Thursday, February 08, 2007

We have to get rid of the Medieval Warm Period

I sent an edited copy of "Debunking of Global Warming" to our local newspaper. In it I featured how much debunking information could be found by simply Googling "Medieval Warm Period Harvard." At the end of my letter, the editor added a remark, presumably to rally the man-made global warming faithful, that they Google "Medieval Warm Period MIT." Apparently the editor thought that the "real" scientists at MIT would set those Harvard "pretend" scientists straight.

Of course, I rushed to follow his advice, and found almost all the first page of articles Google displayed were great for my purposes, and deadly for the global warming enthusiasts.

The following is the "thank you" letter I sent, expressing how grateful I was for his productive research assistance.

Thanks, Editor, for suggesting I Google “Medieval Warm Period MIT.” When I had previously Googled with “Harvard” instead of “MIT,” I found conclusive proof debunking man-caused global warming in the Harvard study (Dr. Soon, et al) of over 240 climate studies.

However, when I Googled with “MIT,” I immediately found several more debunking studies, and powerful support for current global warming being caused by natural, not human, activities. Several great quotes came from Richard S. Lindzen, professor of meteorology and atmospheric sciences at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), who had participated in the Inter-Governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), Third Assessment Review (2001).

When Professor Lindzen was asked if natural variation would be included in future IPCC reports, he was skeptical: "I have my doubts. I participated fully in the Third Assessment, and it was clear that there were political pressures. Participation was very time consuming and scientifically of no value," commented the MIT expert.

Professor Lindzen also stated: "To the best of my knowledge, Dr. Soon is correct (to state that the 20th century is not the warmest period of the last millennium). The bulk of the literature accepts a Medieval Warm Period, though there is some argument as to whether it was truly global."

In Technology Review, published by MIT, I found the article “Medieval Global Warming,” by Richard Muller, an unabashed man-made global warming enthusiast. Mr. Muller noted that M. Mann and colleagues in 1998 and 1999 published a report and graph (the “hockey stick”), that showed world temperatures had been remarkably constant for 900 years, and then shot up rapidly during the past 100 years coinciding with the rapid increase in industrialization and concomitant increase in fossil fuel combustion.

Conveniently for global warming enthusiasts, the Mann study left out both the Medieval Warm Period and Little Ice Age, even though a previous IPCC study had included both.

Why did they leave them out? Because, if left in, Al Gore couldn’t have a book and movie themed on the 20th century being the warmest period of the last 1000 years.

“We have to get rid of the Medieval Warm Period," David Deming, a geoscientist at the University of Oklahoma, was e-mailed by a major participant in the IPCC assessments. As Dr. Lindzen confirmed, this was accomplished by the Third Assessment in 2001.

Back to Mr. Muller, who commented: “It was unfortunate that many scientists endorsed the hockey stick before it could be subjected to the tedious review of time. Ironically, it appears that these scientists skipped the vetting precisely because the results were so important.”

The Harvard study by Soon et al soon filled the science void created by Mann et al, and reestablished the Medieval Warm Period and Little Ice Age. It’s conclusion stated succinctly: “(T)he 20th century is neither the warmest century nor the century with the most extreme weather of the past 1000 years”

Mr. Muller then added: “S. McIntyre and R. McKitrick published a paper in Energy and Environment with a detailed critique of the original hockey stick work. They stated bluntly that the original Mann papers contained ‘collation errors, unjustifiable truncations of extrapolation of source data, obsolete data, geographical location errors, incorrect calculations of principal components, and other quality control defects.’ Moreover, when they corrected these errors, the medieval warm period came back strongly.”

Finally, Editor, by following your advice I came across the most thorough and detailed debunking of man-made global warming I have found to date: “Apocalypse Cancelled” and “Climate Chaos? Don’t Believe It,” both by Lord Monckton (Christopher Walter Monckton, 3rd Viscount Monckton of Brenchley).

In 33 pages of data and analyses, and seven pages of references, Lord Monckton shatters the “hockey stick,” confirms the Medieval Warm Period and Little Ice Age, proves they were global, addresses rising sea levels and their relationship to the last Ice Age, reports polar bears are thriving in most of their ranges, finds the Chinese reported no Artic sea ice in the 1400’s, shows that for hundreds of thousands of years increased carbon dioxide levels followed global warming, not preceded it, and demonstrates that solar energy cycles, not greenhouse gases, are the cause of global warming.

Did you know, temperatures went down slightly from 1945 to 1970, matching diminished solar activity, even as greenhouse gas concentrations were steadily rising?

Phew. And there’s more.

Once again, Editor, thank you for your suggestion that led me to such productive research. It’s not often that someone who disagrees so profoundly with me gives me so much help in proving my positions.

Please click on the label below to see all my articles on this topic.

No comments: