Category Archives: Climate Reconstruction

Temperature reconstruction shows no warming in Central Asia

“Tree-ring evidence reveals recent cooling and glacier thickening in Central Asia as well as flat temperatures throughout the last 432 years.” click here

ClimateGate continues from University of Arizona emails release

“The files released cover emails from Michael Mann to Malcolm Hughes, Eugene Wahl, Caspar Amman, Ray Bradley, and Jonathan Overpeck. Plus there were additional requests for anything out of UEA (Phil Jones at CRU).

The FOIA request goes all the way back to December of 2011, it’s taken this long to get released. Mann fought the release all the way.

Here is a sample, where Keith Briffa of CRU says that Mann’s data (and others) do in fact show a Medieval Warm Period.” click here

Arbitrary climate data changes destroys credibility

“The hubris of the Australian Bureau of Meteorology is on full display with its most recent remodelling of the historic temperature record for Darwin. The Bureau has further dramatically increased the rate of global warming at Darwin by further artificially lowering historic temperatures.” click here

Little Ice Age Conditions as Benchmarks of Hydroclimatic Variability

Tree ring studies such as this required several underlying assumptions which make the resulting projections and forecasts unreliable. Nevertheless, the study represents a lot of work by many very talented scientists and will be useful in furthering discussions of this topic. 

Loisel J, MacDonald GM, Thomson MJ (2017). Little Ice Age climatic erraticism as an analogue for future enhanced hydroclimatic variability across the American Southwest. PLoS ONE 12(10): e0186282. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.018628

The American Southwest has experienced a series of severe droughts interspersed with strong wet episodes over the past decades, prompting questions about future climate patterns and potential intensification of weather disruptions under warming conditions. Here we show that interannual hydroclimatic variability in this region has displayed a significant level of non-stationarity over the past millennium. Our tree ring-based analysis of past drought indicates that the Little Ice Age (LIA) experienced high interannual hydroclimatic variability, similar to projections for the 21st century. This is contrary to the Medieval Climate Anomaly (MCA), which had reduced variability and therefore may be misleading as an analog for 21st century warming, notwithstanding its warm (and arid) conditions. Given past non-stationarity, and particularly erratic LIA, a ‘warm LIA’ climate scenario for the coming century that combines high precipitation variability (similar to LIA conditions) with warm and dry conditions (similar to MCA conditions) represents a plausible situation that is supported by recent climate simulations. Our comparison of tree ring-based drought analysis and records from the tropical Pacific Ocean suggests that changing variability in El Niño Southern Oscillation (ENSO) explains much of the contrasting variances between the MCA and LIA conditions across the American Southwest. Greater ENSO variability for the 21st century could be induced by a decrease in meridional sea surface temperature gradient caused by increased greenhouse gas concentration, as shown by several recent climate modeling experiments. Overall, these results coupled with the paleo-record suggests that using the erratic LIA conditions as benchmarks for past hydroclimatic variability can be useful for developing future water-resource management and drought and flood hazard mitigation strategies in the Southwest.

NASA Changes the Past by Changing the Data

Source: NoTricksZone

How to Create Global Warming by Adjusting the Data

NASA shows us how:

screen-shot-2016-11-21-at-9-36-49-am

Click here for more at The Deplorable Climate Science Blog.

 

Climate Extremes Index Fraudulant

‘Those who intentionally misled the public about climate change should be held accountable.’ here

“What could have caused this divergence?  The primary factor is that the amount of fabricated data used by NOAA has increased since 1980 from 12% to 47%. If NOAA doesn’t have station data during a particular month, they simply make the data up for that station. For some reason, they have been losing huge amounts of data in recent years, and now almost half of their data is fake.” here

Shall we begin accountability with someone at NOAA?

happy-bouncing-smilie