Lorenz et al 2006: “Tropical Cooling”

Despite the protestations of the Team, it seems to be a consensus of other paleoclimatologists that the Holocene Optimum was warmer at high southern latitudes. For now, I’ll take this as read, although it’s well worth canvassing the literature. Some citations are at ukweatherworld.

The next line of Team attack on the Holocene Optimum is the argument of Lorenz et al 2006 (building on earlier articles Rimbu et al 2004 ) – and you’ll undoubtedly hear more on this line of reasoning – that the Holocene Optimum was a period of warming in the extratropics and cooling in the tropics.

So the question becomes: how do they know that there was cooling in the tropics in the Holocene Optimum?
Continue reading

Two Curious Hurricane Graphs

Examining the ATL hurricane data in another thread, I pointed out that there was a very substantial increase in coverage further to the east. In the entire data set, the median westing for a track measurement was 69W.

To attempt to minimize count bias resulting from increased eastward coverage, I did storm and hurricane count calculations restricting measurements to tracks west of 69W. If there is a robust trend, then obviously any robust trend would also exist in the restricted domain west of 69W.

CA readers are used to novelties, but this one is pretty neat. Continue reading

Holocene Optimum

Since Hansen’s article in September, we’re starting to hear the phrase “warmest in 12000 years”- google “warmest 12000 years” and you’ll see recent coverage. This immediately raises the question of the Holocene Optimum – a period from about 8000 to 5200 BP in which there is undisputed evidence of significant NH warmth.  The Team has taken a preditable position on the Holocene Optimum: that it’s a regional and restricted event.  realclimate:

The [Holocene Optimum] is a somewhat outdated term used to refer to a sub-interval of the Holocene period from 5000-7000 years ago during which it was once thought that the earth was warmer than today. We now know that conditions at this time were probably warmer than today, but only in summer and only in the extratropics of the Northern Hemisphere. This summer warming appears to have been due to astronomical factors that favoured warmer Northern summers, but colder Northern winters and colder tropics, than today (see Hewitt and Mitchell, 1998; Ganopolski et al, 1998). The best available evidence from recent peer-reviewed studies suggests that annual, global mean warmth was probably similar to pre-20th century warmth, but less than late 20th century warmth, at this time (see Kitoh and Murakami, 2002).

realclimate links in turn to a NOAA website  which thanks “Dr. Keith R. Briffa, Dr. Phil D. Jones, Dr. Michael E. Mann, and Dr. Henry N. Pollack” for their contributions, and which takes a similar position to realclimate as follows:

In summary, the mid-Holocene, roughly 6,000 years ago, was generally warmer than today, but only in summer and only in the northern hemisphere.

The question that I’m wondering about: do we know that mid-Holocene warmth was only in summer and only in the northern hemisphere, and, if so, how do we know it?  I’m not going to consider high-latitude NH evidence, as that does not appear to be in issue. At some point I might re-visit the question of whether we know that it was only in summer, but for now, I’m going to focus on the topics and the SH. A recent survey of NH northern sites from 0-180W (Kaufman et al 2004) – and results would be similar for 0-180E – stated:

The spatio-temporal pattern of peak Holocene warmth (Holocene thermal maximum, HTM) is traced over 140 sites across the Western Hemisphere of the Arctic (0–180W; north of ~60N). Paleoclimate inferences based on a wide variety of proxy indicators provide clear evidence for warmer-than-present conditions at 120 of these sites. At the 16 terrestrial sites where quantitative estimates have been obtained, local HTM temperatures (primarily summer estimates) were on average 1.6 +- 0.8 deg C higher than present (approximate average of the 20th century), but the warming was time-transgressive across the western Arctic. As the precession-driven summer insolation anomaly peaked 12–10 ka (thousands of calendar years ago), warming was concentrated in northwest North America, while cool conditions lingered in the northeast. Alaska and northwest Canada experienced the HTM between ca 11 and 9 ka, about 4000 yr prior to the HTM in northeast Canada

The proxy evidence for the Holocene is different than millenium proxies  – ring width chronologies decline dramatically in relevance, while ocean sediment dO18 and Mg/Ca, ice core dO18 and stalagmite dO18 all increase dramatically in importance. On a million-year scale, there is a quite decent and interesting similarity between the pattern of ocean sediment Mg/Ca and O18 and Antarctic ice core dO18 and dD values. So one does get a sense that the data rises above cherry-picked red noise.Here’s some of the sites that I want to look at: Stott’s ocean sediment sites in the West Pacific Warm Pool; tropical ice cores (Thompson and others); southern ocean sediments; Antarctic ice cores. There is some surprisingly strong evidence of high-latitude warming in the Holocene Optimum – evidence which seems to be just ignored by the Team and by NOAA. In the face of this evidence, Lorenz et al 2006 (and predecessor article Kim et al QSR 2004) have proposed a newish theory that is gaining sway in Team-world – that there was Holocene Optimum warming in the extratropics, but there was tropical cooling in the Holocene Optimum. So I’ll probably start with some southern extratropic sites – oncluded some of the Lorenz et al concessions and then get to the tropic sites.

I’ve made a new category “Holocene Optimum” to index the posts. Past this, there is the interesting question of the Holocene interglacial as compared to other interglacials during what has been generally a very cold past million years (the Pleistocene).

A Hole in the Map

Here’s an interesting map of tropical salinity from Stott et al 2004. If you were Louis Hissink or a mining geologist looking at this map, you’d be interested in a core in the salinity bulls-eye at 120W and 20S. I haven’t been able to locate any relevant ocean sediment cores in this bullseye area (but am just feeling my way through this data). There seem to be lots of cores in upwelling areas. If anyone is aware of an ocean sediment core in this area with relevant dO18 or Mg/Ca, I’d appreciate the information. (Update note: as noted in the maps in comments, there are some older DSDP cores in this area but they have do not appear to have yielded relevant Pleistocene information.) Continue reading

Briffa et al 2001 – More on Divergence

After several years of trying, Briffa and Osborn have finally listed the sites used in Briffa et al 2001 and related publications. Briffa had reported results on large networks of over 300 sites collected by Schweingruber. Schweingruber had archived over 400 sites at WDCP.

However, it was impossible to tell exactly which sites had been used and up till now, Osborn and Briffa weren’t telling. While the webpage is obviously a huge improvement, there are some annoying problems. In some cases, the identification codes have typographical errors. I’ve noticed incorrect ids for adyboala, balyebda and lespiob in the data set for Briffa et al 2001.

Although Osborn says that all the sites are available at WDCP, most of the sites are there, but some are missing. I noticed 18 sites from the Tibetan Plateau. I’ve written Osborn to request that he remedy these things.

One of the first exercises that I carried out was to calculate a simple average of all the available ring width chronologies in the Briffa et al 2001 network (369 sites – 387 less the 18 unavailable sites.) In this case, I just used the Schweingruber chronologies without trying to re-do using RCS chronologies.

Here’s the result. As you see, there is a noticeable decline in the late 20th century – the “divergence problem.” If this is the average of a large sample of 369 sites, what are the odds that a random selection of say 8 sites has a sharp uptick in the late 20th century. Not very high.

Figure 1. Average of 369 available chronologies (as archived by Schweingruber) in the 387 site network of Briffa et al 2001.

Holland and Webster Figure 1

Holland and Webster stated the following:

Figure 1 shows a strong statistically significant trend since the 1970s similar to that found by Hoyos et al. (2006) and Curry et al. (2006.)

I’ve replicated the hurricane part of their Figure and included 2006 data as they should have – it’s amazes me that authors don’t make the effort to have up-to-date data. Here are some comments. Continue reading

Updated Hurricane Data

I’ve re-collated the hurricane track data from http://www.weather.unisys.com/hurricane/atlantic/2006/index.html and similar tables, updating my earlier collations. I’ve saved these collations in ascii form in the directory http://data.climateaudit.org/data/hurricane/unisys/*.txt using the following nomenclature

hurricane.ATL.txt and Track.ATL.txt with other basins being denoted WPAC,EPAC,SH, NIO and SPAC.

The unisys data contains collated “Best Tracks” information up to 2003-2005 depending on the basin and uncollated track data up to date. I’ve interpolated the newer track data to 6-hour intervals consistent with the Best Tracks data. These are not official interpolations, but are probably decent enough. The “hurricane” tables contain the following information:
id year day_start month_start M name XING SSS class state level peakwind count

Most of the information is collated from unisys; peakwind and count are my calculations from the Track data. The “Track “tables contain the following information (most of the pressure information doesn’t exist).
id year month day qtr lat long wind press

The SH data differs from the Georgia Tech versions, which I’ve also collated in a similar format and will post up.

There has been quite a bit of checking – for example, some hurricane names in the summaries differ slightly from hurricane names in the track directories and I’ve occasionally had to manually edit names e.g. EIGHTEE to EIGHTEEN_E. I haven’t documented the collation but will try to do so at some point.

I use the Track tables in R, where the tapply function trivially yields individual Webster calculations in a single line. I’ll try to look at the new H&W paper, but I’m really trying to do some other things right now; so I’ve posted the collations up for others to use.

Dasuopu at Google Earth

Google Earth really has some marvellous images. At the AGU convention, there were a number of exhibits showing sophisticated applications. I haven’t figured out any sophisticated applications, but I’ve enjoyed locating some of the sites discussed here on Google Earth. Today I’ve located the Dasuopu glacier and compared Google Earth to a sketch from Thompson’s website. Continue reading

Unthreaded

This is a successor thread to unthreaded comments on Road Map (retrievable here).

Continued here.

The MWP in the Warm Pool

You may recall Hansen’s strange splice of modern instrumental records with a Mg/Ca SST proxy ending in 4320 BP based on a partially dissolved core.’ A couple of months ago, I mentioned a new paper by Newton et al (including L Stott) with a high Warm Pool MWP and briefly discussed Netwon’s presentation at AGU (which additionally used modern Mg/Ca values from 1990-1994 as reference.)’ Here is an interesting diagram of Warm Pool SSTs from Lowell Stott, a senior researcher in the field. Unfortunately the webpage didn’t specify what core this was from or otherwise specify the calculation.’ However, the diagram does seem somewhat inconsistent with Hansen’s claim about it being the warmest in a milllll-yun years, if it wasn’t even the warmest in a 1000 years. But Hansen’s article was personally reviewed by Ralph Cicerone, President of NAS.

Update: Lowell Stott confirmed that this is MD81, discussed in Stott et al 2004.