The paper quietly adds to over 1,300 peer-reviewed, published non-hockey-sticks demonstrating that present day temperatures are not unusual, unnatural, or unprecedented in comparison to the rest of the Holocene. Non-hockey-stick papers are published in paleoclimate journals on an almost daily basis, yet never receive any mention in the mainstream media since they demolish the AGW "message."
 |
| Horizontal axis is years before the present. Top graph shows mean annual air temperature. The last ice age peaked about 20,000 years ago, followed by a rapid warming that peaked in the mid-Holocene ~8000-6000 years ago, followed by cooling to present day temperatures. |
 |
| Bottom graph shows temperatures over the past 14,000 years with present day temperature indicated by the dashed horizontal line. Temperatures were ~1C higher than the present ~13,000 years ago and during the mid-Holocene Climate Optimum ~8000-6000 years ago. |
Abstract
Branched glycerol dialkyl glycerol tetraether (GDGT) distributions observed in a sediment core from Lake McKenzie were utilized to quantitatively reconstruct the pattern of mean annual air temperature (MAAT) from coastal subtropical eastern Australia between 37 and 18.3 cal ka BP and 14.0 cal ka BP to present. Both the reconstructed trend and amplitude of MAAT [mean annual air temperature] changes from the top of the sediment core were nearly identical to a local instrumental MAAT record from Fraser Island, providing confidence that in this sediment core branched GDGTs could be used to produce a quantitative record of past MAAT. The reconstructed trend of MAAT during 37 to 18.3 cal ka BP and timing of the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM) in the Lake McKenzie record were in agreement with previously published nearby marine climate records. The amplitude of lower-than-present MAAT during the LGM potentially provides information on the latitude of separation of the Tasman Front from the East Australian current in the subtropical western Pacific. The Lake McKenzie record shows an earlier onset of near modern day warm temperatures in the early Holocene compared to marine records and the presence of a warmer than present day period during the mid-Holocene.
Australian offers $5,000 reward to prove GH conjecture correct.
ReplyDeleteNo average model prediction will ever be anywhere near correct because models are based on an incorrect assumption of isothermal conditions in the absence of greenhouse "pollutants" like water vapour and carbon dioxide.
When my book is available late April there will be advertised in Australian media and on websites a $5,000 reward for anyone in the world who can use valid physics to debunk the Loschmidt gravito-thermal effect (on which my hypothesis is based) and produce a similar study to mine which does not show a negative correlation between temperature and precipitation records, but rather one which is in keeping with the implied greenhouse sensitivity of about 10 degrees of warming for every 1% of water vapour in the atmosphere, this calculation being based on a mean of 2.5% water vapour causing 25 degrees of the claimed 33 degrees of warming.
The WUWT article about the Loschmidt effect was flawed in that it overlooked the thermal gradient in solids. When you connect a conductor to the top and bottom of a cylinder of gas you create a new combined system. Then a new state of thermodynamic equilibrium (with a thermal gradient based on the weighted mean specific heat of the gas and metal) evolves and perpetual circulation of energy is of course impossible.
My four molecule thought experiment clearly demonstrates why the gravito-thermal effect is valid and has set up thermal gradients in tropospheres over the life of planets throughout our Solar System. This occurs by convection, where I use the term as physicists do to embrace both diffusion and advection. Such convection is restoring thermodynamic equilibrium (with maximum entropy) in accord with the Second Law of Thermodynamics. An isothermal troposphere would not be what the Second Law indicates would evolve.
All this is a matter of thermodynamics at a level requiring at least a major in physics. Only five out of 29 on the SkS team have such qualifications, as I do also, and Neal King is one of them. You can see how he fumbled on Lucia's blog and his final post has possibly bluffed you, but it depends on a totally false claim that some molecules accelerate downwards under gravity, whilst he incorrectly claims an equal number decelerate - yes, slow down, when "falling" towards the surface.
Climatologists are incorrect in assuming isothermal conditions in tropospheres and even in sealed cylinders. Graeff did at least find some gradient in virtually all his 850 experiments. He got his physics theory wrong, but not his measurements. Advection is measurable net molecular movement which appears to amount to gas flowing over the sloping thermal plane, always in all accessible directions away from any new source of thermal energy which disturbed the previous state of thermodynamic equilibrium.
It is not a waste of time to consider the validity of the gravito-thermal effect, because it does away with any need to explain the observed thermal gradients in tropospheres using radiation calculations relating to heated surfaces. Of course you can't do that for Uranus, because there is no direct Solar radiation or any surface at the base of its nominal troposphere. You need to think outside the sphere that is Earth.
Of course the Earth was warmer 6,000 years ago. You learn that in Earth Since 101. It's called the Hypsithermal or Holocene Climate Optimum.
ReplyDeleteIn parts of Southeast Asian where the craton is stable, the rivers have incised their banks by about 2 meters (6.6 feet) where they enter the sea because sea level is now lower by that amount.
Inland several kilometers from the sea coast there are natural limestone formations with horizontal grooves cut by waves when sea level was higher.