Must-Have High-Resolution Charts: ‘Carbon Pollution Set To End Era Of Stable Climate’

Many folks asked for high-resolution and Celsius versions of the chart I posted 10 days ago:

Temperature change over past 11,300 years (in blue, via Science, 2013) plus projected warming this century on humanity’s current emissions path (in red, via recent literature).

The high-resolution F version is here and the high-resolution C version is here.

As an aside, readers know I have scaled back my coverage of the denier blogs for two reasons. First, their traffic has flat-lined or declined since Climategate, and despite their best efforts, they can’t get any real traction on social media. Second, and no doubt related to the first, they are so darn monotonous. Pretty much every story is, “The latest piece of peer-reviewed science about climate science and/or the danger of unrestricted carbon pollution is false because….”

Science put 12 men on the moon and got them back, science eliminated smallpox, science put massive computing power in the palm of your hand, and science saved the ozone layer with its just-in-time warnings of the dangers of CFCs (that people heeded). Science builds a beautiful edifice on a solid foundation.

Anti-science delayed action on smoking regulations, delayed or rolled back environmental standards, and, now, is working over-time to stop or slow action on carbon reductions needed to prevent needless suffering for billions of people and countless future generations. Anti-science destroys life, by suffocating it in a “foundation” of quick-sand.

For those who read the deniers blogs, you probably know that they have come up with a truly inane way to try to undermine the 2013 Science paper, “A Reconstruction of Regional and Global Temperature for the Past 11,300 Years” by Shaun Marcott et al that is the source of most of the data for the chart above.

They are arguing that the warming of the past century the authors found in their proxy records is in error. What makes this so head-exploding is that the uptick just happens to match the uptick in the heavily documented and independently verified instrumental record. So the disinformers are spending most of their time attacking the one part of the paper we know is unequivocally is true. That is the quintessence of anti-science.

The fact is Marcott et al doesn’t have findings that are a big surprise to anyone who follows temperature reconstructions. Indeed, as the NY Times pointed out in its post on the paper, “a graph produced by Robert Rohde for his Global Warming Art Web site years ago nicely captures the general picture.” Here it is:

Look familiar? What Marcott et al added to the already imposing edifice of climate science was the most comprehensive reconstruction to date.

And, yes, that chart is by the same Robert Rohde who led the statistical analysis of the Koch-funded BEST (Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature) study that confirmed for the umpteenth time the accuracy of the instrumental record — indeed confirmed that “Global Warming Is Real” and “On The High End” and “Essentially All” Due To Carbon Pollution.

You might recall the disinformers said they would abide by whatever that skeptic-led study found. Until it confirmed climate science. Then they would have none of it. Such is the monotonous, flat-lining nature of anti-science.

25 Responses to Must-Have High-Resolution Charts: ‘Carbon Pollution Set To End Era Of Stable Climate’

  1. BlackDragon says:

    Go science!

  2. Merrelyn Emery says:

    I’m delighted by the news about the deniers’ sites for several reasons. I predicted here many moons ago that denial would shrink to the status of a small but very intense cult, talking only to each other. Monckton was here (Oz) recently but received almost no publicity because reality and science have won that battle. Coming up – the FF industries and $$$, ME

  3. Everyone should print a copy and send it to Obama. He reads a few letters every day and one of these might get through to him.

  4. Lore says:

    I agree, the monotonous drill from the deni-o-sphere has exhausted its interest for me. It just gets to be more shrill and rediculous as each new week and each new peer-reviewed study is introduced. There isn’t even any pretence anymore at attempting to be sly or coy about their smears. Just kids, shooting electronic spitballs and begging for attention.

  5. Steve Bloom says:

    Thanks, Joe, for featuring one of the two key points I raised in a comment on the previous post. Next: “I’d write a post for a camel.”? :) Hope so!

  6. Lou Grinzo says:

    The deniers remind me of Saddam Hussein’s press secretary. I forget his name, but his outright denials during the first Gulf War got ever more ridiculous, culminating in the famous incident with him claiming American forces were nowhere near his location, and you could see US tanks moving into the city behind him.

  7. Lore says:

    You’re thinking of “Baghdad Bob”, Muhammad Saeed al-Sahhaf….

    “There are no American infidels in Baghdad. Never!”

    “My feelings – as usual – we will slaughter them all”

    “Our initial assessment is that they will all die”

    “I blame Al-Jazeera – they are marketing for the Americans!”

    “God will roast their stomachs in hell at the hands of Iraqis.”

    ‘We have destroyed 2 tanks, fighter planes, 2 helicopters and their shovels – We have driven them back.”

  8. Steve Bloom says:

    Baghdad Bob is the perfect analogy! Is there a link for those quotes, Lore?

  9. Lore says:

    Here you go….

    I actually had a business associate from India at one time that would always repeat the phrase when explaining a situation; “I am almost telling you the truth”. Which also seems rather appropriate for our denier friends.

  10. Mulga Mumblebrain says:

    Dear me, ME! That is no way to talk about News Corpse and ‘The Australian’ (The Fundamental Orifice of the Nation’) in particular. Did you not hear Kim Williams and all the other hysterical and histrionic Eumenides screeching that News Corpse is the very standard bearer of ‘Free Speech’ here and throughout the known universe (ie between Big Brother Rupe’s ears)? Look out all they’ll photoshop you to look like Rosa Klebb. I bags a makeover as Che Guevara.

  11. Jeff Poole says:

    True Merrelyn he received the complete lack of publicity he so richly deserved.

    But his idea that the coal barons should take over the media and create an Aussie ‘Faux News’ is taking shape with Jabba the Rhinehart infiltrating Ten and Fairfax.

    And what does he really need to do when both major parties are in furious agreement about doubling coal exports, fracking everywhere and subsiding the death of the Great Barrier Reef by a thousand coal ports…?

    His work here is done.

  12. caroza says:

    What is really funny (and doesn’t seem to have made much of a splash in the climate news) is that somebody at NOAA has rolled the proxy data forward and that *also* confirms the recent instrumental record – see
    I’m not quite sure how badly-sited stations are going to explain this one away….. ;)

  13. Merrelyn Emery says:

    All too true Jeff and there are days I despair but it is clear the tide has turned on the deniers and protests against fracking and new coal mines are increasing. And I know it looks bad on the political front too but when the social tide turns, as with the oceanic one, it sweeps much away with it. Personally, I think we are in for ‘interesting’ times, ME

  14. Conrad Dunkerson says:

    Yes, it is clear that the deniosphere is imploding. You can see it in the coverage of the Marcott paper in the ‘mainstream media’. Every major paper and tv station included quotes from sources like Michael Mann, Gavin Schmidtt, or Katharine Hayhoe… rather than the usual deceivers (e.g. McIntyre, Pielke, Monckton, et cetera). The deniers cried wolf too many times and are now being ignored by anyone with a reputation to maintain.

    I’m also enjoying the charts showing overlapping studies like the ‘proxies confirming instrumental record’ that caroza linked above and this mashup of results going back 20,000 years;

    These show that the results just keep getting confirmed. The only thing missing is a projection going forward. Too many deniers still run with the claim that there could have been magical spikes in the past ‘in between’ proxy data points and thus the unknown cause of those non-existent spikes could be responsible for the current temperature rise as well. Which is, of course, nonsense because we KNOW the cause of the current rise… AND that it won’t be a brief spike, but rather a rapid rise to a new consistently higher temperature. Someone should show the projected temperature for the UPCOMING two thousand years or so under various emissions scenarios to demonstrate that however high we push the temperature is the level the human race will be stuck at for thousands of years.

  15. Joe Romm says:

    Great link. I’ll repost.

  16. Joan Savage says:

    If anyone really really wants to be a credible contrarian, they could argue that it’s not necessarily the end of a stable climate. A new stable pattern could develop, though “stable” only in the sense of having persistent characteristics, not our old-fashioned definition of “stable” with its already outmoded expectations of limited ranges of temperature and moisture and kinetic energy.

    Welcome to Bill McKibben’s vision of Eaarth.

  17. Jay Alt says:

    Everyone send copies to John Holdren. Then he’ll have spares for ‘show & tell,’ in case anyone mention Climate Change inside the Obama’s “Cone of Climate Silence”

    Maxwell Smart (as John Holdren) with the Chief

  18. David Spurgeon says:

    Yes particularly when the ice age comes in the next few years!

  19. M Tucker says:

    What is the connection between the denial blogs and opposition to government action? Almost none. No connection what-so-ever. Republicans don’t bring up Watts. They arm wave about how “the science is not settled.” They say things like, “science is not sure climate change is happening or man is the cause.”

    People in red states who you would expect to recognize climate disruption, farmers and ranchers, have nothing to say about it. They don’t read stupid denier blogs. Even if a multiyear drought just took the farm that has been in their family for generations they will not bring up manmade climate disruption. Government inaction or saying stupid things about the science is not a voting issue with them. Inhofe or Boehner or McConnell will not lose their seats because of inaction or stupid statements about climate disruption. Watch McConnell’s campaign for reelection, it will not even come up. That demonstrates how much the average American voter is worried about climate disruption. McConnell’s Democratic challenger, when one officially announces, will not campaign on it because it will become a liability in Kentucky. Not a single Kentucky voter, Democrat or Republican, is alarmed about AGW. Face it, no matter what a national poll might say, anthropogenic climate disruption is not a big issue in quite a few important states. We will see how long it stays in the public mind in NY.

    Government inaction has nothing to do with idiot blogs that deny science so Joe is correct to ignore them. The fight is not with those people and the pathetic audience they attract. The fight is getting people agitated enough to make it a political issue.

  20. Joe Romm says:

    I agree denial blogs have little impact. But they do feed Fox News and Limbaugh.

  21. M Tucker says:

    Sure, Fox and Limbaugh both feed off the denier blogs but your responding to the blogs will not influence them (but you know that). Stupid is as stupid does. If farmers and ranchers are influenced by Fox and Limbaugh they fall into the stupid is as stupid does group too. If they deny their own senses and experience and wisdom; if they ignore the early arrival of spring, the changing winters, the unpredictable rain; they would deny and ignore anything a climate scientist or agronomist would tell them.

    You do respond to other media and I think that is worthwhile. It is important to get a rebuttal out to the social media when Fox or Limbaugh wax idiotic about climate disruption.

  22. My co-blogger Jos Hagelaars made a similar graph, but also extending it backwards in time to the last glacial maximum (20,000 years ago).

    Eli has dubbed the resulting figure “the wheelchair”:

  23. Mulga Mumblebrain says:

    And the winner of the Dunning-Kruger Award for the most lurid repetition of the longest refuted denialist canard goes to…

  24. Daniel Coffey says:

    You refer to “Jabba the Rhinehart,” who I think is Gina Rinehart, and who was recently written about in The New Yorker as the richest woman on Earth, or some such. It was a delightful profile of a person unmarred by petty moralities and ordinary concerns. In to those tiny hands and those of Rupert M. have been placed the future of humanity, or some large part of it. What a wonderful, great choice the market has made.

  25. Mulga Mumblebrain says:

    Daniel, Ms Rinehart is the true spawn of her father, Lang Hancock. My father, a journalist, used to fondly regale people with the tale of the day when Hancock had him ejected from his office when, against the advice of one of Hancock’s lackeys, he raised the question of Hancock’s business dealings with his former partner, Peter Wright, in a not suitably obsequious manner. The resultant litigation between Wright and his heirs, and Hancock and his sole confection, is still dragging its way through the courts. Rinehart is a perfect example, in my opinion, of how money inerrantly seeks out the worst types. Her lengthy and remarkably punitive legal crusade against her own children is amazing, but she, like many of the rich, who use the ‘justice’ system to intimidate and harass their victims, is incredibly litigious.