Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Interesting graph of Greenland Temperatures

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU
 
Nederland Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-01-10 11:52 AM
Original message
Interesting graph of Greenland Temperatures
It puts current conditions in a historical context:




Data taken from NOAA ice core records: ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/paleo/icecore/greenland/summit/gisp2/isotopes/gisp2_temp_accum_alley2000.txt

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Statistical Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-01-10 12:13 PM
Response to Original message
1. Has it ever been explained what caused the 3 previous warmings or the abrupt change?
Thanks for the chart I knew about the Medieval warming period but had no idea about the 2 prior ones.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joshcryer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-01-10 04:50 PM
Response to Reply #1
10. It was a localized event over Greenland, it wasn't a global event.
There's still debate about the cause.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nederland Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-01-10 06:10 PM
Response to Reply #10
16. Actually
Edited on Mon Mar-01-10 06:10 PM by Nederland
There is still considerable debate over whether or not it was a local or global event. The Wikipedia article on the subject notes the following:

An ice core from the eastern Bransfield Basin, Antarctic Peninsula, identifies events of the Little Ice Age and Medieval Warm Period.<26> The core shows a distinctly cold period about AD 10001100, illustrating that "MWP" is a moveable term, and that during the "warm" period there were, regionally, periods of both warmth and cold.

Corals in the tropical Pacific Ocean suggest that relatively cool, dry conditions may have persisted early in the millennium, consistent with a La Nia-like configuration of the El Nio-Southern Oscillation patterns.<27> Although there is an extreme scarcity of data from Australia (for both the Medieval Warm Period and Little Ice Age) evidence from wave-built shingle terraces for a permanently full Lake Eyre<28> during the ninth and tenth centuries is consistent with this La Nia-like configuration, though of itself inadequate to show how lake levels varied from year to year or what climatic conditions elsewhere in Australia were like.

Adhikari and Kumon (2001), whilst investigating sediments in Lake Nakatsuna in central Japan, verified the existence there of both the Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age.<29>

"Temperatures derived from an 18O/16O profile through a stalagmite found in a New Zealand cave (40.67S, 172.43E) suggested the Medieval Warm Period to have occurred between AD 1050 and 1400 and to have been 0.75C warmer than the Current Warm Period."<30> The MWP has also been evidenced in New Zealand by an 1100-year tree-ring record.<31>


26. ^ Khim, B-K; Yoon H.; Kang C.Y.; Bahk J.J. (November 2002). "Unstable Climate Oscillations during the Late Holocene in the Eastern Bransfield Basin, Antarctic Peninsula". Quaternary Research 58 (3): 234245(12). doi:10.1006/qres.2002.2371. http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/ap/qr/2002/00000058/00000003/art02371. Retrieved 2006-05-04.
27. ^ Cobb, Kim M.; Chris Charles, Hai Cheng, R. Lawrence Edwards (July 8, 2003). "The Medieval Cool Period And The Little Warm Age In The Central Tropical Pacific? Fossil Coral Climate Records Of The Last Millennium". The Climate of the Holocene (ICCI) 2003. http://www.pac.ne.jp/IUGG2003/EN/program.asp?session_id=MC12&program_id=022025-1. Retrieved 2006-05-04.
28. ^ Allen, Robert J.; The Australasian Summer Monsoon, Teleconnections, and Flooding in the Lake Eyre Basin; published 1985 by Royal Geographical Society of Australasia, S.A. Branch; ISBN 0909112096
29. ^ Adhikari DP, Kumon, F. (2001). "Climatic changes during the past 1300 years as deduced from the sediments of Lake Nakatsuna, central Japan.". Limnology 2 (3): 157168. doi:10.1007/s10201-001-8031-7.
30. ^ Wilson, A.T., Hendy, C.H. and Reynolds, C.P. 1979. Short-term climate change and New Zealand temperatures during the last millennium. Nature 279: 315317.
31. ^ Cook E.R., Palmer J.G., DArrigo R.D. (2002), "Evidence for a Medieval Warm Period in a 1,100 year tree-ring reconstruction of past austral summer temperatures in New Zealand", Geophysical Research Letters, 29, doi:10.1029/2001GL014580.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joshcryer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-01-10 08:42 PM
Response to Reply #16
25. Fair enough, but our reconsturctions show that we are globally, higher than MWP.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Viking12 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-01-10 12:33 PM
Response to Original message
2. Umm no, it doesn't put current conditions in historical context.
a) We're not witnessing Dansgaard-Oeschger event like the Younger Dryas and b) central Greenland is not a representation of global conditions.

Joanne Nova? Really that's your source for this graph? Why do you try to hide it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nederland Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-01-10 04:46 PM
Response to Reply #2
8. Interesting Observation
I find it interesting that you think it is significant who created the graph. Given that the data comes from NOAA, why does it matter who created the graph? I was under the impression that one of the central premises of scientific method is that authority is irrelevant, only empirical data matters. In other words, it doesn't matter if the ideas or conclusions are coming from a Nobel prize winning scientist, a first year grad student, or a 12 year old kid. If the data is correct, the presenter is irrelevant.

Odd that you think otherwise.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joshcryer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-01-10 04:52 PM
Response to Reply #8
11. The graph isn't capable of filling the picture for the past 100 years or so.
We know, though, that we could not drill a GISP3 in the same relative location of GISP2 and get accurate results.

'cause the darn ice has melted there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nederland Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-01-10 05:58 PM
Response to Reply #11
15. True
However, I don't understand your point. The fact that the last 100 years are different is clearly indicated by the color of the line changing from blue to red. There is no attempt at deception in the graph.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Viking12 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-01-10 06:53 PM
Response to Reply #15
17. ...and what's the source of the data for the last 100 years?
Unless otherwise identified, I'm assuming some denier drew it in with crayon.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nederland Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-01-10 07:05 PM
Response to Reply #17
18. Are you blind?
The source of the data is clearly labeled on the graph and specifies the author, article title, and journal from which the data came from.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Viking12 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-01-10 07:42 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. Are you mathematically illiterate?
What is 0.0951409(1000)? Where's the source for the data of the last 105 years? If you can't identify a source for the last 100 years supposedly represented on the graph, how can you suggest this "puts the current condition in historical context"?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joshcryer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-01-10 08:37 PM
Response to Reply #19
23. Because the core was made in 1993 it's actually missing the last 122 years.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nederland Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-02-10 12:12 AM
Response to Reply #23
26. Thank you
In other words, all the data comes from the source specified on the graph. But is it the last 122 years, or the last 95?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Viking12 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-02-10 07:06 AM
Response to Reply #26
27. So you admit that the data provided say nothing about the last ~100 years.
Thus, the graph does nothing to put "current conditions in historical context" and your OP was idiotic and you owe everyone here an apology.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Viking12 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-02-10 08:14 AM
Response to Reply #23
28. I used the publication date, 2000 as the benchmark.
.095(1000)+10=105 years. 1993 might be the better starting point but the literature doesn't make that clear. It doesn't become any more clear after reading Alley et. al. (2000) (which BTW does not mention the 20th century, desptie what certain trolls may think)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joshcryer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-01-10 08:21 PM
Response to Reply #18
21. Actually, the source provided ends 100 years ago.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Viking12 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-01-10 04:59 PM
Response to Reply #8
12. It does matter when the source has a well-documented history of distortion
I don't have time to run the numbers myself, but from examining Alley's original article it is pretty clear the graph is a misrepresentation of the data.

Funny how you ignore completely the substantive problems with your post. Typical denier tactics.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nederland Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-01-10 05:52 PM
Response to Reply #12
14. Are you claiming distortion?
Has the NOAA data been improperly displayed on the graph?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joshcryer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-01-10 08:22 PM
Response to Reply #14
22. It's more that you are reading it incorrectly due to how the graph is presented.
The red line is not representative of the last 100 years, though it's clear you believe it is. :(

Easy to fall for though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joshcryer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-01-10 08:39 PM
Response to Reply #12
24. It would be nice for a source, so that those presenting it can be better informed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kristopher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-02-10 02:14 PM
Response to Reply #8
32. Horsecrap
Data is coupled with reasoning, and when a person is clearly associated with deliberate distortions of the data through false reasoning, the knowledge of that persons past efforts is fundamental to what is presented in public discussion.

That is one of the problems the process of peer review is designed to guard against.

Of course you know all of that, which is why you hide the authorship and attempt to downplay the sins of the author.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Birthmark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-01-10 12:41 PM
Response to Original message
3. It puts current conditions in a historical context...
Edited on Mon Mar-01-10 12:49 PM by Birthmark
...in Greenland...assuming it's accurate and representative.

HINT, for those of you playing at home: Greenland is not the entire Earth. It DOES, however, have local weather. ;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
guardian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-01-10 12:52 PM
Response to Original message
4. Your big mistake
is that the time scale is too long. You only want to show the last 150 years. That way the temperature increase looks dramatic and you can needlessly scare the bejesus out of people with predictions of DOOM!

Can you imagine the chaos it would cause if all the doomer scientists used this sort of time scale? Then people would see all the hype is actually just normal fluctuations in the environment. Unless of course if you manipulate the data to hide the "inconvenient truth."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Viking12 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-01-10 01:06 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. How about the last 2000 years, globally represented?
Edited on Mon Mar-01-10 01:09 PM by Viking12
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
guardian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-01-10 01:14 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. A good graph ...
but your scale on the y axis is still too coarse. Come on! tenths of a degree? you can do better than that. This hardly shows anything. I recommend using pico-degrees then the magnitude of change will look realllllllly scary.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
guardian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-01-10 02:02 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. Here's evidence that somebody is doing it right
See you need to get the graph that these people saw. You'll never be able to convince people of impending doom with just a few tenths of a degree change.


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/southamerica/argentina/7344329/Baby-survives-parents-global-warming-suicide-pact.html

Francisco Lotero, 56, and Miriam Coletti, 23, shot their daughter and her toddler brother before killing themselves.
Their son Francisco, two, died instantly after being hit in the back. Her parents said they feared the effects of global warming in a suicide note discovered by police.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joshcryer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-01-10 04:49 PM
Response to Original message
9. The GISP2 ice core was drilled in 1993.
http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=65,-43&spn=0.3,0.3&t=h&q=65,-43">The relative location of the ice core has experienced substantial melting:



You could not drill a GISP3 in the same location and get the same results. Also, GISP2 has no data for the last 100 years or so.

Greenland is likely far beyond any of these warming periods.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Statistical Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-01-10 05:13 PM
Response to Reply #9
13. You sure about that I thought average temperature durring ME warm period was 3 degrees higher?
Edited on Mon Mar-01-10 05:16 PM by Statistical

On edit: I guess not. It was warmest period prior to 20th century.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval_Warm_Period
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joshcryer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-01-10 08:20 PM
Response to Reply #13
20. We now know that MWP was a localized effect in the northern hemisphere.
MWP did not cover the globe.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
guardian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-02-10 09:21 AM
Response to Reply #20
29. Let me get this straight
500 years of the MWP in the entire northern hemisphere proves nothing. But "Hottest Summer Ever Recorded For W. Australia; Perth Endures Driest Summer On Record" is proof of AGW.


........right


May I have another glass of more Slammin' Strawberry Kiwi? Just how high of a BKC (i.e., Blood Kool-Aid Content) do you need to have to be to a doomer?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FBaggins Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-02-10 01:13 PM
Response to Reply #20
31. We "know" no such thing
We speculate that this may be the case... but it is by no means an established fact.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
muriel_volestrangler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-02-10 01:01 PM
Response to Original message
30. So, what are the current conditions?
We've established this graph is for temperatures from before 1900 or so. What has happened since?

The closest temperature station I can find that has been going for the past 100 years is this one: http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/gistemp_station.py?id=431043600000&data_set=1&num_neighbors=1

(other possible candidates here: http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/findstation.py?datatype=gistemp&data_set=1&name=&world_map.x=289&world_map.y=41 )

At a rough guess, I'd say that shows an increase of about 2 degrees - back up to the 'Roman warming' level. And I don't think there's an increase of 2 degrees in 100 years anywhere on that graph.

So, the context for the present seems to be "unprecedently fast warming, that has so far warmed the Greenland climate to significantly warmer than it was in the Medieval Warm Period".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joshcryer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-03-10 12:05 AM
Response to Reply #30
33. Excellent find. Would be interesting to plot that on to the original.
Way above MWP.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jman0 Donating Member (129 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-03-10 09:06 AM
Response to Original message
34. It's from a GW Denier site
Edited on Wed Mar-03-10 09:14 AM by jman0
check it out http://joannenova.com.au/2010/02/the-big-picture-65-million-years-of-temperature-swings/

Original source is David Lappi, a geologist that works for an unnamed petroleum company in Alaska.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Viking12 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-03-10 10:44 AM
Response to Reply #34
35. That has been pointed out....
along with the facts that ) the ice core data set does not include anything from the last 100 years, and b) one 8" hole in Greenland does not represent global temperatures. Despite that information, the graph still puts "current conditions in historical context" according to the denier(s).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Jan 18th 2022, 12:23 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC