tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post3883802690410112361..comments2024-03-25T05:30:23.847+11:00Comments on HotWhopper: Tim Ball recycling Medieval Warming conspiracies at WUWTSouhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08818999735123752034noreply@blogger.comBlogger18125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-41657166702675231502015-03-24T09:34:55.664+11:002015-03-24T09:34:55.664+11:00Yes, of course it is John - the Denialosphere live...Yes, of course it is John - the Denialosphere lives, well, elsewhere and once the myth takes root, no amount of logic, evidence or facts will dislodge it.Tonebnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-78660955934124042402015-03-24T06:16:38.345+11:002015-03-24T06:16:38.345+11:00IPCC(1990) was done in a hurry, and anyone who has...IPCC(1990) was done in a hurry, and anyone who hasn't read the relevant pages might look at this <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/FAR.pages_.pdf" rel="nofollow">4-page annotated version.</a><br />They knew they didn't know much, and said so. Real reconstructions got going.John Masheynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-3822725789784530622015-03-24T06:09:59.973+11:002015-03-24T06:09:59.973+11:00Read MedievalDeception 2015: Inhofe Drags Senate B...Read <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2015/01/26/medievaldeception-2015-inhofe-drags-senate-dark-ages" rel="nofollow">MedievalDeception 2015: Inhofe Drags Senate Back To Dark Ages.</a><br /><br />I explain where the curve came from, with links to the relevant sources.<br />900AD-1680AD was estimated from rainfall and plant records, i.e., everything before the Manley C.E.T. record.<br />All this is well-known.John Masheynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-2867020454062872942015-03-24T04:12:57.464+11:002015-03-24T04:12:57.464+11:00Lars Karlsson
Since there's no evidence for a...Lars Karlsson<br /><br />Since there's no evidence for a strong forcing increase (2) during the period ~900 - 1200CE and (3) requires that the climate system be sensitive to radiative perturbation anyway, all arrows point to (1). Unless one goes with the actual evidence :-)<br /><br />In that case, there appears not to have been a global, synchronous, hot MWP after all. Mystifyingly, our contrarian chums strenuously argue the contrary. <br /><br />Confused they is. BBDhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10687930416706386215noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-46300749754587528422015-03-24T01:32:07.834+11:002015-03-24T01:32:07.834+11:00A hot MWP could imply three things:
(1) Stronger f...A hot MWP could imply three things:<br />(1) Stronger feedbacks, which means a higher climate sensitivity.<br />(2) Stronger external forcings, which could be working either way today (increase or reduce the warming).<br />(3) Stronger internal variability, e.g. atmosphere-ocean exchange, which also could be working either way today (increase or reduce the warming).<br /><br />Of course, it could also have been a combination of 1, 2 and/or 3.<br /><br />As a whole, the risks would be larger than with a less warm MWP.Lars Karlssonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06158469980966810882noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-7264647811046279982015-03-23T23:12:35.581+11:002015-03-23T23:12:35.581+11:00Yes I came across dbstealey a few years ago when I...Yes I came across dbstealey a few years ago when I ran rings around him re Meteorology (I'm retired from the UKMO). He did that then, and it's the typical response from the like. I shouldn't for all the good it does but cant resist to prick their bubble.Tonebnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-58037157125827645342015-03-23T22:28:22.221+11:002015-03-23T22:28:22.221+11:00The whole situation is rather amusing, the people ...The whole situation is rather amusing, the people putting together the IPCC report back in 1990 would not have been able to foretell that in 2015 people would be splitting hairs over the quantitative values - if so then they might have provided a table of their data.<br /><br />I am happy to go with the interpretation that the charts were more for illustration of the text than anything else and they are indeed schematics only.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11552461190113661645noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-82145388516535498362015-03-23T22:16:03.787+11:002015-03-23T22:16:03.787+11:00I am beginning to wonder if ANY of the so-called 7...I am beginning to wonder if ANY of the so-called 7.1 charts (a, b, c) from the IPCC report are truly global.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11552461190113661645noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-15390700063688222382015-03-23T21:57:49.317+11:002015-03-23T21:57:49.317+11:00Jones et al 2009 Appendix A presents some detectiv...<a href="http://shadow.eas.gatech.edu/~kcobb/jones09.pdf" rel="nofollow">Jones et al 2009</a> Appendix A presents some detective work concerning the FAR figure.<br /><br /><i>"In summary, we show that the curve used by IPCC (1990) was<br />locally representative (nominally of Central England) and not<br />global, and was referred to at the time with the word ‘schematic’."</i><br />Lars Karlssonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06158469980966810882noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-6496787589134842972015-03-23T19:49:27.256+11:002015-03-23T19:49:27.256+11:00The fact that GISP2 ends in 1855 and only shows a ...The fact that GISP2 ends in 1855 and only shows a reconstruction of Central Greenland temps has been pointed out on WUWT many times. But they continue to use it, plus the "adjusted" version where someone has tacked some global temps onto the end of it.<br /><br />If you are referring to account dbstealey, well he will never admit to his points being wrong, he will just change the subject when cornered, toss out some insults, go off on a rant etc. But it appears to be his job on that site to do just that.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11552461190113661645noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-83282406475310146012015-03-23T19:01:59.422+11:002015-03-23T19:01:59.422+11:00I have. Not that it'll do any good, and will p...I have. Not that it'll do any good, and will probably attract vitriol. I've also had a go at stealey with his GISP2 ice core data that ends in 1855 before modern warming and the denialosphere's "cooling" Holocene.Tonebnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-76445917560224203142015-03-23T17:11:26.480+11:002015-03-23T17:11:26.480+11:00A lot has been said about the Lamb schematic in th...A lot has been said about the Lamb schematic in the IPCC report (potholer54 has an excellent video on youtube). It has been used by many including Lord Monckton for anti-global warming propaganda, to claim the MWP and LIA were deliberately covered up.<br /><br />The irony is the one that appears in the IPCC report is a poor chart, it is a schematic and poorly-labelled. I am sure that if it was used instead to support some part of AGW, we would never hear the end of how bad it is from the deniers.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11552461190113661645noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-90805220631000480962015-03-23T16:48:35.239+11:002015-03-23T16:48:35.239+11:00I wish Tim Ball (or someone) would point to the da...I wish Tim Ball (or someone) would point to the data behind Lamb's graphs. They look hand drawn to me, based on notions about past climate rather than hard data.David Appellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03318269033139447591noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-84840208546359066022015-03-23T10:50:23.550+11:002015-03-23T10:50:23.550+11:00Harry TO
An interesting observation of Conspiracy...Harry TO<br /><br /><i>An interesting observation of Conspiracy Theorists is they can accept contradictory theories simultaneously</i><br /><br />More in the same vein as hot MWP = sensitive climate :-)<br /><br />Consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds, etc.<br /><br />BBDhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10687930416706386215noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-9480314653490779742015-03-23T09:27:01.880+11:002015-03-23T09:27:01.880+11:00So they argue the MWP was warmer because of eviden...So they argue the MWP was warmer because of evidence from temperature reconstructions. They then argue the current warming was not warmer because they do not trust the temperature reconstructions.<br /><br />An interesting observation of Conspiracy Theorists is they can accept contradictory theories simultaneously, as long as the contradictory theories all support their core conspiracy theory. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11552461190113661645noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-53801258359486743952015-03-23T08:10:10.825+11:002015-03-23T08:10:10.825+11:00See also
http://www.desmogblog.com/2015/01/26/medi...See also<br />http://www.desmogblog.com/2015/01/26/medievaldeception-2015-inhofe-drags-senate-dark-ages<br /><br />For history of fig 7.1(c), a 1965 sketch that covered ~21x34mile patch of central England.JohnMasheyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08174651130367553996noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-69355382630417522962015-03-23T08:04:21.341+11:002015-03-23T08:04:21.341+11:00"dbstealey, resident sockpuppetting mod at WU..."dbstealey, resident sockpuppetting mod at WUWT, put up one of his wrong charts of Greenland and tells a big fat lie"<br /><br />Well, lets remember dbstealey's comment from: http://blog.hotwhopper.com/2015/03/another-conspiracy-theory-at-wuwt.html<br /><br />"Since his lips were moving when he made his denials, I think we can discount whatever the Administration’s spokesman says. Only the truly credulous and naive would take them at their word.<br />When someone is such a serial liar as Obama, the prudent thing to do is to assume that he hasn’t suddenly found Jesus. ."<br /><br />The credulous and naive people are to be found at WUWT. I will leave people to identify for themselves who the serial liar is.Millicentnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-90546996675344734082015-03-23T07:49:21.904+11:002015-03-23T07:49:21.904+11:00With apologies to those who have seem me write thi...With apologies to those who have seem me write this before, but for the thread:<br /><br />If there was a global and synchronous 'MWP' as warm as or warmer than the late C20th, it would be strong evidence that the climate system is at least moderately sensitive to radiative perturbation. <br /><br />If so, the climate system will be sensitive to the radiative perturbation from sharply increasing GHG forcing in the modern period. <br /><br />Contrarians arguing for a 'hot MWP' are arguing for a sensitive climate system and so for very real concern about the climate response to anthropogenic emissions.BBDhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10687930416706386215noreply@blogger.com