New German/Russian Temperature Reconstruction Shows No Correlation With CO2
A new temperature reconstruction carried out by a team of German/Russian scientists has yielded interesting results. It finds no correlation over the last 400 years between atmospheric CO2 and the temperature in the Arctic regions studied.
CONTINUE READING AT OUR NEW WEBSITE:
Explore posts in the same categories: Arctic
P Gosselin - NoTricksZone 
July 30, 2010 at 3:20 pm
The scientists are living in a cult; they know CO2 and temperatures don’t correlate well but they can’t speak out.
July 30, 2010 at 3:23 pm
Have you seen the headlines in the German papers? They are all hollering about “the rapid temp increase since 1990!”
July 30, 2010 at 4:14 pm
Usually the only german source i use is FTD for German financials. For all the rest i used to use the BBC but i don’t trust them anymore; their quality has deteriorated in the last 10 years, not only concerning AGW. So today i’m using blogs and google news.
The german news market is so small and insular. And my prediction stands: 6 months from now Der Spiegel will announce that the radiative physics of CO2 have been misunderstood. Why in 6 months? Simply: All the blogosphere talks about it now; and Der Spiegel has a lag time of 6 months. The other magazines will follow after that.
So set your alarm clock, January 2011.
July 30, 2010 at 4:18 pm
I grew up in the forests of the NW USA. I don’t believe you can extract temperature from tree rings. Solar activity? Yes. Rainfall? Yes. Length of growing season? Probably. Trees respond to light and moisture. A tree growing in the shade of another grows slowly. The trees around another tree grow up, die, fall, and thus affect the tree’s growth. Trees on the north side of a hill grow more slowly than those on the south side. Many things can change the light and
moisture a tree receives, and thus the growth
rate. Temperature is the least of these.
July 30, 2010 at 4:50 pm
You’re probably right, but this time I like the reonstruction so much that I think tree-rings are probably useful after all.
July 30, 2010 at 5:12 pm
Don’t dismiss dendrochronology because of Mann and Briffa. They used selected samples from the Schweingruber network AFAIK. Schweingruber is a real dendrochronologist.
Schweingruber, F.H. (1990) Anatomie europäischer Hölzer – Anatomy of European woods.
It looks to me like Schweingruber was interested in how trees grow, how forests develop etc, and that other people found his samples interesting for their hockey stick manufacturing.
July 30, 2010 at 5:03 pm
You couldn’t make it up but then again, the Alarmists are. Thank you quisling MSM.
Pointman
July 30, 2010 at 5:23 pm
Trees cough out C02, freezing temperatures in russia is an aggregate of -30c,
1. they don’t have frozen russian ships up there
2. too bad russia does have summer
3. they think its frozen queen ice palace or something
4. too bad germany’s too far south, not near enough unlike the turkish navy, spying.
5. have you heard of the results of russian public education?
6. i heard if you live next to china, the end result is sulphur poisoning and global warming.
7. and if you live next to turkey, its alot of warm-hot tempered people producing mass annihilation, mass-religiousity, bad mannered children, and fake turk community gangsterism.
8. unfortunately, frozen russian ships can be found in a northern tip near finland. and the artic regions found in the southern hemisphere, can’t be reached sailing from north to beyond!
July 30, 2010 at 5:39 pm
And one more idea about why the data ends at 2001. I know nothing about dendrochronology but i know that after felling a tree and cutting it to pieces you let the pieces rest for several years if you can. Reason is to let the wood dry out. So the humidity of the living tree tissue probably distorts the tree ring width in the most recent rings.
Just an idea.
July 30, 2010 at 7:09 pm
Certainly, something isn’t copacetic with the graph.
I did a pixel level comparison and 2001 doesn’t even reach 13C. The center of the graphed line ends somewhere between 2005-2006. The line itself is about 3 years in width.
Reply: Ideal for the press to use – however they’d like. -PG
July 30, 2010 at 7:13 pm
This is precisely the celebrated Michael Mann’s deceitful technique applied to “hide the decline.” As time goes on –say through 2015– cumulative discrepancies will expose the whole extraordinarily corrupt and fraudulent enterprise.
Pseudo-science Cargo Cultists’ “climate studies” notoriously employ selective data, spurious analytical techniques, preconceived conclusions. But are they truly so foolish, so short-sighted, as to think they can play these games indefinitely? Nature takes her course… now as Earth enters on a probable 70-year “dead sun” Maunder Minimum similar to that of 1645 – 1715, the Green Gang’s Luddite sociopaths will find their prevarications overtaken by events.
July 30, 2010 at 8:25 pm
Excellant piece and well made clear points.
Following comments so far also excellant.
I do like the picture of the researchers with the very heavy sampling equipment – Was there a Starbucks nearby…
LOL.
What no Little Ice Age…
Weren’t the 1990s cool, and the 1950s hot…
Ed Caryl wrote,
” I don’t believe you can extract temperature from tree rings. ”
Ditto.
July 30, 2010 at 8:37 pm
Could they have spliced on the temperature record for that location at the end?
Might be easy to check if it’s similar or not.
July 30, 2010 at 8:42 pm
I suspect the reason the graph extends beyond 2001 is that the authors smoothed the data and forgot to truncate at the ends of the data.
July 30, 2010 at 9:06 pm
then there is Helliker, B.R. and S.L. Richter. 2008. Subtropical to boreal convergence of tree-leaf temperatures. Nature 454: 511-514.
Excerpt from Not Exactly Rocket Science
July 30, 2010 at 9:51 pm
Looks like the blog you link to is virus-infested. Might be a false alarm or not… just wanted to warn people.
-PG; Which blog?
August 1, 2010 at 9:36 am
It’s kind of interesting. I wonder if it’s just the one blog or if all of science blogs are infected?
July 30, 2010 at 11:13 pm
The link behind the text “Not Exactly Rocket Science”
– as i said, might be a false alarm from my virus watcher. Avira; says: TR/Script.474 – trojan.
Avira is pretty paranoid. Sometimes too paranoid.
July 31, 2010 at 10:08 am
Where the link comes from isn’t important.
Here try this one.
Surprise: Leaves Maintain Temperature, new findings may put dendroclimatology as metric of past temperature into question – Watts up with that?
The important thing is trees maintain their own internal temperature, which explains why Mike Mann’s hockeystick handle is so flat. Along with Dirk’s revelation of unseasoned wood being fluffed up by water – which explains the upswing in the blade.
It’s all hokus pokus. The shaft the blade every damn bit of it. Trees are not thermometers.
August 2, 2010 at 12:54 am
What explains the flatness of Mike Mann’s hockeystick is averaging a ton of data that probably isn’t temperature proxies. Averaging a whole bunch of dissimilar numbers removes any details of what you started with Viola!! flat handle. The blade itself comes from selecting proxies that actually match, to some extent, the current temperature trend and heavily weighting the in the overall reconstruction because they alledgedly are BETTER proxies than the rest!!
July 31, 2010 at 10:35 am
Ed Caryl said “Solar activity? Yes. Rainfall? Yes. Length of growing season? Probably.”
Alerted by this paper, I did an overlay of their temp recon on the Wikipedia solar cycles graph, and correlation with the Hale cycle was very apparent to me. So I posted this at CA (understandably deleted, OT to develop science on an audit blog) but also at Tallbloke’s talkshop
– and he has elevated it to its own thread with a better graph that shows the Hale cycle. Thanks Pierre for the alert.
July 31, 2010 at 1:34 pm
Glad to have been of help! Thanks.
August 1, 2010 at 6:48 pm
It’s obvious to anyone that has looked at more than a few stumps. Ask any Tree Faller.