Related Links: New Paper: Roman & Medieval Warm Periods Were Warmer Than Previously Thought — «A paper published in Nature Climate Change finds
prior temperature reconstructions from tree - rings «may underestimate pre-instrumental [pre-1850] temperatures including warmth during Medieval and Roman times.»
Not exact matches
The conclusion that we are making the world warmer certainly does not depend on
reconstructions of
temperature prior to direct records.
The same holds for the specific global mean EIV
temperature reconstruction used in the present study as shown in the graph below (interestingly, eliminating the proxies in question actually makes the
reconstruction overall slightly cooler
prior to AD 1000, which — as noted in the article — would actually bring the semi-empirical sea level estimate into closer agreement with the sea level
reconstruction prior to AD 1000).
In fact, we do in fact have NH and global
temperature reconstructions over that period, which show the twentieth century warming to be much faster than the
prior warming as the Earth exited the LIA.
«Surface
temperature reconstructions for periods
prior to the industrial era are only one of multiple lines of evidence supporting the conclusion that climatic warming is occurring in response to human activities, and they are not the primary evidence.»
Evidence from cosmogenic beryllium and carbon isotopes was also available as confirmation for
temperature reconstructions (most of this is not in the cited papers but in their referenced articles, including
prior studies by Lean et al).
Given the issues with the fit
prior to that revelation and possible issues with Veizer's
temperature reconstruction (see Royer 2004, 2006), I stand by my earlier characterization.
«Surface
temperature reconstructions for periods
prior to the industrial era are only one of multiple lines of evidence supporting the conclusion that climatic warming is occurring in response to human activities, and they are not the primary evidence,» the report said.
The
reconstruction is using part of the
temperature record (although the ENSO part is three months
prior).
I agree, but ask what is sacrosanct about 1950 to current
temperatures that are melded with
prior paleo
reconstructions?
Much better to use real (non human thermometers) proxy data for real
temperature reconstructions prior to the instrumental
temperature record.