http://www.clim-past.net/2/99/2006/cp-2-99-2006.pdf

I’m not sure what changes in land-use they are referring to. Europe’s population circa 1000 was no more than 38 million. It doubled by 1350, but reduced to 55 million by disease, starvation and war. Most of the famous forests of Central Europe and the UK remained intact, and modern farming methods really didn’t hit Europe until the middle of the LIA. Are they blaming the MWP on human induced changes to the earth’s albedo in a small sections of Europe?

Demesure,

I’m not sure if ENSO is as big as a reason for the significant drop off in Atlantic Hurricanes for 2006. If you check NOAA’s link below and thier MEI numbers, 2006′s Multivariate Index (MEI) is about the same for 2005 (June-Sept):

http://www.cdc.noaa.gov/people/klaus.wolter/MEI/

NOAA’s medium range forcasters are calling for a “mild” winter for most of the US (East Coast is the exception) due to a recent increase ENSO numbers. For those living in the middle US, where the late summer and autumn have been particularly cold and wet, this winter is forecasted to be warm and dry.

“long term cooling induced by changes in land-use in Europe”

Are these people mad. I thought the warmers theory was that forest clearance was causing increase in CO2 levels, and therefore, in their minds, an increase in temperature. But apparently it caused cooling instead.

1. Deny it existed

2. Adjust the hockey stick a little and say it was exaggerated.

3. Call it a regional phenomenon

4. Concoct a Gulf Stream theory

5. Finally concede it, but say it was just as hot now than then!

Still existing is the Vikings In Greenland Problem to explain. Maybe something can be whipped up a la the “scholarship” which explains AGW causes both retreating and advancing glaciers!

Even seasonal models (same type as climate models) fail miserably with 6 months forecasts on el Nino, a major event which can vent an enormous amout of ocean heat into the atmosphere as in 1998 for example. No one predicted this year’s huge el Nino even by August (see oct-nov-dec forecasts in graph). BTW, that’s why this year hurricane forescasts were also that bad (a strong el Nino means a weak hurricane season).
So a model explaining what MAY happen during the MWP and what MIGHT cause it is just good for an IGNobel prize contest.

Ref: http://iri.columbia.edu/climate/forecast/sst/pac_atl2006.html

some interesting comments:
Anonymous Referee #2
Received and published: 3 August 2006

Introduction (p 2, first paragraph, lines 4-5): Cite some attribution studies instead.

Introduction (p 2, first paragraph, line 8): Jones and Mann 2004 is a review paper. I suggest citing papers presenting reconstructions (e.g., Jones 1998, Mann et al. 1999, Esper et al. 2002, D’Arrigo et al. 2006, etc.).

Introduction (p 2-3, second paragraph): I didn’t like this paragraph, and in fact believe that it is somewhat misleading. I suggest replacing “By contrast” with “Similarly” (first line), since most – if not all – large scale reconstructions indicate warmth during me- dieval times. The uncertainties in both the large scale and European scale reconstructions (Guiot et al.?) are too large for such a conclusion to be used in the introduction, and do not justify referring to “contrasting” trends. Also, referring to a “conundrum” certainly overlooks the current state of knowledge of past temperature variations in Europe and theNor thern Hemisphere.

Model and forcing description (p 4-6): Detail potential weaknesses/uncer tainties of employing a global model while utilizing regional output (Europe and below). This should also be mentioned in the abstract.