Sentences with phrase «about ice age climate»

Not exact matches

To the surprise of everyone who knew about the strong evidence for the little ice age and the medieval climate optimum, the graph showed a nearly constant temperature from the year 1000 until about 150 years ago, when the temperature began to rise abruptly like the blade of a hockey stick.

Frankly, if I wanted to worry about climate change, I would worry about global cooling again, since the sun is behaving very weakly just now, and sun - watching scientists have even dared to suggest that a reprise of the Little Ice Age is in the offing.

«You see a rapid increase in population size from about 18,000 years ago, just as the climate began warming up after the last Ice Age,» says lead author Rebecca Dew.

Was it humankind or climate change that caused the extinction of a considerable number of large mammals about the time of the last Ice Age?

So if you think of going in [a] warming direction of 2 degrees C compared to a cooling direction of 5 degrees C, one can say that we might be changing the Earth, you know, like 40 percent of the kind of change that went on between the Ice Age; and now are going back in time and so a 2 - degree change, which is about 4 degrees F on a global average, is going to be very significant in terms of change in the distribution of vegetation, change in the kind of climate zones in certain areas, wind patterns can change, so where rainfall happens is going to shift.

The ends of ice ages were different, but we can still use them to learn more about the sensitivity of the massive Antarctic ice sheet to climate change.»

Moreover, a jump in the region's erosion rates about a million years ago coincides with a transition to more powerful ice ages — a sign that climate change can have a larger than expected effect in tearing down mountains.

The last ice age, about 80,000 to 12,000 years ago, was a time of diverse climates, said Mann.

Since then, there have been small - scale climate shifts — notably the «Little Ice Age» between about 1200 and 1700 A.D. — but in general, the Holocene has been a relatively warm period in between ice agIce Age» between about 1200 and 1700 A.D. — but in general, the Holocene has been a relatively warm period in between ice agice ages.

(1) How does he reconcile his belief about the climate being so stable... i.e., having strong negative feedbacks... with the ice age — interglacial oscillations?

There were climate scientists who speculated about global cooling in the seventies and there were journalists who wrote articles about the prospect of coming ice ages.

See the RealClimate discussions of the Little Ice Age and Medieval Warm Period for explanations of why both the Viking colonization of Greenland and the freezing of the River Thames actually tells us relatively little about past climate change.

in the other case, another friend made disparaging remarks about my cfl's and when i later said, very casually, something to the effect that he doubted the science, he referred to something dixie lee ray said at least fifty years ago about ice ages and climate variations.

«[The next ice age is] not worth worrying about compared to immediate concerns about damaging human - caused climate change expected over the coming decades if no action is taken to mitigate this likelihood.»

But we have used ice cores from several different parts of Svalbard, and can be fairly confident about our findings on climate fluctuations in Svalbard and North Norway as far back as the Viking Age,» says Elisabeth Isaksson.

Qualms about arbitrariness in computer models diminish as teams model ice - age climate and dispense with special adjustments to reproduce current climate.

How about xkcd's «A Timeline of Earth's Average Temperature since the Last Ice Age Glaciation: When people say «The climate has changed before» these are the kinds of changes they are talking about» https://xkcd.com/1732/

1974 Serious droughts since 1972 increase concern about climate; cooling from aerosols is suspected to be as likely as warming; journalists talk of a new ice age.

How much effort would it take for him to look at was actually said by climate researchers in the mid-70s about the prospects for an ice age?

It is true that old fears of a new ice age did not originate with climate scientists [edit — no nonsense please] and I confess to being someone who worried about such things at that time.

The thing I find a bit curious about the result that is the subject of this blog article, though, is the statement that the model used reproduces the Little Ice Age climate simply as a response to the luminosity reduction.

There were climate scientists who speculated about global cooling in the seventies and there were journalists who wrote articles about the prospect of coming ice ages.

Mike's work, like that of previous award winners, is diverse, and includes pioneering and highly cited work in time series analysis (an elegant use of Thomson's multitaper spectral analysis approach to detect spatiotemporal oscillations in the climate record and methods for smoothing temporal data), decadal climate variability (the term «Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation» or «AMO» was coined by Mike in an interview with Science's Richard Kerr about a paper he had published with Tom Delworth of GFDL showing evidence in both climate model simulations and observational data for a 50 - 70 year oscillation in the climate system; significantly Mike also published work with Kerry Emanuel in 2006 showing that the AMO concept has been overstated as regards its role in 20th century tropical Atlantic SST changes, a finding recently reaffirmed by a study published in Nature), in showing how changes in radiative forcing from volcanoes can affect ENSO, in examining the role of solar variations in explaining the pattern of the Medieval Climate Anomaly and Little Ice Age, the relationship between the climate changes of past centuries and phenomena such as Atlantic tropical cyclones and global sea level, and even a bit of work in atmospheric chemistry (an analysis of beryllium - 7 measureclimate record and methods for smoothing temporal data), decadal climate variability (the term «Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation» or «AMO» was coined by Mike in an interview with Science's Richard Kerr about a paper he had published with Tom Delworth of GFDL showing evidence in both climate model simulations and observational data for a 50 - 70 year oscillation in the climate system; significantly Mike also published work with Kerry Emanuel in 2006 showing that the AMO concept has been overstated as regards its role in 20th century tropical Atlantic SST changes, a finding recently reaffirmed by a study published in Nature), in showing how changes in radiative forcing from volcanoes can affect ENSO, in examining the role of solar variations in explaining the pattern of the Medieval Climate Anomaly and Little Ice Age, the relationship between the climate changes of past centuries and phenomena such as Atlantic tropical cyclones and global sea level, and even a bit of work in atmospheric chemistry (an analysis of beryllium - 7 measureclimate variability (the term «Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation» or «AMO» was coined by Mike in an interview with Science's Richard Kerr about a paper he had published with Tom Delworth of GFDL showing evidence in both climate model simulations and observational data for a 50 - 70 year oscillation in the climate system; significantly Mike also published work with Kerry Emanuel in 2006 showing that the AMO concept has been overstated as regards its role in 20th century tropical Atlantic SST changes, a finding recently reaffirmed by a study published in Nature), in showing how changes in radiative forcing from volcanoes can affect ENSO, in examining the role of solar variations in explaining the pattern of the Medieval Climate Anomaly and Little Ice Age, the relationship between the climate changes of past centuries and phenomena such as Atlantic tropical cyclones and global sea level, and even a bit of work in atmospheric chemistry (an analysis of beryllium - 7 measureclimate model simulations and observational data for a 50 - 70 year oscillation in the climate system; significantly Mike also published work with Kerry Emanuel in 2006 showing that the AMO concept has been overstated as regards its role in 20th century tropical Atlantic SST changes, a finding recently reaffirmed by a study published in Nature), in showing how changes in radiative forcing from volcanoes can affect ENSO, in examining the role of solar variations in explaining the pattern of the Medieval Climate Anomaly and Little Ice Age, the relationship between the climate changes of past centuries and phenomena such as Atlantic tropical cyclones and global sea level, and even a bit of work in atmospheric chemistry (an analysis of beryllium - 7 measureclimate system; significantly Mike also published work with Kerry Emanuel in 2006 showing that the AMO concept has been overstated as regards its role in 20th century tropical Atlantic SST changes, a finding recently reaffirmed by a study published in Nature), in showing how changes in radiative forcing from volcanoes can affect ENSO, in examining the role of solar variations in explaining the pattern of the Medieval Climate Anomaly and Little Ice Age, the relationship between the climate changes of past centuries and phenomena such as Atlantic tropical cyclones and global sea level, and even a bit of work in atmospheric chemistry (an analysis of beryllium - 7 measureClimate Anomaly and Little Ice Age, the relationship between the climate changes of past centuries and phenomena such as Atlantic tropical cyclones and global sea level, and even a bit of work in atmospheric chemistry (an analysis of beryllium - 7 measureclimate changes of past centuries and phenomena such as Atlantic tropical cyclones and global sea level, and even a bit of work in atmospheric chemistry (an analysis of beryllium - 7 measurements).

It also constitutes evidence refuting assertions of pundits who have periodically proclaimed that climate scientists warning about warming can not be trusted because they were proclaiming the dawn of an ice age in the 1970s.

Having read the comments here and in Jones and Mann (2004) «Climate over past millennia», I have been reflecting on some of the comments about the hockey stick wrt the Medieval Warm Period (MWP) and the Little Ice Age (LIA).

At the height of the last ice age, sea levels were about 120 metres below present day levels, and the average rise of sea level during the return to our present climate was about 1 metre per one hundred years.

However, our fortune would last much longer than that: the Milankovitch cycles can be calculated over millions of years with astronomical precision (and incidentally be used to predict the beginning of all the past ice ages), and according to that, the next major climate change would arrive only in about 50,000 years.

I'm not sure there's anything particularly new here, except a focus on Hansen's point that the «long term» timescale people talk about with climate may be a lot shorter than the several thousand years or so that was observed for the ice age changes.

If, indeed, climate scientists predicted a coming ice age, it is worthwhile to take the next step and understand why they thought this, and what relevance it might have to today's science - politics - policy discussions about climate change.

To veterans of the Climate Wars, the old 1970s global cooling canard — «How can we believe climate scientists about global warming today when back in the 1970s they told us an ice age was imminent?Climate Wars, the old 1970s global cooling canard — «How can we believe climate scientists about global warming today when back in the 1970s they told us an ice age was imminent?climate scientists about global warming today when back in the 1970s they told us an ice age was imminent?»

And there are plenty of important questions to resolve about the climate of the Holocene — this comfy warm interval humans have enjoyed since the end of the last ice age — before the human influence on the system built in recent decades.

As Professor Barry Brook, Adelaide University said a couple of months after your proclamation about the up - coming ice - age QUOTE: There are a lot of uncertainties in science, and it is indeed likely that the current consensus on some points of climate science is wrong, or at least sufficiently uncertain that we don't know anything much useful about processes or drivers» (http://bravenewclimate.com/2009/04/23/ian-plimer-heaven-and-earth/).

We can study ice ages to approximate climate sensitivity, which indicate a value consistent with the accepted value of about 2 - 4 °C per doubling of CO2.

I suspect that it looked OK in your view or you didn't check; «the paper i cited talks of the hiatus in global temperatures for the past 20 years or so, that the Little Ice Age was global in extent, and that climate models can not account for the observations we already have let alone make adequate predictions about what will happen in the future.

There are many who will not like this recent paper published in Nature Communications on principle as it talks of the hiatus in global temperatures for the past 20 years or so, that the Little Ice Age was global in extent, and that climate models can not account for the observations we already have let alone make adequate predictions about what will happen in the future.

he study, carried out by researchers in the University of Cambridge, Department of Earth Sciences, offers new insights into a decades - long debate about how the shifts in the Earth's orbit relative to the sun have taken the Earth into and out of an ice - age climate.

Not being a climate scientist, and not realizing in the mid-70's that there WAS such a thing, I'm sure you will forgive me for noticing that all the articles in the «popular press», like «Newsweek», «Popular Science», «Popular Mechanics», «Science Digest», newspapers, et al warning us of an imminent ice age and proposing methods of staving off disaster were simply being made up out of whole cloth by science editors to drum up circulation while the real Climate Scientists were frantically trying to warn us that we were about to be rendered into cracklings by anthropogenclimate scientist, and not realizing in the mid-70's that there WAS such a thing, I'm sure you will forgive me for noticing that all the articles in the «popular press», like «Newsweek», «Popular Science», «Popular Mechanics», «Science Digest», newspapers, et al warning us of an imminent ice age and proposing methods of staving off disaster were simply being made up out of whole cloth by science editors to drum up circulation while the real Climate Scientists were frantically trying to warn us that we were about to be rendered into cracklings by anthropogenClimate Scientists were frantically trying to warn us that we were about to be rendered into cracklings by anthropogenic CO2.

For the IPCC both the MWP (Medieval Warm Period) and the LIA (Little Ice Age) existed before the «hockey stick,» so viewing the situation objectively — after the IPCC participated in the rewriting of history by showcasing the «hockey stick as a part of the Left's efforts to manufacture a supposed consensus about climate change — the IPCC condoned a fraud that federal climatists to this very day persist in perpetrating on the public.

I don't think he's predicting a mini ice age, but he is adamant that the assumptions about climate sensitivity to CO2 built into the climate models are wrong and the models grossly understate the importance of cosmic radiation.

For example — you said — How about the period between the medieval warm period and the little ice age for a period that the climate was stable?

While the conditions in the geological past are useful indicators in suggesting climate and atmospheric conditions only vary within a a certain range (for example, that life has existed for over 3 billion years indicates that the oxygen level of the atmosphere has stayed between about 20 and 25 % throughout that time), I also think some skeptics are too quick to suggest the lack of correlation between temperature and CO2 during the last 550 million years falsifies the link between CO2 and warming (too many differences in conditions to allow any such a conclusion to be drawn — for example the Ordovician with high CO2 and an ice age didn't have any terrestrial life).

How about the period between the medieval warm period and the little ice age for a period that the climate was stable?

John Carter August 8, 2014 at 12:58 am chooses to state his position on the greenhouse effect in the following 134 word sentence: «But given the [1] basics of the greenhouse effect, the fact that with just a very small percentage of greenhouse gas molecules in the air this effect keeps the earth about 55 - 60 degrees warmer than it would otherwise be, and the fact that through easily recognizable if [2] inadvertent growing patterns we have at this point probably at least [3] doubled the total collective amount in heat absorption and re-radiation capacity of long lived atmospheric greenhouse gases (nearly doubling total that of the [4] leading one, carbon dioxide, in the modern era), to [5] levels not collectively seen on earth in several million years — levels that well predated the present ice age and extensive earth surface ice conditions — it goes [6] against basic physics and basic geologic science to not be «predisposed» to the idea that this would ultimately impact climate.»

And they most certainly did not forecast, and would have been aghast had they done so, the CAGW scam, the Y2K - make - a-buck scare, the new - ice - age - scare, Al Gore's weight problem, the unbelievably vast sums to be made off of eco-appeals featuring heart - wrenching pictures of adorably cute and cuddly - looking baby harp - seals about to be clubbed to death for their fur, Ditto for photo - shopped pictures of forlorn looking polar bears adrift on ice - floes, universities stuffed with tenured climate science parasites, the improbable appearance of the NGO, watermelon life - form, and the like.

As we now know, saying that in the 1970s all climate scientists believed an ice age was coming is about as ridiculous as wearing a disco outfit to a serious Toastmasters speech.

Modern climate only started to develop about 5 million years ago, with the alternating ice ages lasting roughly 100k years and interglacials lasting 10 — 20k years appearing about 2 million years ago.

Just in the last 650,000 years there have been seven cycles of glacial advance and retreat, with the abrupt end of the last ice age about 7,000 years ago marking the beginning of the modern climate era — and of human civilization.

By the 1970s, the persistent cooling trend had become a hot topic, so to speak, for magazines and books that fretted about a coming Ice Age, and the federal government supported studies that calculated the economic disasters expected from a colder climate.

Serious droughts and other unusual weather since 1972 increase scientific and public concern about climate change, with cooling from aerosols suspected to be as likely as warming; journalists talk of ice age.

Maybe the planet just naturally warms and cools, as it has for hundreds of millions of years, as it has for the past two centuries when the climate was cool (the Little Ice Age) up to 1850 or so, then warmed up to 1940, then cooled until the mid-1970's, then warmed until about 2000.