Hansen Confirmed The MWP In 1981

Climate fraudsters frequently claim that the 1990 IPCC temperature graph below showing the Medieval Warm Period (MWP) was only a representation of Central England Temperatures (CET) and was not global.

2016-01-14-10-57-47

This is nonsense. The graph was derived from James Hansen’s 1981 study, which was taken from temperatures in England, California and Greenland.
2016-01-14-10-54-272016-01-14-10-52-31

Global temperature trend for …. (b) is based on temperatures in central England, the tree limit in the White Mountains of California, and oxygen isotope  measurements in the Greenland ice (W. Dansgaard of the Geophysical Isotope Laboratory, University of Copenhagen, pers. comm.), with the  temperature scale set by the variations in the last 100 years

Challenge_chapter2.pdf

The overlay below shows that the 1990 IPCC graph is essentially the same graph as Hansen 1981.

2016-01-14-11-40-54

Hansen’s paper was based on study in Nature from 1975.

2016-01-15-20-57-47

24 May 1975, Page 12 – at Newspapers.com

The MWP was real, and no matter how many different ways climate criminals find to lie about it, they can’t make it disappear.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Hansen Confirmed The MWP In 1981

  1. oldbrew says:

    They are in a hole with man-made warming but think the solution is to keep digging.
    The MWP has way too much solid evidence and bluffing about that is not science.

    Keep rubbing their noses in the evidence, it’s the best way.

  2. Allen Eltor says:

    The same church of authority worshiping Quacks who refuse to confess analyzing a compressible fluid bath using compressible fluid mechanics is proper scientific research.

    The people substituting Stefan-Boltzman Massage treating the earth as a flat black circle instead of calculation for fluid mechanics and hydrostatic equations.

    The same people whose ‘scientific analysis of that massage’ is that

    a freezing cold compressible atmosphere
    reducing energy to the surface of a light warmed object
    then distributing that already reduced energy density through,
    to emit from a larger, colder, total mass, – is a magic heater.

    Not cooling as in real science.

    Blocking light from the earth
    distributing it throughout a colder, larger overall mass, is a Magic Heater.

    97% of Green House Gas Effect, Magic Heater Believers,

    assert that. A reduced energy distributed through and emitted from a COLDER, LARGER, OVERALL MASS: is a MAGIC HEATER. The Magic Heater in the Sky.

    Literally. You can do the calculations easily that show standard gas equations project the temperature of Venus, JUST FINE.
    They project the temperature of Mars, just fine,

    why don’t Magic Sky Heater Frauds want to use the same mathematics for obtaining the temperature of earth?

    Because James Hansen’s fake programs weren’t designed to get correct answers, they were designed to always show something might/must be askew. Therefore he needed to do some more iterations of his ‘Magic Heater in the Sky’ scenario to ‘refine it.’

    Why did no one who ever believed the Magic Heater in the Sky story take the MULTITUDINAL suggestions to simply put CO2 into a KILN?

    Why did no one ever go back and admit that Anonymous thermodynamics blogger Konrad is right with his experiment showing back radiation CHILLS water by evaporating it, repeated by Roy Spencer, Magic Gas Believer, to show – indeed – light from gas phase water, makes water return to – gas phase. Go figure.

    [Konrad empirical test of ocean cooling and back radiation]

    Roy Spencer’s humiliated experiment run where in fact after he went ON and ON how it isn’t POSSIBLE – after GAVIN SCHMIDT head of GODDARD: actually MADE a POST at REALCLIMATE how ‘IT ISN’T POSSIBLE that MAGIC GAis LIGHT’S uh.. HEAT’n UP thim OCEANS!”

    Humiliated Spencer puts up his finding showing REAL scientists are RIGHT:

    LW EARTH radiation MAKES WATER EVAPORATE, COOLING IT.

    [Can Infrared Radiation Warm a Water Body? Part II
    June 30th, 2015 by Roy W. Spencer, Ph. D.]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.