Debt Rattle January 30 2017

[Raúl Ilargi Meijer]

Edvard Munch Vampire 1893 • Canadian PM Says Québec Mosque Shooting A ‘Terrorist Attack On Muslims’ (R.) • Canada To Offer Temporary Residency To Trav
[See the full post at: Debt Rattle January 30 2017]

[Nassim]

I don’t have access to Forbes. However the article about Arctic ice seems to be quite selective:

1- Antarctic not mentioned
2- the dates chosen
3- 4-years or older ice – as though it were French Bordeaux 🙂

Here is some less selective information:

[Nassim]

Sorry. I don’t seem to be able to delete the failed version above. Please click on image to see the full version – and many others.

I don’t have access to Forbes. However the article about Arctic ice seems to be quite selective:

1- Antarctic not mentioned
2- the dates chosen
3- 4-years or older ice – as though it were French Bordeaux 🙂

Here is some less selective information:

[Ken Barrows]

Nice scale on the graph! Should have done it in increments of 100, then it would be a flat line.
Here’s some other information:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/dec/06/arctic-antarctic-ice-melt-november-record

[Nassim]

Ken,

Yes. If one were to use degrees Kelvin – what real scientists use – and the temperature over the last 100 years had risen by one degree, that would translate to around 0.3% rise in temperature. Big deal. 🙂

There is undoubtedly massive negative-feedback mechanisms in play and that is what has kept the earth’s temperature so stable over the past 5000 years. Don’t forget that the Romans produced grapes and wine in England 2000 years ago.

New paper confirms the climate was warmer 1000 years ago:

The difference between us IMHO, is that I don’t think that the climate is a recent thing.Right now, el-Niño is over and the oceans are taking back the heat they had released. Additionally, the sun is not active which will eventually lead to a big drop in temperature. It has all happened so many times before.

[E. Swanson]

Nassim, your “New paper” graph came from a Watts Up With That post from back in 2012. The paper presents data from 91 sites located in the extra tropical Northern Hemisphere, most of which lie poleward of 40 N, except from some in SE Asia. It’s well known that the high latitudes of the NH experience more variability than the full globe, indeed, your post a few blogs back linking to a comparison of Hansen 1981 with the most recent full NH data showed exactly that. As I pointed out in a comment, the tropics (below 23.5 latitude) represent about 40 percent of the area of the globe (and hemisphere), so leaving these areas outout, as the blog author did, distorts the interpretation of the data.

Your graph is even worse, as the sites appear to be almost all land based, leaving the vast area of the Pacific and Equatorial Atlantic out of the compilation. Further more, high latitudes sites are heavily impacted by the effects of volcanic eruptions and several over the period are evident in your graph at 535, 1259, 1452, 1600 and 1815 to list a few. Sorry, your “new paper” isn’t the solid proof, IMHO, though it was popular on the denialist blogs back in 2012

[Nassim]

E. Swanson,

It is no secret that the world outside “poleward of 40 N, except from some in SE Asia” was little documented in modern times. That has given the fixers fantastic opportunities to use “homogenization” and “interpolation” to manipulate the hypothetical temperatures for most of the globe to get the results they want.

Here is an obvious example: Cape Town. Obviously, this is a strategic location and skewing the data there can be used to move the results for a huge chunk of the globe – both in Africa, the South Atlantic, the Indian Ocean and the Southern Ocean. Many millions of square kilometres can be fudged.

Homogenization of temperature data makes Capetown South Africa have a warmer climate record

Please note how the inconvenient data for the end of the 19th century was excised.

I would love it if you could give me an alternative explanation as to why the historical graph was changed so dramatically.

If you like, I will show you a similar fix for Sydney – which was used to “homogenize” the data for the rest of the continent – and presumably the surrounding oceans.

[E. Swanson]

Nassim: Nice segway onto a completely different topic. Here’s a bit of thought about your first post. There were only 32 proxies out of the 91 available back to 1 CE and the authors note that only half were useful. From the paper, we find that many of the 91 proxies listed only give data for summer months, not annual temperatures. More interestingly, the paper presents graphs of the 32 proxies (Figure 3), few of which show the pronounced “bump” around 1000 CE. It’s curious that those individual plots don’t show that warm bump, while the combined graphs do. Others have tested their results by selectively removing a series to see what the impact of an individual series might be. Then to, there are only 16 proxies in your final graph. I think one must not conclude that the results are solid proof of a warm MWP.

[Author]

Posts