Unprecidented warmth in Arctic

Time to buy up real estate in Canada then? Plenty of room for everyone once America turns into a desert.

 

Another science website description of the research

Unprecedented Arctic warming: Average summer temperatures in last 100 years may be warmest in 120,000 years

It will be a little while before I can access the article directly. But it is a similar 'melting out' story. This time it extends beyond the reach of C14 dating. I'm not quite sure what would be the best choice for looking longer.

Of interest perhaps is that the location (Baffin Island) should have been within the medieval climate anomaly footprint, if indeed that was less than global. So we are required to bend over backwards and suggest that the materials almost (but not quite) melted out during previous warm times.

Bob included in excerpt the author's idea that it has to be CO2. Well, that's just red meat thrown, and I have no doubt that it will get chewed here. I might say it a different way. This moss-dating study does not directly show that +CO2 has already created a novel climate. It is merely consistent with a wide range of independent evidence that we are in a novel climate. A different set of attribution studies have failed to demonstrate solar, volcanic, or 'planetary alignment' as consistently strong drivers. What we are left with are CO2 (as a strong infrared absorber) or the ocean tricking us in some very complicated way.

Dang, though, Baffin Island. That is a spanner thrown into the denial machine. Somebody is going to have to attack this study in some way or another

 

Jut to counter act the denials that we know are coming, with comments like, "it snowed in
Chicago last night, in October, ergo there can't be any global warming", I suggest they understand Arctic Gyres and thier effect on lower latitude climate.


Beaufort Gyre - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

All About Sea Ice, Circulation :: National Snow and Ice Data Center

Hint, it is not good news.

Icarus

 

Baffin island is 600 miles from Greenland.
We know from Greenlands ice core records what the temp was for hundreds of thousands of years.It was warmer for most of the past 10,000 years than today.
We also know from history that Greenland was warm enough to farm in the Medieval Warm Period .
Theres been examples in the past where Gifford Miller has ignored obvious data in order to make a conclusion about CO2 warming
From Schmidt 2005 to Miller 2012: the “not needed” excuse for omitted variable fraud | Watts Up With That?

How did CO2 cause current unprecedented 125,000 year warming on Baffin Island ,when 600+ miles away it did NOT? 600 miles away shows much greater warming precedence and contradicts Millers data.Millers conclusion is meaningless with regard to CO2 warming.
Somethings not right with this study.
I imagine the same local climate that defrosted farm area in Greenland during the MWP, has shifted slightly to the east and is now defrosting Baffin Island.
Or local precipitation lessoned on Baffin island diminishing the ice cover.
If either or both is the case it would have nothing to do with CO2.

 

Just so. That is just what I anticipated. Miller et al needed to be shouted down. I asked for it, and it came.

But just read the last line in #5 above. It is so sure, so confident, so unshakable. It came from "I imagine" a few lines above. I simply cannot understand how anyone could get so sure, absent cited and cross-study concordant evidence.

We need more concordance. We need to stop airily dismissing concordances that have been found. By saying so, I don't suggest that going to 600 ppm CO2 or above will lead to an exactly specified set of local outcomes across the globe. But this (my) uncertainty is far different from presuming that everything will get better and better with more CO2. There are plenty of affinity websites describing that perfect future. If one won't apply the effort to 'audit Pangloss', how could my mere typed words raise you from your slumber?

 

In absence of my imagination, Ill just say Miller 2012 is Bull sh*t as you already know but wont admit publicly.
.

 

I can't say more about the Miller study until I have downloaded and read it. If mojo can, it is because his powers are greater than mine.

 

thank you

 

It pretty simple Mojo..."Somethings not right with this study.". Prove it!

Icarus

PS Maybe it is sunspot messing with the dilithium Chrysals. Perhaps Piers Corbyn has the answer!

 

I did just prove it .
But you are too dim to realize it.
How can this study challenge ice core data 600 + miles away.
YOU Prove that the ice core data is wrong.

 

Long Greenland ice-core information means something to the people that directly examine it, but it means something different to affinity websites that mojo has linked us here. This is a great opportunity for learning that I hope will not be lost on PC readers. I do not claim to be the person who can resolve this! Mojo does make that claim. So, my advice to PC readers is to go with mojo's 'low-effort' interpretations unless you are willing to do some work and develop your own 'high-effort' understanding of the published science.

 

Unprecedented recent summer warmth in Arctic Canada - Miller - Geophysical Research Letters - Wiley Online Library

Table_S1.xlsx

This is data from Millers paper.
Samples age from 225 to 4,285 years
Proving Baffin Island was as warm or warmer than today 225 to 4285 years ago.
Apparently his own data disputes Millers conclusion.

 

This should be very interesting.
The data shown contradicts Millers conclusion.
Nothing omitted can rectify this fact.
If the final paper includes 10 additional samples of 40,000 year old moss, it wont mean beans.
You cant have more recent moss from 225 to 4,285 years ,and conclude that the thawing 40,000 year old moss proves current "unprecedented warming".
I have a feeling the data on the GRL website was never intended for public viewing and shows that Millers conclusion is factually improper.

 

For the dim witted .If there was moss growing on Baffin Island 225 to 4,285 years ago.
The ice must have receded 225 to 4,285 years ago.
Meaning it was as warm or warmer 225 to 4,285 years ago as today .(assuming temp is the only affect on ice caps which is a silly premise)
While atmospheric CO2 was much lower.
Thus CO2 was not the cause of thawing 225 to 4,285 years ago.
Some other mechanism caused warming .

 

I would agree completely with mojo that moss only grows where it has a substrate other than ice. I have not yet taken steps required to download the GRL paper and its supplemental. Can you all forgive me?

But really I thought we were talking here about -40kyrs, and that older moss melting out was beyond the reach of AMS C14 dating. Later, I will have it in hand. In the meantime I advise you all (again) to rely on mojo's offered affinity-website interpretations. Unless you might wish to go to the library and read it for yourselves.

I am involved just now with how plant-derived carbon is used by microbes in response to available chemical resources. It is fascinating, but time consuming. So I won't be helping here to audit Miller. Y'all say where he got it right or wrong. Not my thread.