Global warming discussion IV

[Haig]

The Little Ice Age consisted of ~0.5 deg cooling over 300 years. It’s warmed to 1 deg above pre LIA levels in the last 100 years when the earth should be in a long term cooling trend due to orbital cycles.

Can you cite a source for your facts ?

Little Ice Age was global: Implications for current global warming

The data show that the most extreme cold phases of the Little Ice Age -- in the mid-15th and then again in the early 18th centuries -- were synchronous in Europe and South America. There is one stark difference: while in continental north-west Europe, bogs became wetter, in Tierra del Fuego, the bog became drier -- in both cases probably a result of a dramatic equator-ward shift of moisture-bearing winds.

These extreme times coincide with periods when it is known that the sun was unusually quiet. In the late 17th to mid-18th centuries it had very few sunspots -- fewer even than during the run of recent cold winters in Europe, which other UK scientists have linked to a relatively quiet sun.

 

[Belz...]

What you and I regard as a climate expert will differ, I'm sure.

I'll say. I regard an expert as someone who has relevant knowledge and experience in a field, and who has the support of his peers on his scientific papers and conclusions. You seem to regard an expert as someone who agrees with your prefered conclusion.

Are the trends and the temperature differences between 2014 and 2015 statistically significant?

Given your track record of cherry-picking data, you are in no position to ask this question.

Or just a convenience for COP21 in Paris ?

Are you now saying that the data is outright fabricated? That's quite an accusation, if so.

 

[lomiller]

Can you cite a source for your facts ?

10 different climate reconstructions graphed.

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:2000_Year_Temperature_Comparison.png

Most have less than 0.5 Deg C temperature drop between 1400 and 1700.

Little Ice Age was global: Implications for current global warming

You link contains no discussion of global temperature. The global effects mentioned are wetter/dryer.

 

[macdoc]

Seems to me LIA has been settled as a combination of volcano impact but triggered by a bolide hit that kicked off the cooling.

 

[lomiller]

Seems to me LIA has been settled as a combination of volcano impact but triggered by a bolide hit that kicked off the cooling.

There likely wasn’t a single cause. In addition to reduced TSI and increased volcanic activity there was also considerable reforestation in Europe and the Americas which would have reduced atmospheric CO2, a long term cooling trend from orbital cycles, and recovery a return to more normal conditions following the Medieval Climate Anomaly. (Formerly called the Medieval Warm Period)

 

[Reality Check]

Haig: Links to Christopher Monckton at WUWT lying about climate again

You're missing the point...

The point is you parroting yet again the ignorant Christopher Monckton of Brenchley lying abut climate, Haig:
Haig's 32 parroted ignorance and lies from climate change deniers dating from 11 May 2015 with the list continuing to grow!

1. 27 November 2015 Haig: Your question about Salby's denial of climate science has been answered.
2. 30 November 2015 Haig: Repeats a delusion that a Maunder Minimum will cause a Little Ice Age!
3. 30 November 2015 Haig: It is a lie that Abdussamatov's "forecast" matches temperature data from 2008 to 2015.
4. 3 December 2015 Haig: Repeats the delusion that Watts Up With That is a reliable source about climate even after he has been shown Monckton's lies, etc. on WUWT!
5. 3 December 2015 Haig: Mindlessly links to a lying, ignorant paranoid "Massive Carbon Scheme Fraud" rant!
6. 3 December 2015 Haig: Repeats a lying image about no global warming for 18 years and 9 months again.
7. 8 December 2015 Haig: Repeats a lying image about no global warming for 18 years and 9 months again.

So what new lies are mindlessly parroted from Christopher Monckton of Brenchley and WUWT?
We have Monckton starting with an insane rant about druids followed by that lying image.
Monckton lies abut the pause yet again - there has been no pause in global warming.
Monckton cites the deluded Bob Tisdale's articles.
Monkton lies about IPCC predications in a similar manner to IPCC overestimate temperature rise

Lord Monckton has taken a single equation from the IPCC, used it in an inappropriate manner, and then attributed his results to the IPCC. This is as if I borrowed your car, drove into a tree, and then blamed you. He uses a method that is clearly intended to examine the long-term response of temperature to changes in carbon dioxide, and which is never used by the IPCC (nor should it be) to make predictions about current temperature trends. A slight change in Lord Monckton’s methodology as of July 2010 still does not make his method or attribution remotely appropriate.

8 December 2015 Haig: Links to Christopher Monckton of Brenchley at WUWT lying about climate again.

 

[beelzebub]

Ah Haig....
You said

"The track record of some climate "experts" are dire such as Dr. James Hansen that turn out to be not only wrong but extreme and intended to provoke a reaction rather than be factual!"

But the very article you link to says...

"If Hansen is right—and he has been right, sooner, about the big issues in climate science longer than anyone—the implications are vast and profound."

And...

"Hansen’s track record commands respect. From the time the soft-spoken Iowan told the U.S. Senate in 1988 that man-made global warming was no longer a theory but had in fact begun and threatened unparalleled disaster, he has consistently been ahead of the scientific curve."

...So, even your own source denies your claim - Hansen has not only not been wrong, he has 'consistently been ahead of the scientific curve'!

You couldn't shoot yourself in the foot more if you used a 15" Naval gun!

 

[Reality Check]

Thanks for your input guys but you don't seem to know when to give up

We will not give up on knowing when someone is parroting climate change deniers rather than thinking rationally about climate science, Haig !
Haig's 40 posts of parroted ignorance and lies from climate change deniers dating from 11 May 2015 with the list continuing to grow!

1. 8 December 2015 Haig: The delusion that a news report on a denier video is climate science.
2. 8 December 2015 Haig: Cities yet another deluded climate change denier - Marc Morano !
   Look at what his web site has quoted from an interview:
   • Lies about the UN climate conferences.
     The conferences are a platform to establish policy given the best evidence from climate science. That evidence is that we are on a track to easily produce a 2 degree increase in temperature with high costs in lives and money.
   • The idiocy that cherry picked news reports from the 1970's are evidence of climate science predictions of an ice age.
   • Lies abut Obama’s speech from the 2014 UN summit in New York. Here is the transcript - no mention of ISIS!
     Academics that think that global warming contributed to the creation of ISIS. The drought of 2006 through 2010 caused unrest in Syria that ISIS took advantage of. Global Warming Helped Create ISIS
3. 8 December 2015 Haig: A lie about a non-existent pause needing to be explained.
4. 8 December 2015 Haig: Repeats a lying image about no global warming for 18 years and 9 months again.

 

[Reality Check]

Well guys,...

Well, Haig, repeating a lie about a pause in global warming existing when the evidence that global warming has accelerated does not make the evidence go away
8 December 2015 Haig: Global warming has accelerated so a pause in global warming is a lie.
What has global warming done since 1998?

The planet has continued to accumulate heat since 1998 - global warming is still happening. Nevertheless, surface temperatures show much internal variability due to heat exchange between the ocean and atmosphere. 1998 was an unusually hot year due to a strong El Nino.

It is global surface temperatures (not global warming) that had a lesser increase (not a lie about a pause, Haig) in the last couple of decades than previous decades.

 

[Reality Check]

Don't take any statements at face value from ANY source - check the facts as much as you can and THEN make your own mind up is just basic, with something that is important to you.

A pity that you do not follow your own advice, Haig:
Haig's 40 posts of parroted ignorance and lies from climate change deniers dating from 11 May 2015 with the list continuing to grow!
No checking of the facts there, Haig!
No making up your own mind by looking at credible climate science!

 

[Reality Check]

Haig: It is a lie that James Hansen has a "dire" track record

The track record of some climate "experts" are dire such as Dr. James Hansen that turn out to be not only wrong but extreme and intended to provoke a reaction rather than be factual!

Climate Seer James Hansen Issues His Direst Forecast Yet has nothing about his track record being "dire", Haig, which makes your statement about checking facts look like a lie because you did not even check the contents of what you cited !

Dr. James Hansen has a good track record of publishing correct papers on climate science, especially modelling.
8 December 2015 Haig: It is a lie that James Hansen has a "dire" track record.

 

[Reality Check]

Haig: Swallows paranoiac lies about the IPCC manipulating evidence

Where have the skeptics been wrong? They are saying the climate change of the last century and the Pause of this century are all within the natural variability of our climate.

These unnamed climate "skeptics" are lying to you, Haig, and you are swallowing these lies whole without checking the facts. That is why they are wrong.

You are even swallowing paranoiac lies about the IPCC manipulating evidence from Climate Depot. This is impossible because the evidence is in the scientific literature, not the IPCC reports which just cite the scientific literature.
8 December 2015 Haig: Swallows paranoiac lies about the IPCC manipulating evidence without checking the facts!
A Marc Morano rant is not climate science.
A Marc Morano Gish Gallop is not climate science,
Marc Morano stupidly citing other climate change deniers in news reports such as David Rose is not climate science.
Marc Morano really stupidly cites Monckton who has a track record about lying about climate science

For a comprehensive rebuttal of many of Christopher Monckton's arguments, check out this presentation by Professor John Abraham. Abraham has compiled many examples where Monckton misrepresents the very scientists whose work he cites. Check out this PDF of Monckton quotes versus the scientists who in their own words explain how Monckton misrepresents their research.

 

[Haig]

10 different climate reconstructions graphed.

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:2000_Year_Temperature_Comparison.png

Most have less than 0.5 Deg C temperature drop between 1400 and 1700.

Thanks for that link.

I note that the graphs are "reconstructions and modeling of temperature" and show the Medieval Warm Period as being not as warm as the Modern Warm Period now. The written records of the times show that to be highly unlikely and untrue with grapes being grown in Scotland and crops being grown in Greenland as just two examples.

The future "reconstructions and modeling of temperature" by the IPCC and others hasn't matched the reality as time catches up on the predictions.

The written records of the LIA times show that the climate was much more harsh than a mere 0.5 Deg C temperature drop would suggest. We will shortly have the start of a New Little Ice Age to judge for ourselves after the Max of Solar Cycle 25.

Ah Haig....
You said

"The track record of some climate "experts" are dire such as Dr. James Hansen that turn out to be not only wrong but extreme and intended to provoke a reaction rather than be factual!"

But the very article you link to says...

"If Hansen is right—and he has been right, sooner, about the big issues in climate science longer than anyone—the implications are vast and profound."

And...

"Hansen’s track record commands respect. From the time the soft-spoken Iowan told the U.S. Senate in 1988 that man-made global warming was no longer a theory but had in fact begun and threatened unparalleled disaster, he has consistently been ahead of the scientific curve."

...So, even your own source denies your claim - Hansen has not only not been wrong, he has 'consistently been ahead of the scientific curve'!

You couldn't shoot yourself in the foot more if you used a 15" Naval gun!

Welcome to the thread You've misunderstood my point in the post Here

The clue is in the TITLE and FIRST line of the article of the source I used

Climate Seer James Hansen Issues His Direst Forecast Yet
James Hansen’s new study explodes conventional goals of climate diplomacy and warns of 10 feet of sea level rise before 2100. The good news is, we can fix it.

As a Climate Seer, he is the High Priest of the religion of AGW and an archetype Alarmist as the SOURCE shows ..... but his track record is DIRE ....

Of course he is an "expert" for Warmists and very clearly not for the Skeptics

NASA’s James Hansen gets dissed by global warming establishment! Warmists Say Sea Level Rise study based on ‘flimsy evidence’ & ‘rife with speculation’


Failed Predictions of the Alarmists


A little known 20 40 year old climate change prediction by Dr. James Hansen – that failed will likely fail badly


Get it NOW?

You can take your foot out of your own mouth

 

[Trakar]

Thanks for that link.

I note that the graphs are "reconstructions and modeling of temperature" and show the Medieval Warm Period as being not as warm as the Modern Warm Period now. The written records of the times show that to be highly unlikely and untrue with grapes being grown in Scotland and crops being grown in Greenland as just two examples...

You do realize that there are vineyards in Scotland right now, and Greenland AG grows potatoes, cauliflower, thyme, tomatoes, green peppers, carrots as well as a variety of other vegetables and cereal crops and hay currently,...don't you?

You can take your foot out of your own mouth

What did you say? it sounds like you have something in your mouth.

 

[beelzebub]

Umm... Haig,
You are still shooting yourself in the foot by linking to fringe nut-job sites rather than to the scientific (reality-based) sources.

Perhaps their simplistic, know-nothing, assertions are easier to understand than the complexities of actual research - or maybe it's just that the nuts say what YOU want to be true and the experienced, knowledgeable, educated scientists are saying things you don't happen to like.

Well, I don't like gravity - it hurts me when I fall! - but I would be daft if I then went around denying gravity, and linking to fellow gravity-denier nut-job sites!

Climate Denial? Same thing

 

[Haig]

You do realize that there are vineyards in Scotland right now, and Greenland AG grows potatoes, cauliflower, thyme, tomatoes, green peppers, carrots as well as a variety of other vegetables and cereal crops and hay currently,...don't you?

The thing is Trakar ... back in the MWP they were out in the open, successful and numerous that is NOT the case now even in this climate that is supposed to be so much warmer

Scotland's Wineries

Grapes need one hundred days to ripen and in that time they need a lot of sun and heat. Sun and heat are not Scotland's strongest points.

Greenland is Green Again

Greenland has been on the cusp of agriculture since the 16th century. Before this, agriculture was practiced by Viking settlers. Then came the “Little Ice Age” of the 16th century, wiping out Norse settlers and dooming agriculture in the region. But temperatures have been rising steadily since the 80s, and farming may soon be possible.

What did you say? it sounds like you have something in your mouth.

Is that you talking to yourself or chewing leather ?

Umm... Haig,
You are still shooting yourself in the foot by linking to fringe nut-job sites rather than to the scientific (reality-based) sources.

Gezz don't you know Hansen predictions ? Check them out from your own sources, once you get that foot injury seen too

source

“Hansen predicted that global temperatures should be nearly 2 degrees higher in 20 years, ‘which is about the warmest the earth has been in the last 100,000 years.’” AP Overheating of Earth Poses Survival Threat, “ The Press-Courier,(Milwaukee) June 11, 1986

source

“Hansen said the average U.S. temperature has risen from 1 to 2 degrees since 1958 and is predicted to increase an additional 3 or 4 degrees sometime between 2010 and 2020.” AP Overheating of Earth Poses Survival Threat, “ The Press-Courier (Milwaukee), June 11, 1986

Lots more failed Dire predictions from Hansen ... if you care to look .... source in (my bold) ...

“Within 15 years,” said Goddard Space Flight Honcho James Hansen, “global temperatures will rise to a level which hasn’t existed on earth for 100,000 years”. Sandy Grady, “The Heat is On,” -- The News and Courier, June 17th 1986


And he implied that seas would rise 85 feet in the next 5 years:

“The last time the world was three degrees warmer than today – which is what we expect later this century – sea levels were 25m higher. So that is what we can look forward to if we don’t act soon. None of the current climate and ice models predict this. But I prefer the evidence from the Earth’s history and my own eyes. I think sea-level rise is going to be the big issue soon, more even than warming itself.” --Jim Hansen, “Climate change: On the edge” The Independent, 17th February, 2006

“A major report from the World Meteorological Organization and the United Nations Environment Program earlier this month concluded that without a major effort to fight warming, global temperatures could increase by 0.54 degrees Fahrenheit per decade until the middle of the next century, and sea levels could rise by a foot.” Guy Darst, “Nasa Scientist Says Future Droughts Likely,” The Lewiston daily Sun, June 24, 1988, p. 6

Perhaps their simplistic, know-nothing, assertions are easier to understand than the complexities of actual research - or maybe it's just that the nuts say what YOU want to be true and the experienced, knowledgeable, educated scientists are saying things you don't happen to like.

Prehaps you need to get out more if you think sites like WUWT can be dismissed so easily

Well, I don't like gravity - it hurts me when I fall! - but I would be daft if I then went around denying gravity, and linking to fellow gravity-denier nut-job sites!

Climate Denial? Same thing

Look out you're falling and Who's saying the climate isn't changing? Not me or any skeptics I've read.

Climate change is natural and it's not our fault we just have to adapt as they did in the MWP and the LIA times

 

[macdoc]

Why does Exxon acknowledge AGW and you blather on oblivious to reality. They knew in the 70s - you haven't a clue going on 40 years later.

The climate does change naturally at times ...this is not one of those times. Take your denier crap to the conspiracy forum where it belongs.

 

[lomiller]

I note that the graphs are "reconstructions and modeling of temperature" and show the Medieval Warm Period as being not as warm as the Modern Warm Period now.

No they don’t. They show the MCA as 0.5 – 1 deg C cooler than the last decade.

The written records of the LIA times show that the climate was much more harsh than a mere 0.5 Deg C temperature drop would suggest.

What? How can you tell from a “written description” without actual temperature data, that temperatures changes were more extreme? What seems to be going on is that you are assuming 0.5 deg C isn’t very much because it’s smaller and slower than current changes when in fact it’s quite large.

 

[lomiller]

Greenland AG grows potatoes, cauliflower, thyme, tomatoes, green peppers, carrots as well as a variety of other vegetables and cereal crops and hay currently,...don't you?

Furthermore, the populated area of Greenland is a lot farther north now. Greenland’s population is centered around mining areas not the areas most suitable for agriculture as it would have been 600 years ago.

 

[Haig]

Claim: positive CO2 feedback from plants due to “warm nights” will flood atmosphere with carbon

A study led by Princeton University researchers suggests that hotter nights may wield more influence than previously thought over the planet’s atmosphere as global temperatures rise — and could eventually lead to more carbon flooding the atmosphere. The researchers determined that warm nighttime temperatures, specifically in the tropics, lead plants to release more carbon through a process known as respiration. Average nighttime temperatures in tropical regions such as Manaus, Brazil, (above) have risen by 0.6 degrees Celsius since 1959. Further temperature increases risk turning Earth’s land-based carbon-storage capacity, or sink, into a carbon source.