because Antarctica shows the same as everywhere else.
Reference
Khim, B.-K., Yoon, H.I., Kang, C.Y. and Bahk, J.J. 2002. Unstable climate oscillations during the Late Holocene in the Eastern Bransfield Basin, Antarctic Peninsula. Quaternary Research 58: 234-245.
Description
General climatic features were inferred from a study of the grain size, total organic carbon content, biogenic silica content and, most importantly, magnetic susceptibility of 210Pb- and 14C-dated sediments retrieved from the eastern Bransfield Basin (61�58.9’S, 55�57.4’W) just off the northern tip of the Antarctic Peninsula. Most of the Medieval Warm Period (AD 1050-1550) was warmer than the Current Warm Period.
Reference
Hall, B.L., Hoelzel, A.R., Baroni, C., Denton, G.H., Le Boeuf, B.J., Overturf, B. and Topf, A.L. 2006. Holocene elephant seal distribution implies warmer-than-present climate in the Ross Sea. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 103: 10,213-10,217.
Description
The authors collected skin and hair – and even some whole-body mummified remains – from raised-beach excavations at various locations along Antarctica’s Victoria Land Coast (~77�30’S, 163�30’E) that they identified by both visual inspection and DNA analysis as coming from southern elephant seals (Mirounga leonina) and which they analyzed for age by means of radiocarbon dating. Results from fourteen different locations – which they describe as being “well south” of the seals’ current “core sub-Antarctic breeding and molting grounds” – indicate that what they call the Seal Optimum began about 600 BC and ended about AD1400, “broadly contemporaneous with the onset of Little Ice Age climatic conditions in the Northern Hemisphere and with glacier advance near [Victoria Land’s] Terra Nova Bay.” These findings, in their words, indicate “warmer-than-present climate conditions” over a period of time that encompassed both the Medieval and Roman Warm Periods, as well as the intervening Dark Ages Cold Period, and that “if, as proposed in the literature, the [Ross] ice shelf survived this period, it would have been exposed to environments substantially [our italics] warmer than present.”
“This Homewood article was far too long and seemed like a lot of work to refute a silly leftist 125,000 claim that deserves only ridicule.”
I thought it was a very good article. I wondered to myself after reading it if there were going to be any challenges to the data presented, since the data seems pretty clear. And sure enough, the data isn’t clear to everyone.
All the data points one way: it was warmer in the past. How can that be disputed?
There are no real time data from temperature measurements.
Only rough estimates from LOCAL proxies
Those estimates are too inaccurate to prove warmer in the past 5000 years, but probably do prove warmer from 5000 to 9000 years ago.
You are concluding what you want to be true globally … without considering the low quality of local proxy data with high margins or error being used as proof.
”Only rough estimates from
LOCALGLOBAL proxies”I write reasonable conclusions based on available data after analyzing the data quality.
ha ha. You do nothing of the sort.
Write a reasonable conclusion about this….
There were trees growing in the Arctic were there is now ice and proxy data shows a warm period in South Africa, New Zealand, Antarctica, and China. Al these occurred aprox. 1000 years ago…
You have no idea what you are talking about.
You used to seem to be a rational person, but that is no longer the case.
You should be sedated.
Insults are not arguments and refute nothing.
I will add: “You … seem to be a rational person’ to my resume and use you as a reference.
Richard, I know that a lot of people have mental health issues around Christmas and New Year’s.
There are some who say it’s caused by societal collapse. These pseudoscientists have no data to back them up. It simply can’t be confirmed one way or another. The data wasn’t collected. Sure there are anecdotes about stonings, but for all we know, there were just as many transsexuals in Jesus’ time as there are today. Three out of four founding fathers were probably bi-curious.
I cling to these conclusions, Richard, not so much because the dearth of data leads me there but because that’s what a corrupted society wants to believe. Above all, I want to be seen as reasonable by those who have lost all reason.
A partially disguised insult (?) that was not clever or funny. But I would not expect any debate of science or any attempt to refute any of my comments. Too much thinking required?
Did you think it was disguised? How clumsy of me!
Seems to me it was just a statement of fact. Nothing you are saying is reasonable
The dog ate his brain.
From a confused person who falsely claimed NOAA lowered the global average temperature 5 degrees F. in 1997 to create more global warming.
You are, once again, lying your ass off; I never claimed anything of the sort. I pointed out a clear discrepancy in the official records of 1997 and suggested one possible reason which was most definitely not what you’ve just stated. Just stop lying or is that all you’ve got – lies and deceit?
The reality is that Putin may drop a nuke on Paris.
Another utterly meaningless statement.
The other day I asked if you ever read your own crap.
“Everybody knows, including the Warministas, that there is zip Global Warming.”
Tremendous warming in the past 20,000 years
Moderate warming since the 1690s
Minor warming since 1975
Anyone who claims no warming is a science denier.
My Michigan home was under a thick glacier 20,000 years ago. It was melted about 10,000 years ago.
No warming?
Warming and cooling cycles. If you’d bothered to check, you’d have seen that the peak of this interglacials warming was 8 or 9,000 years ago and the warming periods have been running down, getting less and less as we approach the next glacial period. You also should know, as well as I do, that the warming that occurred in this modern warm period was the least warm of any of the warm periods in this interglacial and, by the best information we have, the last interglacial as well. There has been warming, as well as cooling, but to only mention the warming is as deceitful as the climate enthusiasts.
The current interglacial is not over so we have no idea what the peak temperature will be.
Weak local proxy estimates to prove the Holocene Climate Optimum was warmer tha the second half of 2023.
No evidence to prove any warm periods in the past 5000 years were warmer than the last half of 2023 In fact, the proxy estimates, when added together to create a fake global average suggest the last six months are the warmest six months in 5000 years.
We are currently in a warming trend during an interfacial — the best known climate for humans and animals in 5000 years and possibly the best climate for C3 plants in millions of years.
We should be celebrating the current climate and hoping it gets warmer.
We should not be claiming great knowledge of the past climate based on haphazard local proxy data, even in the past 10,000 years.
There have been warm centuries and cool centuries. Anecdotes strongly suggest people living in those centuries loved warm and hated cold.
We should be admitting there is no knowledge of the climate in 50 to 100 years, which leftists will never admit … while making scary 100 years climate predictions
all temperature proxies are next to worthless- tree rings? ice in the middle of a glacier? absurd
The peak occurred long ago, Richard.
You’re getting yourself worked up like you did last time you ended “taking a break from WUWT”.
Why not take a breath, maybe go click the donation link and make a different more useful kind of contribution? Let’s all go do that!
No climate
No science
Childish insults
An interfacial? What’s that, like a fortnight? The time elapsed between Nancy Pelosi’s facelifts?
probably meant interglacial. ‘f’ and ‘g’ are right next to each other on the keyboard.
So intergacial then. Is that some kind of interracial LGBTQIA+ thing?
Your comments have are completely incoherent from one to the next.
Do you have the intelligence to at least quote one key sentence from a comment I made here and then attempt to refute that comment … or are insults your best shot?
You keep making a claim about the warmest in 5000 years. Where is your proof? You made the claim, so we don’t need to disprove it, you need to prove it. And I think you will have a hard time disproving that Greenland was habitable along with the other historical facts (not proxies) mentioned by Nicholas McGinley.
There are only averages of local proxies for the past 5000 years.
They show about 0.5 degrees. warmer than the past 10 years
Their margins of error are CERTAINLY much larger than
+/- 0.5 degrees C.
Therefore, no evidence exists that warm periods in the past 5000 years were warmer than the past decade, and certainly not warmer than the last half of 2023 with the EL Nino heat.
The second half of 2023 is the warmest year since 1850 with the best measurements available.
There are no accurate estimates capable of proving any six month period in the past 5000 years was warmer than the second half of 2023.
I claim the second half of 2023 is probably the warmest six months in 5000 years because we are living in the best climate in 5000 years. Data do not exist to prove me wrong, or for me to change “probably” to “definitely”
Please everybody stop with the Greenland claptrap. Greenland is only 0.4% of Earth’s surface. It is not a proxy for 100% of Earth’s surface based on historical anecdotes or even local Greenland proxies.
With 90% of temperature readings taken in the warmer cities around the world, the higher temperature readings probably just reflect the growth of cities across the world.
Mr. Greene: Here is an example of why you draw insults. You note that there are local proxies which have been averaged. Then you say, definitively, “no evidence” without realizing that local proxies are SOME EVIDENCE! Not conclusive, but it’s some evidence (like Galileo reportedly said “but it moves”.) BTW, in other comments you are drawing hard conclusions re: the last 5000 years, from what? Local proxies?? And you at times acknowledge the vast uncertqainty (so uncertain, why bother??), then get back on the “but the last 5000 years shows….” bicycle. One gets weary.
too much spiced eggnog?
I don’t know which spice but it wasn’t nutmeg.
“If there was warming, these Climate Jihardists would “- live in “tiny houses” with no electricity, only get around on a bicycle and eat only lettuce- otherwise, of course, they’d be hypocrites
I thought the use of fossil fuels was increasing at a much higher rate than the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere.
Anybody who claims the daily high has any bearing on climate is fraudulent.
Given the abysmal quality of the crap they’ve been coming out with one can only presume they’ve been getting high daily.
The trend of TMAX and TMIN are over 30 years or more are both elements of climate change
WRONG !
They are elements of urban and airport warming.
NOT global climate change.
UHI / economic growth is one manmade cause of global warming
Does not affect oceans.
Inaccurate temperature measurements are another manmade cause of global warming
Most likely does not have much of an effect on UAH satellite measurements.
If you are implying all warming since 1975 was caused by increasing UHI and inaccurate measurements, then you are wrong.
I have not seen anyone say there has been no warming since 1975.
I think almost everyone here, maybe everyone, knows that the mid to late 1970s were at the tail end of several decades of cooling.
One thing is for sure: Nothing productive will result from a conversation in which people are talking about different things.
There are several different time scales and intervals being mentioned here, and mixing them up, conflating them, misconstruing what someone else is saying with regard to the specific interval they are referring to, is sure to get us nowhere.
Most important is to not waste time on the past climate based on rough estimates from local climate proxies.
Leftist style climate change is wild guess data free predictions of the future climate, that have been wrong since the early 1970s. They don’t really care about climate history before the 1975 warming trend began.
Much worse than local climate proxies with large margins of error are predictions of the future climate in 100 years made with no data at all.
Leftists throw down predictions of climate doom faster than conservatives can refute them.
Leftists would love to have us waste time debating whether the warmer centuries in the past 10000 years were really warmer than 2023, or not warmer.
Two-thirds of Republicans under the age of 30 agree with the so-called “climate change” agenda.
Blame the UN, they have the loudest voice on the planet, and their IPCC is constantly pushing “climate change” action.
Good comment. Right to the heart of the matter.
Apart from El Ninos, there has been NO atmospheric warming in 45 years of the satellite temperature measurement era.
Absolutely zero signature of human cause warming of the atmosphere…
… just the massively urban affected surface fabrications.
The UAH data show a +0.14 degrees per decade warming since 1979 with a peak in the last half of 2023 and the record hot month was July 2023.
You are an El Nino cut member tin hat conspiracy theorist. El Ninos and La Ninas offset each other iver a 50 year period.
They are all followed by a reversion to the mean rising temperature trend
Now explain how the heat got into the oceans that get’s released every five years or so. Please don’t say underseas volcanoes or i will start laughing.
UAH is not a measurement of the surface temperatures.
And we only have such data going back to what is very well known to be the low ebb of a 30+ year cooling period.
There is nothing going on like what was happening around the world in the 1930s.
A common talking point aimed at refuting human-caused climate change is that the 1930s was the hottest decade in recorded history. This is true, but only for the United States during the era known as the Dust Bowl. It was far from true for the planet as a whole.
June-August 2023 was also the Northern Hemisphere’s hottest meteorological summer on record, at 2.59 degrees F (1.44 degrees C) above average. The season, which also marks the Southern Hemisphere’s winter, was the Southern Hemisphere’s warmest winter on record at 1.53 degrees F (0.85 of a degree C) above average.
Don’t let facts and data get in the way of your conclusions!
You make unverified statements and we are supposed to accept them as the truth. How many thermometers were there recording temperatures worldwide in the 1930s? How many are there now? Why do we have “infilling” and “kriging” and a host of other tools to make up temperatures that aren’t measured? And how do you get a worldwide temperature to a resolution of .01C?
Ocean heating is fake.
There is zero objective evidence that the oceans have warmed up in recent years, let alone are storing massive amounts of thermal energy.
If they were, why do tide gauges fail to show any evidence of any increase in the thermal expansion of the oceans?
Instead of being an independent source of data that could be used to check other sources, the ARGO data was altered to match the TOA imbalance, which is massively suspect.
No two devices that measure TSI have ever agreed with each other, so how can anyone precisely say what the TOA imbalance is?
It is impossible to have any confidence in the veracity of any of the data sets. I am still waiting for some reason to discount the possibility that UAH data has been corrupted by fake data that was then used to calibrate the satellite sensor measurements.
If the last 6 months are the hottest in (name an interval), why do local measurements completely and utterly fail to show any such thing?
How can there be zero places with record hot temps for the past six months, but somehow they all add up to a record hot planet?
And how does it get hotter than ever while crop yields are at record values all around the world, sea ice is growing at the fastest rate in decades, fire coverage is one of the lowest ever recorded, drought areas are at an unusually low value…
Prior to the era of global warming alarmism, when it was an unusually cold period, there were signs of it everyplace one looked, and the same was true for unusually warm periods.
Record heat is not conducive to record crop yields, nor is it compatible with rapid ice growth.
We have seen one data set after another being corrupted.
To assume that one of them is immune to the corruption makes no sense whatsoever.
It is just naive, honestly.
Objective information does not comport with the notion of the planet being usually warm at the present time.
If all climate data are really fake, then we all know nothing about the present and past climate. And you would be among the we.
The past two winters in SE Michigan have been the warmest winters with the least snow since the 1970s. I don’t need a Ph.D. climate scientist to tell me that I love the global warming effect on my SE Michigan climate
The government is always wrong conservative cult, in my opinion, is just as stupid as the government is always right leftist cult.
Was 1970 5000 years ago? You aren’t making sense. By the way, 1974 and 1978 had some very large snows in Michigan.
Oh I don’t know, RG. Help me remember a time when the government was ever right? Those who say always are always wrong, am I right?
“If the last 6 months are the hottest in (name an interval), why do local measurements completely and utterly fail to show any such thing?
How can there be zero places with record hot temps for the past six months, but somehow they all add up to a record hot planet?”
Excellent question. We haven’t been anywhere near a record hot temperature around my neck of the woods, summer or winter.
This “hottest year evah! hype is just more of the same alarmist climate change propaganda that’s been going on for years. They use computer games to lie to people and try to scare them. Regional temperatures don’t show “hottest year evah!”.
Mr. McGinley: As you have discovered, Mr. Greene is an enigma. IF you think he’s difficult to disagree with, you should try to agree with him!! (h/t Wm Buckley for that gem). For instance, I agree with him that temps 125k yrs ago is not supported by data. Then he turns and says, “but in last 5000 yrs….” with certainty, when data from 5000 yrs ago until the invention of the thermometer is just as bad as 120k yrs before that, and he sees no contrast! He will agree that temp records even today are not suited for purpose (like 97% of scientists who brush with Crest toothpaste will say) because of infilling etc., then tell you with certainty what the globe was 5000 yrs ago. It’s pointed out by commenters, and it makes no dent.
Above, he’s trying to draw conclusions from the last two winters in MI, and he sees no problem with that.
But, to his credit, he watches TCM, so I try to be kind.
“+0.14 degrees per decade”
OMG, didn’t know that- now that I know that, I’m gonna panic!
Let’s see, by the time I’m dead it could almost reach another half degree. If I’m lucky.
Do temperatures revert to the trend or is the “trend” calculated from the temperatures? I think your understanding of the world is a little naive. Temperatures seem to be a cyclical measure so your trend will start going down at some point.
I was specifically referring to the sharp, temporary peaks and troughs from the ENCO cycles.
Most of the Sun’s heat energy that the Earth receives from the Sun is stored in the oceans.
“Climate Change” means something very specific in the context of these discussions.
Stop being one of the ridiculous obfuscators.
There are roughly estimated past climates
There are wild guesses of the future climate called “climate change” by leftists.
What else is there?
Two-thirds of Republicans under 30 support the so-called “climate change” agenda.
“Climate change” means the weather for the past 30 years, now.
And BTW, there is no parameter of the Koppen System of Climate Classification that refers to daily maximum and minimum temperatures.
Climates are organized by monthly averages of precipitation and temperature with respect to certain cutoff values that relate to survival of various types of vegetation.
Unless you can articulate some coherent system and explanation for believing daily max and min values bear on the climate of a location, you are just making noise and have joined the ranks of the liars.
The global average temperature statistic for a month is a blend of TMAX and TMIN temperatures for each day of the month. The trend of TMAX and TMIN over 30 years or more is an indicator of climate change. Those data show TMIN rising faster than TMAX. Which provides more information than a single average temperature.
You are bloviating about how a regional climate zone is defined.
I am talking about long term global climate change. A different subject.
\The Köppen climate classification: The five main groups are A (tropical), B (arid), C (temperate), D (continental), and E (polar). Each group and subgroup is represented by a letter.
In some parts of the world, climate zones have already shifted considerably since Köppen drew his first climate map more than a century ago. The fastest change has been in the last few decades of global warming. The largest changes have been in cold and polar climates, which have become less cold and sometimes drier.
=====================
Td1 = (Tmax + Tmin)/2 is calculated from the daily maximum temperature (Tmax) and minimum temperature (Tmin), and Td0 is integrated from hourly values during a day, defined as being from midnight to midnight. The standard deviations at stations are averaged to 5° × 5° grids.
GAT is an unphysical statistic, not a real, measured temperature.
Who said GAT was a measurement
It is a statistical average of measurements, infilling, homogenization, pasteurization, time of day adjustments, fried dyed and laid to the side and then “corrected” with a fudge factor to please the government boss.
Perfect for official goobermint use.
Your famous recent “temperature record” only seems to show up in GAT, not in real temperature series.
“Perfect for official goobermint use”
Perfect for dishonest temperature data mannipulators.
Since max and min don’t have any information on the distribution of the temperature throughout the day, it would seem to be difficult for him to come up with anything really meaningful.
Really are you that ignorant of the Koppen Climate ClassificationIndex?
My regional climate has been the same for thousands of years now it is still classified as BSk and has been unchanged since 1964 when I moved there.
LINK
I wrote the 30 or more year trend of daily highs and daily lows is a climate change indicator
You twisted my words and replied with a childish insult
If there is a cycle of longer than 30 years then your metric is pretty meaningless. 30 years is an arbitrary duration pulled from someone’s rear just like 1.5C or 2.0C for the “climate crisis”.
Until those with responsibility for managing honesty and integrity do their jobs in meteorological offices and media outputs almost everywhere we will get the lies and half truths layered upon layer until the moment someone says ‘now this looks really, really serious’ and no one will believe them.
The BBC reports snow in the Scottish Highlands and 12 degrees [sic] elsewhere (it started as 15 degrees elsewhere [sic] although where I live it didn’t ever get above 11C (52F)). I think in the New Year all UK TV license holders should be paid £100 for every lie the BBC tells which will bankrupt Auntie very quickly and give us the possibility of a half decent replacement which doesn’t need household support in any shape or form.
The Guardian meanwhile reports ‘the hottest ever whatever’ as its bleats to its fast shrinking readership and its over reliance on Gates and company without touching upon the fact that it is probably now a record period since it last told the truth. Who really knows?
Because a single snowflake fell on the 25th December somewhere in the U.K., we have had a white Christmas!
“More than 50% of Christmases have been classified as white since 1960.” which is ridiculous, I think I actually saw snow on Christmas Day on no more than a handful of occasions over the same period. Even in 1962/63 long winter it didn’t snow until the 26th.
It used to be that the UK definition (by bookies) was if the air ministry recorded snow falling on it’s roof on Christmas day – a strict definition. Nowadays it’s if any local airfield get’s a couple of flakes it becomes a white Christmas, a far looser interpretation. Like everything else, it’s dumbing things down for the easily pleased.
I always thought it was the Met office roof, but I could be mistaken.
It might have changed twice then! Not sure but might bear checking.
You’re right. First it was the Air Ministry roof, then the Met office roof now it’s a host of locations around the country just have to report falling snow, not settling.
It used to be.
Here in the US a place has to have at least an inch of snow on the ground, for it to be a “white Christmas”.
There are always areas that have snow on December 25th, always places that have never had any, and a lot of places that very occasionally get some snow on or before Christmas.
But seriously, who cares?
On Christman Day my wife complained about the lack of snow for Christmas. We actually had some rain. I mentioned that is there was snow in Christmas Day she’d be complaining about the slippery roads.
We are both old enough to complain about the weather 365 daya a year … and claim the weather was so much better when we were young back in the 1960s.
We had a beautiful white Halloween this year at my house, and I’m sure I don’t live too far from Richard Greene.
I live in Bingham farms Michigan since 1987 and in Southfield, 4 miles south of here, from 1977 to 1987
We demand snow on Christmas Day and warm and dry on Halloween Day so kids can enjoy trick or treating more.
And what about the BIPOC? Didn’t they celebrate Christmas?
I know.
I hear that the deer hunting in the dense forests of Baffin island was really good this year. Oh, that was 125,000 years ago, my mistake. In all seriousness, I was looking today at maps of what the landmasses looked like back then. Scandinavia was an island. The Black and Caspian Seas were connected. James Bay was connected to what would have been the Great Lakes. The fishing during the Eemian must have been epic.
I am pretty sure that 120,000 years of having two miles of ice, has made it very difficult to say such things with much certainty and/or specificity.
Besides, conditions during the last interglacial are only tangentially relevant to the current situation.
The Alarmists have a simple answer to these unhelpful historic facts and data.
When the facts do not support the climate crisis narrative, they simply ignore the facts and present selective often fictional helpful data.
Weather remains the climate alarmists friend.
There is always somewhere on Earth where the weather is providing dramatic copy, pictures of chaos and tragedy. These images are then adopted and presented as ‘evidence’ of climate change.
The variability of weather ensures, the alarmist focused MSM, never run out of scary images to present to us.
I think it is even worse than simply saying extreme weather is evidence of climate change.
They have now succeeded in totally conflating weather with climate, and bad weather with climate change.
Bad weather is declared to be not just proof but the ongoing manifestations of a fake narrative called “the climate crisis”.
The sad and amazing thing is people are convinced it is all true, and also believe that human beings can control the weather, and furthermore can do so by having certain beliefs, and by paying more money for certain things.
They literally think that every instance of bad weather is the fault of people who do not believe the climate liars.
Yes, we are living in a crazy situation. There are a lot of people who are not living in the real world, for one reason or another. And some of those delusional people have power over our lives.
Plus, there are now cellphone cameras everywhere to capture the bad weather that has been occurring forever and present it as something new.
Thi is unusual for a typical Paul Homewood article. He throws the kitchen sink at the 125,000 year claim for which there are not enough accurate data to refute or prove that leftist claim. It’s just climate propaganda, which leftists throw down faster than conservatives can refute the false claims the media repeats like trained parrots.
Climate reconstructions are rough guesses of past local climates. When combined to create a fake global climate estimate, the variations are smoothed
The last half of 2023 is probably warmer than any six month period in the past 5000 years
From 5000 to 9000 years ago was probably slightly warmer than the last half of 2023. That’s why 5000 to 9000 years ago was called a climate optimum
All the proxies prove is the climate is always changing, but we have no idea what an accurate global average temperature was before 1979, nor should we care.
Because scary predictions of CAGW doom are not based on historical temperatures, or lab spectroscopy of CO2, or a thorough understand of the water vapor positive feedback and whatever prevents that feedback from causing runaway global warming.
It’s possible the last six months were the warmest six months in the last 800,000 years, We can’t know. But if we are warmer, that’s great news.
Warm is good
Cold is bad
More CO2 is good
Leftists are vermin
5000-9000 years ago was CONSIDERABLY WARMER than current TEPID temperatures.
Much less Arctic sea ice,
Tree line much further north, and further up mountains
Animals ranging where they currently cannot exist.
Please stop DENYING Climate Change.. it makes you look very very stupid,.
You are reporting LOCAL very rough estimates from proxies, not an accurate real time measurements combined to create an accurate global average temperature
The Holocene Climate Optimum (HCO) average temperature, when roughly estimated by adding all local reconstructions together, may have been only slightly warmer than the past six months
We can’t even be sure the global averaged HCO temperature based on proxies WAS warmer than the past six months, even if some local proxies show that.
“Considerable warmer” is your speculation of very rough local proxy estimates. Not a fact.
“The Holocene Climate Optimum (HCO) average temperature, when roughly estimated by adding all local reconstructions together, may have been only slightly warmer than the past six months”
Now how is that possible when we know that trees were growing in places where glaciers are presently sitting?
The glacers are still there in our time, there are no trees growing underneath them in our time. How can you compare the two periods as being equal in warmth? Do you think a few more tenths of a degree temperature increase will change that situation and melt the glacers and cause the trees to grow there?
If glaciers are there and trees won’t’ grow there, that means when there were no glaciers there and trees did grow, that the climate was warmer then, than it is now. There’s no doubt about it.
What is the value of a proxy giving the global temperature by one tree somewhere, can’t remember, in Russia ?
Isn’t that local too ?
Definitely local, extrapolated to the whole world. This is alarmist climate science.
Arctic sea ice on Christmas Day 2023 has hit a 20+ year high value.
There are zero actual locations with thermometer data showing it is warmer now than in recent years, or even recent decades, let alone that we are at some sort of long term peak.
You have let your mind be infected with the warmista lies.
It was far warmer in the 1930-1945 period that in any recent years.
Alpine glaciers have stopped their cycle of retreat, polar sea ice has ceased to decrease and is now stable to increasing, the US is in a period of very low coverage of abnormal dryness, parts of Asia and Europe are having historic cold, Greenland has added huge amounts of snow/ice for almost all of the past 6 years…the list is long of factual data that runs counter to the warmista lies.
Maybe you have been taken in by the nonstop media reports of fake data such as the ocean around Florida being hotter than ever. Every such lie has been thoroughly debunked. All of it is 100% bullshit.
All weather all over the world is well within the bounds of recent historical precedent.
What is “probably” true is that right now, most of the Earth is having weather patterns and conditions that are about in the midpoint of the ranges established over the past 150 years.
Total BS completely tossing out all global average temperature compilations in the garbage with no replacements except your wild speculation not based on global data
Your claim about Arctic sea ice on Christmas day is a lie.
One day would be data mining
Yesterday’s information is not available.
Daily information is not available
Monthly information is published in the first week of the next month
Your claim is false.
Average Arctic sea ice extent for September 2023 was 4.37 million square kilometers (1.69 million square miles), placing it fifth lowest in the 45-year satellite record. Following the annual minimum of 4.23 million square miles (1.63 million square kilometers),
Summer Arctic sea ice extent is shrinking by 12.2% per decade due to warmer temperatures. Arctic sea ice reaches its minimum extent (the area in which satellite sensors show individual pixels to be at least 15% covered in ice) each September.
http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/files/2023/10/monthly_ice_09_NH_v3.0-1.png
Two-thirds of the Republicans under 30 years of age agree with the “climate change” agenda.
I don’t know why so many downvotes on the above statements. Several of them seem logical to me.
Lol! This is WUWT. Logical comments are generally frowned upon if not openly attacked.
This is a support group for old folks who think they understand stuff that they don’t really know anything about (which includes me); it’s not an actual science site.
Once you understand that you can enjoy it better.
You can’t win the argument at WUWT, so you disparage WUWT.
This is Standard Operating Procedure of those who don’t like the message and can’t refute the message: Attack the messenger.
You can’t win an argument with people who can’t be dissuaded from their beliefs,, no matter what the evidence says to the contrary. That’s right.
“You can’t win an argument with people who can’t be dissuaded from their beliefs”
This is true. Look in the mirror.
Many conservatives do confuse insults with data based debate
All leftists confuse insults with data based debate
It wasn’t an insult, it was an observation.
Every single thing that’s observed and being marked down to ‘global warming’ is a manifestation of Earth losing Energy
i.e. Temperature is NOT Energy. Energy is not Power (flow of energy)
How can they be so dumb/selective as to ignore their very own authority (Stefan’s Law) which states that temperature is related to flow of Energy.
What’s being ‘celebrated’ in the shape of Rising Temperatures is akin to seeing that the radiators in your house are glowing hotter than they ever used to
While utterly & wilfully ignoring that the kerosene tank (outside in your garden) is draining at an ever increasing rate and is not an infinite resource.
No, I am NOT talking about fossil fuel kerosene or CO₂ – I’m alluding to water in the landscape.
i.e. Water that should be tied up in soils, swamps, peatbogs, ponds, lakes, beaver dams, plants and trees.
Water is = Climate Kerosene
It’s uncannily easy to know how much is there, how much was there and how fast it’s disappearing. Equally easy to understand and interpret.
Many of us already have an actual device doing so – usually on the wall of the hallway in our house.
Sometimes called: Barometers
If your barometer (adjusted for altitude) consistently reads higher than 1013mB – you and your neighbours for 100’s miles around, are running really low on klimate kerosene
And when you do, your radiators will go very very cold.
As plenty places around the globe are reporting right now.
*rolls the eyes*
At least she spared us the rebuttal about the Sahara which of course turned into a desert by soil erosion after the sugar mongers burned down all the trees.
Your comment was caused by
G L O B A L
W A R M I N G
Left out the part about how when it was warmer, things were far better, not worse.
Cold is bad, warmth is good.
High CO2 is good, low CO2 is bad.
Colder is stormier, warm is more moderate and tranquil.
Literally every single part of the warmista religion is the exact opposite of what is true.
They have built a worldview and a cult of pure lies and untruth.
“They (leftists) have built a worldview and a cult of pure lies and untruth.”
Why should leftists treat climate different than every other subject? One has to lie, cheat and steal elections to promote leftism. That comes with the territory.
You have the best summary of the climate religion in this thread.
We live in what may be the best climate for humans, animals and plants for the past 5000 years and leftists will not allow people to be happy about that.
The Northern Hemisphere has had better weather and fewer extreme dangerous weather events since the 1950s. That is also a state secret.
Leftists arer pathological liars with political power as their only goal. That secret is out.
From the home page of my climate and energy blog … maybe the next stop after this top climate website:
The Honest Climate Science and Energy Blog
The climate emergency is fiction.
Nut Zero is a waste of money.
Wild guess climate predictions are not science.
More CO2 and warming are both good news.
Fascism will not stop climate change.
Climate change will not kill your dog.
Editor: Richard Greene (BS, MBA)
The Honest Climate Science and Energy Blog
The rich stand to make trillions from “climate change” spending which Bloomberg estimated to be $200 trillion to stop warming by 2050.
The rich own the media which has been spewing out the bad “climate change” stories and has brainwashed most of Europe and the US.
The UN and their IPCC have been putting out scary “climate change” reports every week.
Now it’s the Amazons turn https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-67751685
Not to forget that I wrote a chapter about the evidence that the Holocene Climate Optimum was warmer than the present for thousands of years in the Clintel report “The Frozen Climate Views of the IPCC,” and a small section in my latest book “Solving the Climate Puzzle.”
https://www.amazon.com/Solving-Climate-Puzzle-Suns-Surprising-ebook/dp/B0CM5982VX/
Here it is:
“Converting proxy data into temperature changes involves many uncertainties and unproven assumptions.”
100+
I love when someone posts an article disguised as a comment that is better than the original article.
One thought on potential inaccuracies of climate proxies in the Arctic or Antarctica:
The past 50 years the temperature trends in the Arctic, and Antarctica were very different than the global average temperature trend, with faster warming of the Arctic and no warming of Antarctica
It seems to me that local proxies in or near the Arctic Circle or in Antarctica could lead to inaccurate estimates of the past global average temperature
Climate proxies in general tell us climate always vary, and along with anecdotes from past centuries, tell us that we should be very happy about the current climate. And that the future climate will be warmer, unless it is colder.
“Blah, blah, blah.” To quote the Doom Pixie.
Unwarranted assumptions based on climate enthusiasts unfounded propaganda. What’s the matter? Dog ate your brain?
I’m sending a copy of your burst of verbal flatulence comment to yo’ mama, and asking her where she went wrong
“Undoubtedly, the massive amount of CO2 released into the atmosphere by human activities is contributing to this warming.”
There’s no evidence for that. Just saying it is so doesn’t make it so. There were other similar periods of warming in the past that were equal to the current warming, and the previous periods were not burdened with excess CO2, so something other than CO2 caused those warmings and until proven otherwise, we should assume that same “something” caused the current warming.
What’s the current rate of warming? UAH has it at 0.14C.
Bearing in mind that the “massive” amount of human-caused emissions raised the concentration of CO2 from a minuscule 0.028% to a whopping 0.043%, it’s amazing that we haven’t all suffocated.
In other words it went from 0.0 to still 0.0, but yeah UNDOUBTEDLY contributing to warming. Nothing else could be affecting things.
The oceans only cover 71% of the earth’s surface. It would be absurd to think that ocean dynamics could be more relevant than fossil fuel emissions.
“Anybody who claims that this year is the hottest for 125,000 years is fraudulent.”
I’m rather sure we won’t see that quoted in the MSM.
That first chart of Greenland Ice Cores, should be used as a logo, to counteract, the fiddle[hockey]stick.
First impression, at giving it a glance from a layman’s point of view, is we’re heading steadily towards another ice age.
Yes, it looks chilly! We are heading in the wrong direction: Colder.
My comment refers to the author’s item quoted 1)Greenland.
The same plot has been used by Jo Nova <a
href=”https://joannenova.com.au/2023/10/hottest-ever-september-just-more-headlin
target=_blank>here</a> and in that post appears a reference to “David Lippi”
(unknown to me) while, as here, reference to dataset is a paper by R.B.
Alley.
1) The paper by Alley (2000) neither includes a plot similar to 1)Greenland
nor makes available a dataset I can derive the 1)Greenland plot from. Alley
refers to GISP2 ice core.
2)Googling for David Lippi, I’ve found the “belivers” site rescuetheworld.net
(!, the plot can be found srolling down at
https://rescuetheworld.net/?page_id=1364) where the 1)Greenland plot is quoted
as wrong because a non-linear horizontal scale has been used; They produce a
“correct” plot without any decline in temperature (this new plot is also wrong
in my opinion).
3) Given the references to GISP2, I downloades GISP2 d18O (and also the
antarctic Taylor Dome’s d18O) series and found nothing similar to
1)Greenland.
My plots (labels in English, and text in Italian) can be found at
https://www.zafzaf.it/clima/pp30.html (all datasets I used are available at
the link in the bottom line of the post -sito di supporto or support site).
Here I use the label Ka=kyr BP and a reversed horizontal scale with respect
1)Greenland.
At this point, I cannot confirm the so-called Alley’s plot as long as cannot
find the dataset the plot has been generated from; so, I ask if, here at
WUWT, someone knows the dataset and can provide a link to it.
It is. Regularly. Unfortunately they never admit that the most recent data in that chart ends in the 1850s. (Yes, the 1850s, not even the 1950s.)
So it’s mis-labelled and used to mis-direct and disinform rather than inform.
The management at this site know this, because it has been pointed out to them for over a decade now.
They still regularly allow it to be published without clarification or correction.
And then they complain about integrity in science….
From the article: “Anybody who claims that this year is the hottest for 125,000 years is fraudulent.”
This year is not even the hottest in living memory.
You mean you? You personally can remember hotter years (or at least you think you can) where you happened to be at a particular place and time; so therefore everywhere the world must have been hooter in the past too?
I don’t think that’s how it works.
I mean there are people who are alive today who lived through the hot 1930’s. You’re disputing this?
I’ve shown charts from all over the world that do show it was just as warm in the Early Twentieth Century as it is today. No doubt, you have seen them. They don’t fit your alarmist climate change worldview, so you reject them out of hand. That doesn’t change the fact that they exist and that they show it was just as warm in the recent past, within the memory of people still alive.
There are people all over the world who were alive during the Early Twentieth Century, when it was just as warm as it is today. Get it? You don’t have to go back 5,000 years to find a little warmth.
That was in the US only. The 1930s weren’t hot, globally. Are you disputing that?
Which brings us back to local personal experience trumping global scientific measurements.
“That was in the US only. The 1930s weren’t hot, globally. Are you disputing that?”
Yes, I do dispute that.
Is China part of the United States? No, China is on the opposite side of the world from the United States. Take a look at China’s Tmax chart. It shows China was just as warm as the United States in the Early Twentieth Century.
Is Australia part of the United States? No, Australia is on the opposite side of the world from the United States and in a different hemisphere. Take a look at Australias Tmax chart. It shows Australia was just as warm as the United States in the Early Twentieth Century,
Can you say: Global warming?
It was just as warm in the Early Twentieth Century as it is today, around the globe, according to the written, historic temperature records. Just because every square inch of the Earth doesn’t have a temperature measurement, doesn’t change the facts that where there are measurements, they all show it was just as warm in Living Memory as it is today.
Dispute that.
I have a question about the picture at the top of this page/article.
AI generates this picture. That’s my understanding from recent comments here.
So, in getting this picture, what do you do, do you say, “AI, draw me a picture of a woman screaming with her hair on fire”? Is that how it works?
Liar liar hair on fire?
Hottest in “125,000 years” is obviously an estimate issued for propaganda purposes. The precise figure is “Eleventeen bazillion jillion years.”
I hope that clears it up.
tom,
Eleventeen jillion bazillion years is more correct, mathematically.
An awful lot of sparring going on today. Happy Boxing Day!
You have provided a much-needed correction. There are a lot of quacks infesting this doomsday business. Therefore, it’s imperative to be as precise as possible. Thanks for your help. I need all the help I can get.
Don J. Easterbrook Professor of Geology, Western Washington Univ, Bellingham, WA has also documented wood found at the base of retreating glaciers on Mt. Baker in Washington State that carbon date to the early Little Ice Age. His books also record the expansion of those glaciers in the mid 20th century cooling period that NOAA/NASA has been homogenizing out of existence.
There was a High Altitude Archology study done in the Rockies with a conference done
in Cody WY.
https://billingsgazette.com/lifestyles/recreation/archaeologists-uncovering-ancient-peoples-widespread-use-of-mountains/article_b589afe6-194b-58d7-a1b1-7442b8c10220.html
“.The scientists are also finding that the high country wasn’t the same as we now see it. Old whitebark pine stumps have been dated to 1,100 to 2,100 years ago in places that are now 500 feet above where trees are growing now, Guenther said.
“These were happy, well-fed whitebark pine,” he said.”
Yes, I think tree line measurements are pretty definitive evidence that it was a lot warmer in the past and the warming was global.
There’s only one reason trees would grow at a higher elevation than they grow now, and that is it had to have been much warmer for those trees to grow higher up the mountainsides.
Just that 1,100 to 2,100 year old trees are still there is only because
they were covered in snow for all this time, then only recently when
the snow melted back they were exposed. Then combine that with
the fact that large herds bison were at 10,500+ ft in elevation during that time
strongly suggests that there was a major climate impact happening on the prairie. Then combine that with other paleo findings such as sediment samples in
Cahokia and other locations and a climate picture of that era comes out.
It was obviously much hotter than the present. Bottom line is that it is
impossible to say what impacts human activities are having on the climate if any,
until the parameters of natural variation have been established. And for
some reason the Green Blob doesn’t even admit there is any natural variation
of any kind.
This is the same Don Easterbrook who was confidently predicting imminent global cooling here at WUWT about 15-years or so ago, right? Just before temperatures spiked to their warmest on record and continue to rise. How seriously should we take this guy?
From his silly paper:
Any guesses how that went?
With the measured rise of CO2 since 2000, the IPCC predicted 0.6 degrees per decade through 2050, or 1.2 deg C warming from 2000 to 2020. The observed rise was 0.3 deg C, making Easterbrook’s prediction closer to reality than the IPCC so far.
Predicting changes in the weather and studying trees are two different things.
Does a missed temperature prediction negate his study of tree lines?
Easterbrook isn’t the only one who thinks cooling is in the offing, although the timing is not known. Going by recent history, the temperatures warm for a few decades and then they cool for a few decades, and the pattern repeats, all within a range of about 2.0C from hottest to coldest. At least, this is the case with the United States.
If history repeats, then a cooling period is in our future.
Of course, you think CO2 trumps all this. We shall see.
No, but it’s indicative of a mindset. He is certainly worthy of scepticism.
«First, the x-axis is mislabelled. In fact, it should say “Years before 1950”, rather than “Years before present (2000 AD)”.The GISP2 ice core only extends up to 1855 – 95 years before 1950. This means that none of the modern observational temperature period overlaps with the proxy reconstruction.» Carbon Brief
Which means that currently we are in between the MWP en Roman temperature maximum.
Unfortunately most people do not think or do their own research and will just believe this bulletin of Official Nonsense.
That “We Live In Cold Times” pic looks like one of my lost Wisdom Teeth.
Ah, the annual Homewood Christmas Gish-Gallop of nonsense, half-truths, misdirection and flat-out falsehoods. All grist to the mill here.
Just take point 1, for instance. The chart of the GISP2 data is, as usual, misleadingly labelled. It says it shows the GISP2 site data for the past 10,000 years before present, where ‘present’ is stated to be the year 2000. This is a flat-out deception. It’s a lie.
In the GISP2 data, and by convention, the year defined as ‘present’ is 1950; not 2000. So that immediately makes the ‘present’ reference period 50 years out of date; or 74 years before our current year.. But wait, there’s more…
The most recent data point is marked as 95 years before ‘present’, where present is 1950, not 2000, remember. So the latest point on that chart shows GISP2 temperatures in the mid-1850s. It completely misses out on all the warming recorded in that region and others in the current period of warming. The most recent datum point in that chart occurred ~175 years ago!
This has been repeated so many times and over so many years here at WUWT that I can only imagine the site’s operators must be aware that it is a blatant misrepresentation; yet they continue to permit the same deception to take place year after year.
Several comments above demand integrity in science. It might be a good idea for the same commenters to require this site to start demonstrating some too.
The graph may be mislabeled, but I don’t see how that changes anything since we have written temperature records that cover the period you are complaining about. We don’t need proxies after 1850, we have the written record.
Much ado about nothing.
If by “the written record” you mean instrumental temperature observations at the site where the GISP2 ice-core data were taken then yes, let’s see them!
They will be a lot higher than those in the 1850s.
Mr. Nail: This site demonstrates integrity to all but the willfully blind. Why don’t you set out a tin cup and sell apples?
Well, if you call ‘integrity’ the wilful misrepresentation of scientific data sets such as GISP2 then this site has ‘integrity’ in spades. You’re welcome to that sort of ‘integrity’.