Nature Unbound III: Holocene climate variability (Part A)
I added this to my discussion on the Holocene, particularly because it adds a graph on the only worldwide full Holocene climate proxy temperature reconstruction. But this article is important on its own, and deserves your attention. Read the whole thing, it is necessary reading to understand the current climate alarmism in context. "Conclusions 1) The Holocene is a period of 11,700 years characterized by an intense warming for about 2,000 years and a progressively accelerating cooling for the last 6,000 years, following the changes in obliquity of the Earth’s axis. 2) Fluctuations in greenhouse gases cannot explain Holocene climatic changes and, indeed, their concentration changes run opposite to temperature trends for most of the Holocene. 3) Climate models perform very poorly when trying to reproduce Holocene climate evolution. This is likely due to having too much sensitivity to changes in greenhouse gases and too little sensitivity to insolation and solar variability. 4) The Holocene Climatic Optimum was a more humid period, 1-2°C warmer than the Little Ice Age, during which global glaciers reached their minimum extent. 5) The Mid-Holocene Transition, caused by orbital changes, brought a complete change in climatic mode, with a decrease in solar forcing and an increase in oceanic forcing, displacing the climatic equator and ending the African Humid Period, while increasing ENSO activity." Once you understand how the entirety of the Holocene undermines the argument the climate alarmists are making based on a tiny few data points comprising the last 150 years of the 12,000 year long Holocene it becomes obvious how obscene their lies are, and how foolish. This is very much like two accident reconstruction engineers being dispatched to an accident. On arriving one of the engineers (the climate alarmists) believe that out of the 120 foot accident scene, with its 120 foot skid, ending in the wreck, all that is necessary is to look at the last 1.5 feet. From that scant data he believes he can reconstruct the entire event. Perhaps, but why take the chance? They have the data from the full 120 foot crash site, they have the time, why not do it right and reconstruct the entire data set, and find out the answer using the full data set? This compares directly to the climate alarmist and the Holocene's 12,000 years versus their desire to only look at the last 150 years. Don't be fooled, that is what they are trying to do.
Comments
|
AuthorMaddog Categories
All
|