New paper that selects hockey-stick data finds only 0.25C global warming over past 1000 years
A paper published today in Nature Climate Change attempts to revive the Gergis et al zombie hockey stick, but as Steve McIntyre and others have already observed, the paper is a reworking of a previously discredited paper, and is "non-compliant
with [anti-data-torturing] protocols on several important counts,
including its unprecedented ex-post screening [only using proxies that
show a hockey stick shape, rejecting non-hockey-sticks] and its reliance
on the same proxies that have been used in multiple previous studies." Even if one
believes this highly-flawed paper that selects only hockey-stick
proxies, the proxy reconstruction of Northern Hemisphere temperatures
shown in Fig 2a below indicate only a small ~0.25C difference between
the Medieval Warm Period temperatures ~1000 years ago and temperatures
at the end of the record in 2000. The Southern Hemisphere reconstruction
shows almost no difference in temperature between the MWP peak and the
year 2000. In addition, Figure 2a shows Northern Hemisphere temperatures
not statistically-significantly different between the early 1300's [at
the beginning of the Little Ice Age] and the year 2000.
The Earth’s climate system is driven by a complex interplay of internal
chaotic dynamics and natural and anthropogenic external forcing. Recent
instrumental data have shown a remarkable degree of asynchronicity
between Northern Hemisphere and Southern Hemisphere temperature
fluctuations, thereby questioning the relative importance of internal
versus external drivers of past as well as future climate variability1, 2, 3. However, large-scale temperature reconstructions for the past millennium have focused on the Northern Hemisphere4, 5,
limiting empirical assessments of inter-hemispheric variability on
multi-decadal to centennial timescales. Here, we introduce a new
millennial ensemble reconstruction of annually resolved temperature
variations for the Southern Hemisphere based on an unprecedented network
of terrestrial and oceanic palaeoclimate proxy records. In conjunction
with an independent Northern Hemisphere temperature reconstruction
ensemble5,
this record reveals an extended cold period (1594–1677) in both
hemispheres but no globally coherent warm phase during the
pre-industrial (1000–1850) era. The current (post-1974) warm phase is
the only period of the past millennium where both hemispheres are likely
to have experienced contemporaneous warm extremes. Our analysis of
inter-hemispheric temperature variability in an ensemble of climate
model simulations for the past millennium suggests that models tend to
overemphasize Northern Hemisphere–Southern Hemisphere synchronicity by
underestimating the role of internal ocean–atmosphere dynamics,
particularly in the ocean-dominated Southern Hemisphere. Our results
imply that climate system predictability on decadal to century
timescales may be lower than expected based on assessments of external
climate forcing and Northern Hemisphere temperature variations5, 6 alone.
From over 25 hemispheric-scale temperature reconstructions published in
recent decades, only three cover the ocean-dominated Southern Hemisphere7. These Southern Hemisphere temperature reconstructions include only seven8 or fewer9 proxy
datasets for the entire Southern Hemisphere, or were provided as
peripheral components of Northern Hemisphere and global reconstruction
efforts4 with
the caveat that ‘more confident statements about long-term temperature
variations in the Southern Hemisphere and globe on the whole must await
additional proxy data collection’4. Consequently, attribution of temperature changes to external forcings10, 11 and investigations of the coupling between temperature and greenhouse gas concentrations5, 6 have focused on the Northern Hemisphere.
Data spanning inter-annual to multi-millennial timescales suggest
limited temperature coherence between the two hemispheres. The degree of
independence in Northern Hemisphere and Southern Hemisphere temperature
trends over the past 150 years2 indicates
that responses to external forcing may be modulated by ocean–atmosphere
variability, reducing predictability of the climate system in
twenty-first century model projections1, 3.
Patterns of late Quaternary deglaciation have also demonstrated high
inter-hemispheric variability, attributed to a coupling of orbital
forcing, ice-albedo feedbacks and the Atlantic Meridional Overturning
Circulation12, 13.
Finally, a recent evaluation of multi-centennial reconstructions from
seven continents also suggests stronger regional temperature coherence
within the hemispheres than between them14.
Yet, the preliminary nature of existing annually resolved Southern
Hemisphere temperature reconstructions has hindered knowledge of the
existence and driving mechanisms of inter-hemispheric climate
variability on the societally relevant multi-decadal to centennial
timescales.
Here, we introduce a Southern Hemisphere temperature reconstruction
ensemble and assess inter-hemispheric temperature variability over the
past millennium in both empirical reconstructions and state-of-the-art
climate model simulations. We use an extensive Southern Hemisphere
palaeoclimate data network from more than 300 individual sites15 yielding 111 temperature predictors (Supplementary Section 1). This proxy collection nearly doubles the number of records considered in the most advanced previous reconstruction attempt4,
now allowing the development of an annually resolved and well-verified
Southern Hemisphere temperature reconstruction for the past millennium (Fig. 1 and Supplementary Section 2) which is insensitive to moderate changes in reconstruction methodology or proxy network composition (Supplementary Section 3).
Although our database is weighted towards the Pacific sector of the Southern Hemisphere (Fig. 1a),
the proxy network captures the inter-annual to long-term variability in
Southern Hemisphere mean temperatures recorded by instrumental data
(calibration: r = 0.73–0.95, RE = 0.50–0.91; verification: r = 0.57–0.88, RE = 0.32–0.77; all p 0.01; Fig. 1b, c).
The Southern Hemisphere reconstruction ensemble shows temperatures in
the period 1000 to 1200 CE (all years hereafter Common Era) that are
close to the long term (1000–2000) average. This is followed by an
approximately 150-year warm phase (1200–1350) containing the warmest
pre-industrial temperatures of the past millenium (Fig. 2a).
The subsequent long-term cooling trend reaches a minimum around 1600,
with negative decadal-scale ensemble-mean temperature anomalies
prevailing until the early twentieth century. 99.7% of the Southern
Hemisphere reconstruction ensemble members indicate that the late
twentieth century contained the warmest decade of the past millennium.
This finding complements well-established evidence for the anomalous
characteristics of Northern Hemisphere industrial-era warming5.
Besides the positive twentieth century temperature anomalies,
simultaneous cold anomalies in both hemispheres are identified between
1571 and 1722 (based on the 1000–2000 long term mean; Fig. 2a).
During the rest of the millennium, the Northern Hemisphere and Southern
Hemisphere are more prominently characterized by differences in the
occurrence, timing and phase of warm and cold episodes. In medieval
times, Southern Hemisphere temperature anomalies are notably colder than
the Northern Hemisphere both before 1100 and around 1400, and warmer
between 1280 and 1350. Expression of the industrial-era warming trend in
the Southern Hemisphere also lags by approximately 25 years behind the
Northern Hemisphere. Moreover, Southern Hemisphere temperatures tend to
show a weaker cooling response to strong volcanic eruptions, for
example, during the early nineteenth century.
To determine the extent to which reconstructed temperature patterns are
independently identified by climate models, we investigate
inter-hemispheric temperature coherence from a 24-member multi-model
ensemble (simulation details in Supplementary Table 9). Very similar temperature evolutions are modelled for the two hemispheres (Fig. 2b).
The majority of model ensemble members show warmest pre-industrial
temperatures sometime between 1050 and 1250 in the Northern Hemisphere
(79% of ensemble members), the Southern Hemisphere (75%), and
simultaneously in both (67%) hemispheres. Interestingly, this simulated
warm period is delayed compared to the reconstructed medieval warmth in
the Northern Hemisphere and precedes the phase of maximum Southern
Hemisphere pre-industrial warmth16.
Between 1300 and 1900, simulated temperatures are close to the
1000–2000 average, periodically interrupted by shorter volcanically
induced cold excursions. In contrast to the delay in industrial Southern
Hemisphere warming in the reconstructions, the climate model
simulations show a mostly synchronous temperature increase after 1850.
Mean correlations between 30-year filtered reconstructions and
simulations for all possible ensemble pairs are r = 0.29 ± 0.22 (2σ ensemble spread) for the Southern Hemisphere and r = 0.47 ± 0.33 for the Northern Hemisphere. These values increase to r= 0.35 and r =
0.77 for the ensemble means. As the model ensemble means are subjected
less to internal variability than each individual simulation and better
represent the temperature response to external forcing, these values
suggest substantially weaker links between external forcing and Southern
Hemisphere temperature variability compared to the Northern Hemisphere.
We quantify coherence between Northern Hemisphere and Southern
Hemisphere temperature extremes by identifying the percentage of
ensemble members showing decadal average temperatures more than one
standard deviation above or below the 1000–2000 baseline (Fig. 3).
Extended periods where at least 33% of the reconstruction ensemble
members in both hemispheres simultaneously show extreme cold or warm
temperatures are identified only between 1594 and 1677 and since 1967,
respectively. Since 1974 more than 66%, and since 1979 more than 90%, of
ensemble members show synchronous positive extremes (corresponding to
‘likely’ and ‘very likely’ categories using IPCC AR5 calibrated
uncertainty classification). This analysis provides evidence for a
global cold phase coinciding with the peak of the Northern Hemisphere
‘Little Ice Age’ (LIA) and a late-twentieth century warm phase of
unprecedented duration and magnitude within the past 1000 years. In
contrast, we find no empirical support for a globally coherent ‘Medieval
Climate Anomaly’ (MCA) at decadal timescales during the past millennium14.
Our new temperature reconstruction from the Southern Hemisphere
suggests that data from the Northern Hemisphere alone are insufficient
to characterize global scale temperature anomalies, trends and extremes.
Simulated extreme conditions shown in Fig. 3 are a direct expression of external forcing (Fig. 3d).
The notable reconstructed seventeenth-century peak LIA is less
prominent in the model ensemble, which shows the clearest global cooling
signal in response to volcanic eruptions around 1815 (Tambora), the
1450s (Kuwae) and 1258 (Samalas). External climate forcing as
incorporated in the current climate model simulations does not account
for key features of reconstructed temperature variation. This suggests
that internal variability was a key driver for hemispheric and global
decadal-scale extreme periods.
To further investigate inter-hemispheric temperature coherence, we
calculate the ten-year running temperature differences between the
standardized Northern Hemisphere and Southern Hemisphere reconstructions
(Fig. 4a).
The variability and amplitude of the Northern Hemisphere–Southern
Hemisphere temperature difference fluctuates considerably over time,
showing periods with large divergence (for example, around 1100 and
1575) and with more in-phase variability (for example, the thirteenth
and eighteenth centuries). The distinct and internally driven drop in
Northern Hemisphere temperatures around 19702 was
preceded by several other analogous periods of contrasting hemispheric
temperature trends. Internal ocean–atmosphere processes appear to be the
main driver of the larger Northern Hemisphere–Southern Hemisphere
differences; only two episodes of contrasting temperature regimes
coincide with strong volcanic eruptions (Kuwae and Tambora). Model
simulations also contain periods of contrasting inter-hemispheric
temperature trends, but with notably smaller differences between the
hemispheres (Supplementary Figs 36–59):
median reconstructed Northern Hemisphere–Southern Hemisphere
differences are outside the 10th–90th percentile range of model
simulations 42% of the time (Fig. 4).
The lower Northern Hemisphere–Southern Hemisphere temperature contrasts
within the simulations are not only evident in the pre-instrumental
period but also during the twentieth century3 (Fig. 4b, c), when both the reconstructions and instrumental data2 show strong inter-hemispheric variability.
The Southern Hemisphere reconstruction presented here allows new
insights into the characteristics of the global climate system. For
example, it has been proposed that the Southern Hemisphere response to
external forcing may be delayed and buffered by the large heat capacity
of the oceans17, 18. The greater amplitude of pre-industrial temperature variation in the Northern Hemisphere (0.67 °C ± 0.46 °C (2σ ensemble
spread) versus 0.37 °C ± 0.11 °C in the Southern Hemisphere), the
approximately two-century Northern Hemisphere lead during medieval times
and the approximately 25 year lead during the era of industrial warming
are in line with this hypothesis. However, we find no evidence for a
consistent lag between Northern Hemisphere and Southern Hemisphere
temperatures (Supplementary Section 8).
The coherent and extreme cool conditions in both hemispheres around
1600 are unique within the past millennium and now offer perhaps the
most viable explanation for the drop in global CO2 (difference of 8.37 ppm or 0.19 W m−2 between 1540–1580 and 1600–16405, 19, 20; Fig. 3d), which may not be sufficiently explained by land use change21 or Northern Hemisphere-temperature–CO2 feedbacks5.
Our results suggest that large, internally driven temperature contrasts
between the hemispheres, such as identified in the twentieth century2 have
repeatedly occurred on the policy-relevant multi-decadal to centennial
timescales. This finding is strengthened by evidence from annually
resolved regional temperature reconstructions14, 22, 23 and the timing of glacial fluctuations in New Zealand and the Northern Hemisphere24. Our data support hypotheses that global and hemispheric temperature extremes and transitions may be initiated11, 16, 25 and prolonged26 by
internal variability and feedbacks. Analyses targeting periods where
climate models and reconstructions differ will be necessary to identify
weaknesses in both proxy- and model-based representations of the Earth’s
climate system. However, the strong inter-hemispheric coupling in the
simulations assessed herein suggests that models overestimate the
strength of externally forced relative to internal climate system
variability, therefore implying more limited predictability not only on
regional1, 27 but
also hemispheric scales. The stronger coherence between the Northern
Hemisphere temperature reconstructions and external forcings similarly
implies that detection and attribution studies10 and climate sensitivity estimates5, 6 based
on Northern Hemisphere data alone may not be representative of the
global climate system. Future consideration of Southern Hemisphere
temperature evolution should reduce uncertainties in estimating and
attributing natural and anthropogenically forced climate variations.
We use the Southern Hemisphere spatial mean of the Goddard Institute for
Space Studies (GISS) Surface Temperature Analysis (GISTEMP) temperature
grid28 as the instrumental predictand for the reconstruction. The palaeoclimate data network15 consists
of 48 marine (46 coral and 2 sediment time series) and 277 terrestrial
(206 tree-ring sites, 42 ice core, 19 documentary, 8 lake sediment and 2
speleothem) records (details in Supplementary Section 1).
Although proxy records are preferentially located towards land areas,
the network represents a considerable improvement of both geographical
coverage and proxy quantity and quality (for example, resolution,
length) since the last Southern Hemisphere reconstruction effort4. Proxies are screened with local grid-cell temperatures28 yielding 111 temperature predictors (Fig. 1) for the nested multivariate principal component regression procedure23.
A 3,000-member ensemble reconstruction of annual Southern Hemisphere
temperatures over the period 1000–2000 was generated with the spread of
ensemble members considered a measure of uncertainty.
For each ensemble member we use different reconstruction parameters by
randomly selecting a subset of proxies, as well as varying the
calibration/verification intervals within 1911–1990, and other
reconstruction parameters (details in Supplementary Section 2.2).
The perturbation of calibration/verification periods allows a
‘verification ensemble mean’ to be calculated over the 1911–1990 period
by averaging all members where a given year was used for verification
(and not for calibration). Analogously, a ‘calibration ensemble mean’
was calculated. These time series and their corresponding Reduction of
Error (RE) skills are shown in Fig. 1c, b,
respectively. These statistics along with additional verification based
on the sparse early Southern Hemisphere instrumental data (RE =
0.41–0.90; Supplementary Fig. 10)
point to reconstructive skill over the past millennium. In addition to
traditional reconstruction uncertainty estimates based on regression
residuals, we assess the influence of the ensemble perturbations on the
reconstruction outcome. Uncertainty envelopes in Fig. 2a represent combined calibration and ensemble uncertainties (details inSupplementary Section 2.4).
Although we have taken steps to provide robust results considering the
challenges of proxy-based reconstructions (for example, potential
underestimation of past climate amplitudes) discussed in the literature,
we note that all reconstruction approaches contain uncertainties. The
fact that our reconstruction verifies well and captures interannual and
decadal-scale temperature fluctuations during the instrumental period (Fig. 1 and Supplementary Section 3) indicates reduced probability of such artefacts. An extensive assessment of reconstruction robustness is provided inSupplementary Section 3.2 and Supplementary Figs 13–26,
with tests demonstrating that the potential bias introduced by the
proxy-screening and reconstruction methods or by single dominant records
or proxy archives is small.
Northern Hemisphere reconstruction ensemble.
Details concerning the Northern Hemisphere reconstructions are provided in ref. 5 andSupplementary Section 5.
The most important difference from our Southern Hemisphere
reconstruction is that it is not based on a single predictor matrix but
uses nine published Northern Hemisphere reconstructions based on
different (but not independent) proxy sets and various reconstruction
methodologies. In ref. 5,
the individual single-member reconstructions were recalibrated to
instrumental temperature data using different calibration periods as
ensemble parameters, resulting in a total of 521 ensemble members. The
Northern Hemisphere ensemble spread is larger than in the Southern
Hemisphere owing to the relatively large differences between some of the
original sub-reconstructions and the composite-plus-scaling approach
over a range of time windows in ref. 5.
To best illustrate these two approaches, the ensemble means of the nine
sub-reconstructions are shown for the Northern Hemisphere in Fig. 2a.
As a consequence of these methodological differences and the larger
ensemble spread in the Northern Hemisphere, one would expect generally
reduced probabilities for extreme periods in the Northern Hemisphere.
However,Fig. 3a, b shows
similar fractions of periods with high probabilities for extremes,
indicating a similar consistency between ensemble members in the timing
of extreme periods in both hemispheres.
Last year, the Democratic controlled Colorado legislature passed a
number of anti-Second Amendment gun control laws. The laws were so
restrictive and unjust that firearm related companies began moving out
of the state. The Outdoor Channel cancelled 4 programs being filmed in
Colorado.
Shortly after the laws were passed, 37 county sheriffs
joined together to file a legal challenge to all of the anti-gun laws
passed by the legislature. They contended that the new laws that set
limits on magazine capacity and requiring background checks for all gun
sales or transfers, including private ones, violate the Second
Amendment. By the time the lawsuit was actually filed, the number of
county sheriffs that signed onto the legal challenge grew from 37 to 54.
A year later, 55 of the state’s 62 county sheriffs have banded
together to tell the state legislature and governor that they refuse to
enforce the state’s gun-control laws, especially the one restricting
magazine capacity. The sheriffs say that not only are the laws
unconstitutional but they are also unenforceable. Weld County Sheriff John Cooke explains:
“They’ve turned law-abiding citizens into criminals.
They banned magazines that hold more than 15 rounds and what they’ve
said is that any magazine that can be readily converted to hold more
than 15 rounds is illegal. Well, that’s 99.999 percent of all magazines.
They have a base plate and a spring that you can remove to repair or
clean. If you can do that, then that magazine is illegal to possess
after Jan. 1, and you can’t buy any. How do we enforce that?”
“There’s a grandfather clause in the law that says if you own a
magazine before July 1, 2013, that’s more than 15 rounds, you’re allowed
to keep it. How are my deputies going to know who bought that magazine
before or after July 1? So we’re not putting any resources into it or
making it a priority.”
“They don’t understand how it works because the legislator that
introduced this bill, she didn’t come to the sheriffs and say, ‘Explain
to me what a magazine is,’ because she didn’t even know. Then after the
bill gets passed she was confronted on how a magazine could be
converted, and she said, ‘Oh, people will just have to live with it.’”
“At a debate that we had here last year, she was talking about how
these 30-round magazines, once people are done shooting, they’re no good
anymore because you just throw them away. She has no clue about what a
gun is or a magazine is, and yet she’s trying to outlaw them federally.”
“Most law-enforcement agencies in this state don’t really understand
how to enforce this, and the people don’t know how to comply with this.
So we actually filed a lawsuit. Fifty-five out of the 62 elected
sheriffs filed a lawsuit in federal district court against these laws
because we’re saying it violates people’s due process. If somebody
doesn’t know that they’re violating the law, how can they be held
accountable? And that’s a violation of due process.”
“Even the federal courts can’t make me enforce the laws. So if we
lose and the judge says, ‘No, these laws are constitutional,’ I still
set the priorities and the resources for my agency. There’s no law in
the state of Colorado that says I have to enforce the law, so I still
won’t enforce them because in my belief and my opinion, it’s not my job
to turn law-abiding gun owners into criminals.”
It will be interesting to see what happens in Colorado between the
county sheriffs, the courts and state government. What many people fail
to realize is that the Supreme Court has ruled that the county sheriff
is the supreme law enforcement officer in the county. They even has
jurisdiction over federal law enforcement officials.
If the county sheriffs’ authority is challenged in court, all they
have to do is not only turn to the Supreme Court case involving former
Sheriff Richard Mack from Arizona, but they can also point to US
Attorney General Eric Holder. If you recall, Holder recently told all
state attorney generals that they don’t have to enforce any law they
don’t like, referring specifically to laws banning same-sex marriage.
If the US Attorney General and all state attorney generals can pick and
choose what laws they will and will not enforce, then surely county
sheriffs, who are the supreme law enforcement officer in their counties,
can also pick and choose. Now we need every county sheriff in the US to
do the same thing as the county sheriffs in Colorado and refuse to
enforce laws that they believe are unconstitutional and unenforceable.
Last year, the Democratic controlled Colorado legislature passed a number of
anti-Second Amendment gun control laws. The laws were so restrictive and
unjust that firearm related companies began moving out of the state. The
Outdoor Channel cancelled 4 programs being filmed in Colorado.
Shortly after the laws
were passed, 37
county sheriffs joined together to file a legal challenge to all of the
anti-gun laws passed by the legislature. They contended that the new laws
that set limits on magazine capacity and requiring background checks for all
gun sales or transfers, including private ones, violate the Second Amendment.
By the time the lawsuit was actually filed, the number of county sheriffs that
signed onto the legal challenge grew from 37 to 54.
A year later, 55 of the
state’s 62 county sheriffs have banded together to tell the state legislature
and governor that they refuse to enforce the state’s gun-control laws,
especially the one restricting magazine capacity. The sheriffs say that
not only are the laws unconstitutional but they are also unenforceable.
“They’ve turned law-abiding citizens into criminals. They
banned magazines that hold more than 15 rounds and what they’ve said is that
any magazine that can be readily converted to hold more than 15 rounds is
illegal. Well, that’s 99.999 percent of all magazines. They have a base plate
and a spring that you can remove to repair or clean. If you can do that, then
that magazine is illegal to possess after Jan. 1, and you can’t buy any. How do
we enforce that?”
“There’s a grandfather clause in the law that says if you
own a magazine before July 1, 2013, that’s more than 15 rounds, you’re allowed
to keep it. How are my deputies going to know who bought that magazine before
or after July 1? So we’re not putting any resources into it or making it a
priority.”
“They don’t understand how it works because the legislator
that introduced this bill, she didn’t come to the sheriffs and say, ‘Explain to
me what a magazine is,’ because she didn’t even know. Then after the bill gets
passed she was confronted on how a magazine could be converted, and she said,
‘Oh, people will just have to live with it.’”
“At a debate that we had here last year, she was talking about how these
30-round magazines, once people are done shooting, they’re no good anymore
because you just throw them away. She has no clue about what a gun is or a magazine
is, and yet she’s trying to outlaw them federally.”
“Most law-enforcement agencies in this state don’t really
understand how to enforce this, and the people don’t know how to comply with
this. So we actually filed a lawsuit. Fifty-five out of the 62 elected sheriffs
filed a lawsuit in federal district court against these laws because we’re
saying it violates people’s due process. If somebody doesn’t know that they’re
violating the law, how can they be held accountable? And that’s a violation of
due process.”
“Even the federal courts can’t make me enforce the laws. So
if we lose and the judge says, ‘No, these laws are constitutional,’ I still set
the priorities and the resources for my agency. There’s no law in the state of
Colorado that says I have to enforce the law, so I still won’t enforce them
because in my belief and my opinion, it’s not my job to turn law-abiding gun
owners into criminals.”
It will be interesting to see what happens in
Colorado between the county sheriffs, the courts and state government.
What many people fail to realize is that the Supreme Court has ruled that the
county sheriff is the supreme law enforcement officer in the county. They even
has jurisdiction over federal law enforcement officials.
If the county sheriffs’
authority is challenged in court, all they have to do is not only turn to the
Supreme Court case involving former Sheriff Richard Mack from Arizona, but they
can also point to US Attorney General Eric Holder. If you recall, Holder
recently told all state attorney generals that they don’t have to enforce any
law they don’t like, referring specifically to laws banning same-sex
marriage. If the US Attorney General and all state attorney generals can
pick and choose what laws they will and will not enforce, then surely county
sheriffs, who are the supreme law enforcement officer in their counties, can
also pick and choose. Now we need every county sheriff in the US to do the same
thing as the county sheriffs in Colorado and refuse to enforce laws that they
believe are unconstitutional and unenforceable.