Icing the Current Warm Period I recently came across
on the blog
skepticalscience to a weak blog entry, designed by a certain Daniel Bailey. Since in this case in my view not working in an intellectually honest way with the MWP, I decided to make some comments. A serious mistake, as it subsequently turned out - ad hominem attacks, insults ehrrührige.
For this reason I'll be looking at the said article in this post more closely. Bailey begins his article "Medieval Warm Period the Icing" with some introductory remarks, which are not of interest to us.
He then runs:
First, the question is to clarify what the - is saying "It was warm in the Medieval Warm Period" meant - the skeptics assumed. From the context it is evident that this is coined by a general statement, to the whole world to act, have, since Robert Way, the author of the linked text, even following grants:
Firstly, evidence suggests that the Medieval Warm Period was in fact warmer than today in many parts of the globe seeking as in the North Atlantic.
Hitting this general statement, then rebukes Bailey then pointed out that this general statement is not supported by the relevant scientific literature. It also seems to be reasonable and appropriate to address this general statement with a new regional study from northern Spain. Me, the question arises, run by what "skeptics" Bailey must feel when he hears often held that the temperatures during the MWP global, ie. ultimately, both regional, hemispheric and global were consistently higher than they are today. Regardless of the study refuted Chivelets imho such a statement - if accurate.
we'll see: The Medieval Warm Period
(MWP) was a period of supposedly warm climate during the early part of the past thousand years. How long it lasted, what areas were affected and even if it existed have been questioned. Some areas seem to have been affected more by changes in precipitation than in temperature.
The first statement I been able to gain little. I have already repeatedly pointed out that in comparison to the MWP in the same Region occurring below Little Ice Age, which relates the averaged temperatures, was demonstrably warmer. If one considers the Little Ice Age would have been a global phenomenon - I tend to - then the MWP was indeed globally hotter - average temperatures - less than the Ice Age. As such, it seems to me to be a little negligent, a "supposedly" to intersperse, without explaining on what comparable period, this "supposedly" refers for now. The second and third statement we will, in reverse, at the end of this posting deal.
Now the author goes on to the main part of his nearly two-page article. He leads the study of Koch and Clague, entitled
Extensive glaciers in northwest North America during Medieval Time on. Since I did not intend the Springer Group 34 Euro for the review of an article to forward, and the authors (yet) a free downloadable pdf copy on their websites (
Dr. John Koch ,
Dr. John J. Clague ) available , I have to make recourse to Bailey's interpretation and go out with a heavy heart of their accuracy.
Bailey says now that this study provides new evidence by showing that several glaciers in western
North America and elsewhere in the world advanced during Medieval time and that some of these Achieved glaciers extents similar to those at the peak of the Little Ice Age, a very cold period many hundreds of dog years later.
Interestingly, there is talk here that stretched
several / some in glacier in North America and elsewhere in the world during the Middle Ages and
some / many of these several / some glaciers in North America and elsewhere in the World expansion rates reached as to the climax in the Little Ice Age - I suppose at the same glaciers - occurred.
I want from a "few" of the "few" Glacier, seen from the linked graphic
, the Gorner, Aletsch and Grindelwald glaciers . Remove As I have already mentioned in my interview with
graduate meteorologist Klaus pulse ,
Holzhauser speaks in terms of the expansion of the Gorner Glacier during the Middle Ages from the fact that they only "weak" (weak) was:
During the Mediaeval Climate Optimum , the glacier advanced weakly in the twelfth century AD and AD in 1186 reached an extent comparable with that of c. 1950th ... At no other glacier in the Swiss Alps are the fourteenth-century advance and the Mediaeval Climatic Optimum so well documented as at the Gorner glacier. (Ibid., 794)
also for the Aletsch and Grindelwald glaciers may be similarly held.
The Mediaeval Warm Period, from around AD 800 to the onset of the LIA around AD 1300, was interrupted by two weak advances in the ninth (not certain because based only on radiocarbon dating) and the twelfth centuries AD (around AD 1100) . (Ibid., 792)
Figure 2 shows evidence that, Despite differences in size and location, the variations of the Great Aletsch, the Gorner and the Lower Grindelwald glaciers show strong similarities over the last 3500 years. (Ibid., 796) (See Figure 2, 791, WVB):
But further. Bailey concludes that these now
glacial responses could not have happened in a world with a climate similar to ours today. Indeed, recent studies ( here and here ) by Mauri Pelto glaciers show that without a consistent accumulation zone (where the glacier "packs on weight) will survive not. This helps explain why today's glaciers (responding to today's warming wTorld) are retraiting to their smallest areas in many thousands of years, exposing their longer histories in the form of buried datable material for scientists like Koch and Clague to decode.
The author seems to think that during a MWP, in which, as he continued to perform below the original text of explanation, by assumption, summer should have been as warm as today, the glacier had withdrawn globally and significantly need. Since this apparently was not the case that global temperatures could then be only for a certain period during the MWP "warm" was. To quasi-supportive, two studies by Pelto be cited. Although I probably over long distances by out-one, do-would go out two (eg, the second paragraph in the Conclusion of the paper, published in Quaternary International 235 (2011), 75 is almost identical to the first 16 rows of the fourth paragraph of the Conclusion of the paper, published in The Cryosphere, 4, (2010) 74).
Back to Bailey. His conclusions may, as already granted at the beginning, on the claim of the existence of a global sourcing, in time and size matching MWP will be true, however, the definition of a MWP as I used to use and probably the majority of scientists and lay people in a similar manner, passing without a trace.
also makes me wonder whether one of a few, few are now expanding glaciers on all continents, can be assumed that, first, the earth is not globally warmed and second, that is only for a certain period within the current Warm Period "warm"?
Furthermore I consider the impact statement
This helps explain why today's glaciers (responding to today's warming world) are retraiting to their smallest areas in many thousands of years, exposing their longer histories in the form of buried datable material for scientists like Koch and Clague to decode.
to be problematic. First, there is, as mentioned, still some glaciers extend, or have extended into the late 90's. Furthermore, the statement that retreat
"today's" glacier on the "smallest areas in many thousands of years" /-form is generally asserted, is simply wrong.
Kaser et al. Go 2010, as seen from one of my previous posts
example, assuming that "absence of plateau glaciers before 1200 [for the Kilimanjaro, WVB] is shown and it is very probable that examined extended dry periods have occurred several times throughout the Holocene.
Also, to cite another counter-example, Ivy-Ochs et al speak. In the abstract to their work, "Latest Pleistocene and Holocene glacier variations in the European Alps, the fact that smaller glaciers in the Austrian and Swiss Alps over longer periods during the Holocene were as they are today.
Now, if Mr. Bailey in his interpretation of Koch and Clague to " final final "come," glacier advances in the MWP "put" period of cooling ahead "and this in turn would suggest that the term "MWP by MCA to be replaced," then I can only answer:
if so, then I call for current hot period that, since even in this glacier advances occurred and, although perhaps not as strong pronounced as claimed for the MWP - the MWP recovered, not even from the coldest period of several centuries - also by cooling phases within this period likely is that among other matters glaciological (perhaps delayed) - a global cooling, so at least for the period adopted from 1940 to 1970 are - make noticeable (ed).
That being so, it would be only logical to refer to a current warm period as CCA or malocclusion. To access the untreated statements to come back. How long it lasted
, what areas were affected and even if it existed have been questioned. Some areas seem to have been affected more by changes in precipitation than in temperature.
It could be that I am wrong but these issues do not fit very well into the present?
I think in conclusion that the term of a CCA also from a purely time-history analysis would be out probably true if you consider that 35 years ago, Newsweek even published an article in the warning of the consequences of an approaching ice age.
HOW TO READ: Climatologists are pessimistic that
political leaders will take any positive action to compensate for the climatic change, or even to allay its effects. They concede that some of the more spectacular solutions proposed, examined as melting the arctic ice cap by covering it with black soot or diverting arctic rivers might create problems far greater than those they solve.
Newsweek, April 28, 1975, 64th
