The article also incorrectly equates instrumental surface temperature data that Jones and CRU have assembled to estimate the modern surface temperature trends
with paleoclimate data used to estimate temperatures in past centuries, falsely asserting that the former «has been used to produce the «hockey stick graph»».
The problems
with the paleoclimate data are well known and will not be summarized here; however, the issue of interest in this context is not the «blade» of the hockey stick, but rather the modes of variability and their magnitude seen in the stick handle.
Idso's calculations for climate sensitivity are greatly at odds
with the paleoclimate data; if sensitivity were as small as he proposes, the Milankovic changes in solar forcing wouldn't be enough to kickstart the climb out of an ice age, but this still presupposes AGW, that CO2 emissions will increase the temperature by some amount.
The findings, published in the journal Nature Communications, show that integrating evidence from historical writings
with paleoclimate data can advance both our understanding of how the climate system functions, and how climatic changes impacted past human societies.
Not exact matches
Paleoclimate data point to a warm tropical ocean
with a clear east - west temperature gradient during the warm climates of the Pliocene and Miocene.
However, values this low are inconsistent
with numerous studies using a wide variety of methods, including (i)
paleoclimate data, (ii) recent empirical
data, and (iii) generally accepted climate models.
This is being actively investigated for the current human - caused global warming scenario
with models and
paleoclimate data.
It's a long paper
with a long title: «Ice melt, sea level rise and superstorms: evidence from
paleoclimate data, climate modeling, and modern observations that 2 oC global warming could be dangerous».
Ice core
paleoclimate isotope
data are indirect indications of temperature (proxies) over millions of years compared to instrumental temperature measurements
with high resolution of hours, days and decades.
This is being actively investigated for the current human - caused global warming scenario
with models and
paleoclimate data.
Dr Hansen told CNN: «In the
paleoclimate data, the Cenozoic
data is the most alarming — burning all the fossil fuels clearly would send the planet back to the ice - free state
with sea level about 250 feet higher.»
Coats, S., 2015:
Paleoclimate Model -
Data Comparisons of Hydroclimate over North America
with a Focus on Megadroughts.
Previous large natural oscillations are important to examine: however, 1) our
data isn't as good
with regards to external forcings or to historical temperatures, making attribution more difficult, 2) to the extent that we have solar and volcanic
data, and
paleoclimate temperature records, they are indeed fairly consistent
with each other within their respective uncertainties, and 3) most mechanisms of internal variability would have different fingerprints: eg, shifting of warmth from the oceans to the atmosphere (but we see warming in both), or simultaneous warming of the troposphere and stratosphere, or shifts in global temperature associated
with major ocean current shifts which for the most part haven't been seen.
Also, there is
paleoclimate data that contradicts the ice - core
data, such as Stomata and we have 90,000 direct empirical chemical measurements dating back to 1812 of atmospheric
with a 3 % accuracy that depicts CO2 as high as 440ppm (Beck 2007).
One of the longest standing Climate Audit issues
with paleoclimate reconstructions is ex post decisions on inclusion / exclusion of
data, of which ex post decisions on inclusion / exclusion of sites /
data in «regional [treering] chronologies» is one important family.
Among the communities targeted by the EarthCube program, some communities, including scientists using marine annually resolved proxy archives, have yet to establish a cyberinfrastructure
with improved standards for storage and sharing of
paleoclimate data and archive - specific metadata on the physical samples.
A proper thing to say is that
paleoclimate data and global modeling need to go hand in hand to develop best understanding — almost everyone will agree
with that.
As where Marcott et al went wrong as climate scientists, when they used
paleoclimate data of long millenia time scales in natural variability,
with the short decadal time scale (weather) in natural variability and claim to predict the future of where the pendulum of climatology will be in the future, when actually showing that they are confused, what they are representing as evidence of the future climate is in fact their total misunderstanding of climatology and the complex chaotic circumstances that influence the real world.
However, as Hansen notes, empirical estimates of climate sensitivity based on
paleoclimate data are consistent
with the sensitivity in climate models of approximately 3 °C for doubled atmospheric CO2.
Paleoclimate data assimilation is emerging as a novel tool to understand low - frequency climate dynamics, blending multi-proxy paleoclimate observations with numerical simulations of Eart
Paleoclimate data assimilation is emerging as a novel tool to understand low - frequency climate dynamics, blending multi-proxy
paleoclimate observations with numerical simulations of Eart
paleoclimate observations
with numerical simulations of Earth's climate.
However, in my opinion, NSF (
paleoclimate) has become a cheerleader for the small
paleoclimate industry and abdicated its obligations to ensure compliance
with US federal
data archiving policies.
Anyone who would like to discuss
with me the facts revealed by the Wegman report that there is a
paleoclimate mafia controlling what gets published, that they have systematically published erroneous interpretations of paleoclimatic
data, and that almost any paleoclimatic temperature profile can be obtained depending on how you manipulate the proxies, just email me at drdrapp [at] earthlink.net and tell me your name, address, professional affiliation, and recent work you have done climate science.
Anthony invited me to help
with the analysis but, as you know, I long ago resolved to spend time on
paleoclimate data not temperature
data and did not pursue the topic.
That might have changed this week
with the coverage of announcement of «Ice Melt, Sea Level Rise and Superstorms: Evidence from
Paleoclimate Data, Climate Modeling, and Modern Observations that 2 °C Global Warming is Highly Dangerous» by James Hansen and 16 other eminent scientists.
For the further comparison
with other
paleoclimate data, therefore, the MXD reconstruction is used; although the reader should take note that the relatively low sample replication in the MXD
data generally gives a wider error band (Fig. 5).