|
|
Post by cuttydyer on Apr 4, 2013 12:45:35 GMT
The MWP in my back yard. Dartmoor is my home; for those not famililar with this vast (for England) granite upland, it’s an area of moorland in south Devon, England. Protected by National Park status, it covers 368 sq mi. The granite upland dates from the Carboniferous period of geological history. The moorland is capped with many exposed granite hilltops known as tors, providing habitats for Dartmoor wildlife. The highest point is High Willhays, 621 m (2,037 ft) above sea level. The entire area is rich in antiquities and archaeology. It is one of England’s last great wildernesses.  All who live and farm the moor are very aware of the evidence of climate change, we are surronded by the archaeology of cereal crop farming; Dartmoor’s current cold climate makes it is impossible to grow such crops. I came across the following comment by a Mr Tony Brown on the climateaudit site and thought it worth reposting: I live near Dartmoor which is in Southern England (up to 2000 feet high). Dartmoor has a fantastic record of antiquities ranging from the bronze age hut circles through to abandoned farmsteads dating from the medieval warm period. Drive just ten miles and we have Roman remains in Exeter (home to the Hadley Centre whose scientists I sometimes meet professionally)
Combine this heritage with the English obsession with the weather and record keeping, and we have something that is probably unique…We know what the climate was doing from Tacitus- a Roman general, through the Anglo Saxon chronicles (494 to 1154) the Venerable Bede, the Domesday book, Chaucer, Pepys diary, plus extensive church and estate records.
Taking all these sources into account we can reconstruct-from real people-a record of the climate that stretches from 4000BP right to the start of CET records in 1659.
We know what crops were being grown behind the bronze age hut circles that were abandoned as the weather cooled, we know how far north vineyards grew and what grape varieties were used in 1085. We know the names of the people who had to abandon their Dartmoor farmsteads as the weather cooled again in the MWP- we know what crops they were growing and how the yield dimished as the ‘habitation’ line dropped from 1400 feet to 1100 feet. We have engravings of Church scenes before the dissolution of the monsateries showing olive and lemon trees. We have the estate records where the owners discussed with their managers which exotic (to us today) fruits could be grown.
As a researcher/analyst and statistician who believes in solid facts, it baffles me when, in the face of the overwhelming documentary evidence, we have people who should know better deny the existence of the holocene maximum, the Roman warm period and the MWP etc. Instead they prefer to rely on computer models which are nothing more or less than utterly fanciful and uses information that has to be extensively reworked in order to arrive at the answer they seem to want.
What about a bit more reliance on factual evidence rather than theory? Why are we so keen to continually play about with computers?
|
|
|
|
Post by trbixler on Apr 4, 2013 13:15:26 GMT
cutty
Very nice find. With regards to computers used for political purpose they are the modern day form of the church. The unwashed bow before them as if god has spoken from the human written programs.
|
|
|
|
Post by cuttydyer on Apr 4, 2013 13:50:49 GMT
cutty Very nice find. With regards to computers used for political purpose they are the modern day form of the church. The unwashed bow before them as if god has spoken from the human written programs. Both the spewings of a computer model and historical records are as equally heavily influenced by the authors politics; give me physical archaeological evidence every time. |
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Apr 4, 2013 19:45:39 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by flearider on Apr 7, 2013 2:26:56 GMT
to bad they din't keep there findings ..
|
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Apr 7, 2013 2:42:07 GMT
There might be something published from this time around. Last time was a disaster. Not sure if it didn't show them what they wanted to see or what happened.
|
|
|
|
Post by glennkoks on Apr 10, 2013 12:10:04 GMT
One could definitely say that the weather has become topsy turvy. Last year we did not have a winter and march saw record highs for much of the nation.
This year has a brutally cold start to spring for much of the nation.
|
|
|
|
Post by cuttydyer on Apr 12, 2013 10:03:20 GMT
Evidence for the Medieval Warm Period in Antarctica...  Link: wattsupwiththat.com/2013/04/11/evidence-for-a-global-medieval-warm-period/#more-83933From the article, one example of many: Noon et al. (2003) used oxygen isotopes preserved in authigenic carbonate retrieved from freshwater sediments of Sombre Lake on Signy Island (60°43?S, 45°38?W) in the Southern Ocean to construct a 7,000-year history of that region’s climate. This work revealed that the general trend of temperature at the study site has been downward. Of most interest to the present discussion, however, is the millennial-scale oscillation of climate that is apparent in much of the record. This climate cycle is such that approximately 2,000 years ago, after a thousand-year gap in the data, Signy Island experienced the relative warmth of the last vestiges of the Roman Warm Period, as delineated by McDermott et al. (2001) on the basis of a high-resolution speleothem ?18O record from southwest Ireland. Then comes the Dark Ages Cold period, which is also contemporaneous with what McDermott et al. observe in the Northern Hemisphere, after which the Medieval Warm Period appears at the same point in time and persists for the same length of time that it does in the vicinity of Ireland, whereupon the Little Ice Age sets in just as it does in the Northern Hemisphere. Finally, there is an indication of late twentieth century warming, but with still a long way to go before conditions comparable to those of the Medieval Warm Period are achieved. |
|
|
|
Post by steve on Apr 13, 2013 19:50:00 GMT
The MWP in my back yard. Dartmoor is my home; for those not famililar with this vast (for England) granite upland, it’s an area of moorland in south Devon, England. Protected by National Park status, it covers 368 sq mi. The granite upland dates from the Carboniferous period of geological history. The moorland is capped with many exposed granite hilltops known as tors, providing habitats for Dartmoor wildlife. The highest point is High Willhays, 621 m (2,037 ft) above sea level. The entire area is rich in antiquities and archaeology. It is one of England’s last great wildernesses. All who live and farm the moor are very aware of the evidence of climate change, we are surronded by the archaeology of cereal crop farming; Dartmoor’s current cold climate makes it is impossible to grow such crops. I came across the following comment by a Mr Tony Brown on the climateaudit site and thought it worth reposting: I live near Dartmoor which is in Southern England (up to 2000 feet high). Dartmoor has a fantastic record of antiquities ranging from the bronze age hut circles through to abandoned farmsteads dating from the medieval warm period. Drive just ten miles and we have Roman remains in Exeter (home to the Hadley Centre whose scientists I sometimes meet professionally)
Combine this heritage with the English obsession with the weather and record keeping, and we have something that is probably unique…We know what the climate was doing from Tacitus- a Roman general, through the Anglo Saxon chronicles (494 to 1154) the Venerable Bede, the Domesday book, Chaucer, Pepys diary, plus extensive church and estate records.
Taking all these sources into account we can reconstruct-from real people-a record of the climate that stretches from 4000BP right to the start of CET records in 1659.
We know what crops were being grown behind the bronze age hut circles that were abandoned as the weather cooled, we know how far north vineyards grew and what grape varieties were used in 1085. We know the names of the people who had to abandon their Dartmoor farmsteads as the weather cooled again in the MWP- we know what crops they were growing and how the yield dimished as the ‘habitation’ line dropped from 1400 feet to 1100 feet. We have engravings of Church scenes before the dissolution of the monsateries showing olive and lemon trees. We have the estate records where the owners discussed with their managers which exotic (to us today) fruits could be grown.
As a researcher/analyst and statistician who believes in solid facts, it baffles me when, in the face of the overwhelming documentary evidence, we have people who should know better deny the existence of the holocene maximum, the Roman warm period and the MWP etc. Instead they prefer to rely on computer models which are nothing more or less than utterly fanciful and uses information that has to be extensively reworked in order to arrive at the answer they seem to want.
What about a bit more reliance on factual evidence rather than theory? Why are we so keen to continually play about with computers?
cuttydyer, I live in Devon and have visited these settlements. Tony has no excuse for stating such nonsense as " it baffles me when, in the face of the overwhelming documentary evidence, we have people who should know better deny the existence of the holocene maximum, the Roman warm period and the MWP etc." There is a difference between "denying the existence" of the MWP and stating that the evidence is that the MWP was likely not globally as warm as now. I suggest you obtain and read the Noon paper before you take WUWT and CO2"science"'s word for what it says as they often put too much focus on a short term spike in the proxy such that once you average out all the proxies you aren't left with much. Recently I picked out a few such papers to illustrate: solarcycle24com.proboards.com/post/88135/thread |
|
|
|
Post by cuttydyer on Apr 13, 2013 21:30:45 GMT
Steve,
We're lucky people living in such a beautiful part of the country; couple of questions:
Archaeological evidence has divulged that the Dartmoor's climate was warmer during MWP than present - do you dispute this?
Are you saying with absolute certainty, that the MWP was limited to the Northern Hemisphere?
|
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Apr 14, 2013 0:59:25 GMT
cutty: I can say with absolute certainty that the MWP was worldwide. Just as now, not every place will be "warmer". The evidence from hydro studies, ice cores, Sargasso Sea proxy, etc...etc...all indicate that it most certainly was worldwide.
I don't understand why this is even an issue with some?
|
|
|
|
Post by steve on Apr 14, 2013 13:50:30 GMT
Steve, We're lucky people living in such a beautiful part of the country; couple of questions: Archaeological evidence has divulged that the Dartmoor's climate was warmer during MWP than present - do you dispute this? Are you saying with absolute certainty, that the MWP was limited to the Northern Hemisphere? I don't have any reason to dispute what you say about Dartmoor's climate. My view is that the Medieval climate appears to have been different world-wide, but not warmer. I think that as scientists have gradually looked back in time using regional proxies, they have naturally focussed on identifying a phenomenon that relates to the MWP, and when they've found a warmer period they've labelled it as being evidence of the influence of the MWP. Organisations such as co2"science" latch onto these references and quote numbers of papers citing the MWP as proxies for warmth. If you look at the link above, even Craig Loehle has trouble finding strong evidence of a warmer than now MWP. People have got the idea that "IPCC scientists" have drawn some sort of ideological line in the sand about not wanting to admit that the climate has been warmer than now in the recent past - recall the alleged "We have to get rid of the MWP" email that one sceptic claims he was sent. So any statements that the MWP was not as warm as now are claimed as being head in the sand statements. People like Tony Brown now have to ask themselves why climate science reaction to Marcott's study was at most relatively sanguine and in many cases quite supportive. Ignoring the irrelevant uptick in the 20th Century portion, the study claims that most of the Holocene has been warmer than now. Why aren't climate scientists terrified of Marcott's findings? Why isn't the sceptic community hailing it in the same way as they hail any evidence of the MWP? |
|
|
|
Post by steve on Apr 14, 2013 14:06:02 GMT
cuttydyer, There is a lot of other mythology about the IPCC and the MWP. The figure above is misleading in its representation of the IPCC graph from 1990. The IPCC graph did not have any numbers on the temperature axis, and the caption points out that the diagram is a schematic. The diagram also has a line stating it is temperatures around the beginning of the 20th Century. If you believed the scale that has since been added, you will find that adding the warming since the beginning of the 20th Century to the dashed line would take you above the MWP temperatures. This version of the image is linked from Skeptical Science, as that is what came up in google image search.  You can check the original in this PDF: www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/far/wg_I/ipcc_far_wg_I_chapter_07.pdfThe IPCC image had 3 plots. Plot c was the "MWP" plot. The caption is: |
|
|
|
Post by icefisher on Apr 14, 2013 16:20:42 GMT
There is a lot of other mythology about the IPCC and the MWP. The figure above is misleading in its representation of the IPCC graph from 1990. The IPCC graph did not have any numbers on the temperature axis, and the caption points out that the diagram is a schematic. The diagram also has a line stating it is temperatures around the beginning of the 20th Century. If you believed the scale that has since been added, you will find that adding the warming since the beginning of the 20th Century to the dashed line would take you above the MWP temperatures. That is misleading Steve. The accompany text indicates the tickmarks on the left side of the graph labeled as "Temperature Change (deg C) are single units. The accompaning text says "The period since the end of the last glaciation has been characterized by small changes in global average temperature with a range of probably less than 2°C (Figure 7.1)" Each graph holds the Holocene within a range of one tickmark above and below the average tickmark line. Got the blinders on as usual huh? |
|
|
|
Post by magellan on Apr 14, 2013 19:00:31 GMT
Funny how steve always manages to find references from SkS, RC etc., known for shall we say, less than complete honest information. Odd, I found a reference to CA for the very same graph using Google. 'IPCC 1990 mwp' put CA #1. Where did IPCC 1990 Figure 7c Come From? |
|
