General Discussion

DCBob

(24,689 posts)

22. There are numerous methodologies to determine past climate changes.

Fri Mar 23, 2012, 12:01 PM

Mar 2012

Most of them show the current warming is more extreme than anything seen in at least 1200 years.

From NOAA..

In summary, it appears that the late 20th and early 21st centuries are likely the warmest period the Earth has seen in at least 1200 years. For a summary of the latest available research on the nature of climate during the "Medieval Warm Period", please see Box 6.4 of the IPCC 2007 Palaeoclimate chapter. To learn more about the "Medieval Warm Period", please read this review published in Climatic Change, written by M.K. Hughes and H.F. Diaz. (Click here for complete review reference). Discussion of the last 2,000 years, including the Medieval Warm Period, and regional patterns and uncertainties, appears in the National Research Council Report titled "Surface Temperature Reconstructions for the Last 2,000 Years", available from the National Academy Press.

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/globalwarming/medieval.html

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

34 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Medieval warming WAS global – new science contradicts IPCC [View all] FarCenter Mar 2012 OP

Extremely vague statement tabatha Mar 2012 #1

+1 ProfessorGAC Mar 2012 #2

"warming-alarmist" in the first sentence immediately colours whatever this article is saying... SidDithers Mar 2012 #3

Precisely. n/t ljm2002 Mar 2012 #9

Agreed. mmonk Mar 2012 #12

That's what Bohunk68 Mar 2012 #18

More junk science from denier Lewis Page JBoy Mar 2012 #4

he has quite a record..., G_j Mar 2012 #19

LOL... good lawd fascisthunter Mar 2012 #5

Lewis page also believes pscot Mar 2012 #6

The term "climate change" is vague enough to allow for an ice age. Boojatta Mar 2012 #8

My understanding is that if the Gulf Stream fails hootinholler Mar 2012 #34

How quickly did the warming occur? mmonk Mar 2012 #7

while the author of the article is a bit of a kook... ProdigalJunkMail Mar 2012 #10

The study probably does not say what the reporter/columnist asserts it says Viking12 Mar 2012 #14

The study does claim in the abstract ProdigalJunkMail Mar 2012 #16

"This ikaite record qualitatively supports..." Viking12 Mar 2012 #20

yes...that is why i said IF... ProdigalJunkMail Mar 2012 #21

Nope. No quantitative data at all. Viking12 Mar 2012 #24

so, would it then contradict the other data ProdigalJunkMail Mar 2012 #25

My super-fast reading is that it is in line withing existing proxy analyses back to at least the LIA Viking12 Mar 2012 #26

ahhh, that would 'splain it ProdigalJunkMail Mar 2012 #28

If that story were any more slanted the words would slide right off my screen. nt Codeine Mar 2012 #11

What complete Bunk Bandit Mar 2012 #13

This is about temperature, not carbon dioxide FarCenter Mar 2012 #15

There are numerous methodologies to determine past climate changes. DCBob Mar 2012 #22

The statement that is being contested is the following: FarCenter Mar 2012 #29

The article referenced in the OP does nothing to 'contest' the IPCC Viking12 Mar 2012 #30

The lead researcher was quoted in the Syracuse University release as saying: FarCenter Mar 2012 #32

So? That says NOTHING about your false assertions about the MWP and the IPCC. Viking12 Mar 2012 #33

The Medieval Warm Period was actually cooler than what we considered "normal" temperatures Lydia Leftcoast Mar 2012 #17

I doubt that pre-fossil fuel populations would have influenced climate due to biofuel burning FarCenter Mar 2012 #23

Medieval Bikini Babe... Tikki Mar 2012 #27

It's F'n Lewis Page exagerating - again intaglio Mar 2012 #31