Posted on 10/26/2009 1:08:59 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
SEDIMENT cores from a small Arctic lake in Canada stretching back 200,000 years show unprecedented gains in global warming since 1950, indicating human activity is the likely cause.
"The past few decades have been unique in the past 200,000 years in terms of the changes we see in the biology and chemistry recorded in the cores,'' University of Colorado glaciologist Yarrow Axford said.
"We see clear evidence for warming in one of the most remote places on Earth at a time when the Arctic should be cooling because of natural processes."
Mr Axford is the chief author of the study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
For thousands of years, environmental changes in a remote lake on Canada's Baffin Island closely matched natural, cyclical climate changes such as those caused by the Earth's periodic wobble as it swings around the sun, the researchers said.
However, lake sediment cores dating from 1950 show that expected climate cooling was overridden by human activity like greenhouse gas emissions.
Researchers were able to reconstruct the local climate over the past 200,000 years by analysing algae, insect fossils and geochemical traces in sediment cores extracted from the 40ha lake.
The cores stretch back 80,000 years further than existing Greenland ice cores, revealing environmental conditions prevalent during two earlier Ice Ages and three interglacial periods.
Researchers found that several types of mosquito-like midges that for many thousands of years thrived in cold climate surrounding the lake suddenly began declining at around 1950; two midge species adapted to the coldest weather disappeared altogether.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.com.au ...
Be sure to ignore all the contradicting evidence. Look ONLY at our new cores, because only THEY are right!
LOLOLOL!
It all depends on what the definition of "global" is. :-)
If Global warming is a done deal, the Debate is Over.....Why does the GW crowd keep changing the subject from the OLD ARGUMENTS and bring up NEW ARGUMENTS ?
With missing sunspots for the last year or so, this Winter is going to be a hard sell.....Ice on the ground trumps Sediment in the lake.
How dare you imply that there could be such a thing as a global warming!? The peanut gallery insists that global warming is false!
I hope the snow is 2 feet deep and falling fast when al gore and obama and schwarzenegger fly to Copenhagen for Hopenhagen.
Alternative explanation: Someone was growing pot around the lake.
200,000 yrs is a blip on the geological scale. Bet they don’t want to go back further.
They have had this stuff a planned out for quite a while now.
They should have planned the meeting for summer months because we are due for some cold weather that will fly in the face of their theories.
Did anyone else note the glaring peculiarity of this information?
That is, the headline is about *geology*, sediment samples, and suddenly there is a segue right into *biology*, about midges.
This sounds suspiciously like looking for data to support the conclusions they have already reached. So let’s look further.
They say that they have data in the sediment going back 200,000 years, and yet the last 60 years have been markedly different. Since they did this with a core sample, how much of that core sample is the last 60 years?
1/3,333th and a third of however large that core sample. 200,000 divided by 60. So how big is that core sample?
For the sake of argument, let’s assume it is a really big one, 10 meters in length. That’s about 32.8 feet. About 1/3rd the length of a football field. Even at that scale, the last 60 years is about 3 millimeters in thickness.
And that 3 millimeters, of an improbably long core sample, is the *last* 3 millimeters, far less affected by compression than a sample, say, 7 meters down.
But how about them midges, huh?
"We see clear evidence for warming in one of the most remote places on Earth at a time when the Arctic should be cooling because of natural processes."
Mr Axford is the chief author of the study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
For thousands of years, environmental changes in a remote lake on Canada's Baffin Island closely matched natural, cyclical climate changes such as those caused by the Earth's periodic wobble as it swings around the sun, the researchers said.
However, lake sediment cores dating from 1950 show that expected climate cooling was overridden by human activity like greenhouse gas emissions.
Researchers were able to reconstruct the local climate over the past 200,000 years by analysing algae, insect fossils and geochemical traces in sediment cores extracted from the 40ha lake.
Interesting.
At the Institute we have been vocal about putting any faith in the Global Climate Models for many reasons - all modeling assumes one knows all the angles and all the pathways; and that is total hubris, especially as far as Earth's climatic variation. In the philosophical sense modelling is hardly science at all, but to a degree humanistic fantasy, like movies or Christmas train gardens.
In this report however if it is legitimate, and one can't dismiss PNAS, there is evidence something is recently environmentally out of whack with Earth's precessional (wobble) period. If one looks at 200,000 years of reliable periodic association then sees something incongruent, then there is apparently something unique happening.
But this statement:
However, lake sediment cores dating from 1950 show that expected climate cooling was overridden by human activity like greenhouse gas emissions.
is really ignorant and quite annoying; hopefully it wasn't the scientists who made it. It exposes the bigotry associated with the whole anthropogenic claim. There is little reason whatsoever to associate the incongruent happening to anthropogenic causes when such dramatic variations have occurred during other era's when SUV's did not exist - if of course such incongruent happenings did indeed occur when SUV's did not exist.
Which means to make any argument at all for "human activity like greenhouse gas emissions," a greater geological perspective is needed to rule out non-anthropogenic causes. That is to say no one is denying global warming occurs or that it has occurred during humanity's industrialization; but to say that industrialization is the cause of global warming is bogus until proven; and given that CO2 has been significantly higher in the geological past with its subsequent reduction and while life on Earth prospered, there is no reason to react unscientifically (as so many politicians routinely do).
Johnny Suntrade
Where is the PROOF?.....
.....Correlation is NOT CAUSATION.
The title is misleading and/or dishonest.
I would have thought the early days of industrial revolution times would have popped up way before 1950 under their surmise.
but what do I know? I’m not paid via grants to deliver said product or info on que.
Correlation is not causation...except when global warming is involved.
It would make sense to "clear out the dust" to improve one's sense of smell.
Rewatch Glengarry Glen Cross for parallel behavior among high-pressure salesmen and desperation.
Eliminating that was a critical mission of the original and all subsequent examples of the “Hockey Stick.”
That area got it's first important military outposts in the 1940’s due to World War Two. Subsequently, several military bases were extended due to the Cold War. DDT was prominently introduced to those bases to cut down on the summer swarm of mosquitoes.
DDT, introduced in the late 40's and early 50's killed the midges.
Other scientists are finding traces of DDT in the various nearby glaciers from the same time period!
After careful research, I discovered a correlation between the release of the film “Nanook of the North,” the moon landing and the mysterious appearance of midges on Bikini Beach. How much money can I get and when can I go?
Are we discussing the last 200,000 years or since 1950?
Once they make up their minds, we can go from there.
My first response would be "total BS!"
Many of us have seen the swings in temperature for the last 400,000 years and they are way too numerous to argue with, both for low and high temperature periods.
By the way, geniuses, who elected you as the final arbiters of the constant ideal temperature God intended?
As soon as I find it, I will post the email that a famous researcher got from a well-known activist requesting support for "eliminating the medieval warm period."
Astonishingly, he wrote that in an email over his actual name.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.