A 6 year old video that’s 1 hour 22 minutes, and I don’t know how I’ve missed it until now. It is a remarkably well done survey of the science, the costs, and the foolishness; all presented in a wonderfully biting way.
Well worth the watching. Show it to your friends who are “unsure”…
The political / costs aspects are focused on Australia / New Zealand as he’s from Down Under.
Looks like Jo Nova has a review of his book up:
It’s sad that Bob Carter died suddenly.
Great video – straight forward and no frills.
Too bad there are so few like him to give a good counter point to the global warming propaganda.
That is the first chart that I have seen with time periods attached to the onset and termination of the Younger Dryas 3 year onset and about 60 years for return to the normal trend line. I was surprised however that the plot showed the younger dryas temperature anomaly began with a sharp warming spike not a sudden cooling. I was not aware of that. I was under the impression that the warming had proceeded for some significant period of time and then cooled sharply. dropping back to glacial temperatures.
That temperature pattern does not fit any of the scenarios I have ever seen discussed for the Younger dryas.
An asteroid impact on the ice sheet in the northern hemisphere (Canada) would have caused a sharp cooling from then normal temperatures in the northern hemisphere not a sharp spike in temps followed by a several century drop back to glacial temperatures.
Time to go back and re-examine the hypothesis.
I am referring to the item labeled as (1) in this graph which Bob Carter said happened in only 3 years but which was localized to the northern hemisphere, there was not a comparable sharp increase in antarctic temps, they increases in a long term ramping up of temperature over this period not a sudden sharp warming.
It has been my experience that as soon as you show the weakness of the science the argument becomes the necessity for western culture to behave better.IOWs be “earth friendly”, that all the improvements to the ecology mean nothing because at some point a group did something bad.
Larry, wouldn’t a catastrophic asteroid impact cause widespread fires well beyond the impact zone? It’s conceivable they might have burned for years. That might not have changed the climate for thirty years but it might have sullied the measuring method.
@Bruce Ryan:
It all depends on what the impact hit. Ocean? No fires. 2 mile thick ice sheet? No fires. Forest? Fires. Desert? No fires. (There’s a fused glass plane in the Sahara from such an impact). Break up into multiple bolides over a couple of continents mostly ice covered or water? Small scattered fires like natural forest fires. Etc.
Best evidence so far is for a modestly disbursed impact of several chunks but with the major chunks into the ice sheet of North Atlantic and only a few smaller bolides into ice free parts of North America or Europe (and many of them believed to be secondary ejecta – such as a set of “bays” in the Carolinas where their shape points back to a primary impact in south Canada).
A fire can at most put more carbon into the layers. It can not add to the nano-diamonds that are also evident.
As I recall the “evidence” (foggy morning first coffee in hand…) it looks like a wall of icy slush washed over Siberia (thus the mammoth herds preserved instantly) and a lot of dusty wind covered what is now the USA (so there’s a foot or three of “dust layer” over places as far south as the Carolinas). Evidence of an impact without fire as a major element – most of the mass into an ice sheet but with some ‘scouring” of the land under the ice as the combined impactor / ice reached rock level. There is also a major platinum mine in Canada just about where the impact is thought to have happened, so possibly the asteroid was a PGM type. Nothing like a few megatons of platinum impact to ruin your day ;-)
It is all a rather fascinating rabbit hole to run down. My belief is that (looking at how all prior interglacials have ^ peaks and this one is more — flat topped) is that we were headed for a similar shoot up, reverse, shoot down over about 14,000 years; but the impact “clipped the peak”. It stopped the rise momentum of “whatever” was the process. Then we were already past that peak driver so just had more of a deflated “go flat” for 12,000 years. Now we’re on the normal downslope of a cooling post-inter-glacial BUT without the momentum downward from an overshoot peak. The impact damped the oscillation.
The bad news from that is that if you overlay our “mountain” of rise from our deepest part of the glacial on the prior interglacials, you will see ours is peak clipped and our Holocene temps neatly making a line across their peak – but then our line ends just about where their down plunge passes by… The implication is that we’re just about to re-join that plunge back into a glacial period. “Oh Dear” comes to mind…
The only good news out of it is an error band that says we might have another 1000 or 2000 years before it gets bad; and that we don’t have a cooling momentum underway just yet (perhaps all that farming, ploughing up dark earth, burning coal…) Still, from a geologic perspective, THE giant risk is that plunge. Then realize the Little Ice Age was pretty bad, there’s both a major 1470 year Bond Cycle and a minor half that 750 ish year half cycle, the L.I.A. started about 1300 (or 800 years after the catastrophic 536 collapse of the Roman Empire as conditions went to hell) and that’s about 700 years before now so….
Yes, I very much hope that is just “numerology”… but there’s a whole lot of cyclical history saying otherwise. Fall of Akkad. Pharaonic records of 100 years of droughts. Greek Golden Age and the fall of Greece. Roman Warm Period and then ice flows at Constantinople. There is a very strong climate cycle of long duration, with ‘ripple’ in it, that is being ignored by just about everyone at present.
Look at the “flat line” of the Holocene in the graph above. Now stop ignoring the peaks and plunges of that “flat line”. Those are the ripple. What spikes up, then spikes down. Given that in the broad view (look at the outer envelope of the whole of 12,000 years) we’re rolled over into the cooling trajectory: IF right now we hit one of those down spikes as ought to happen given recent warming out of the L.I.A. the result will be far colder than the L.I.A. and far more damaging. We are on a “stair steps down” path at present, with the stairs increasingly steep. The next one down could be the one that starts the return of the glacial sheets.
Again, the good news is that it is unlikely to be our problem. “Fast” for a glacial is still “glacially slow” and takes multiple lifetimes. Cold comes fast (as fast as 5 years) but the ice is a mass flow problem from evaporating oceans and that does not speed up with cold.
Yes but the sharp spike I am talking about happened 2000 years before the sharp cooling of the Younger Dryas and lasted about 500 years.
How much heat do you have to put into the earth system to raise temps that rapidly. One thought that came to mind is, as shown in his video clip at one point much of the north atlantic was covered by sea ice at the end of the ice age. If thaw began and melt water began flowing into the ocean at some point that “lift” of a rising sea level would have unanchored that sea ice and perhaps resulted in massive calving of large block ice bergs. As they drifted south and melted they would have exposed a huge amount of relatively warm north Atlantic water to the atmosphere and that in turn would have dumped a huge amount of heat into the atmosphere relatively locally in the the gap between American and Europe.
That could have set off a chain reaction of lots of ice into the tropics cooling those waters and caused over turning or some major disruption of the thermohaline circulation which could explain the descending spikes of heating and cooling as it headed back into the cooling of they younger dryas. Like a coffee pot near boiling, the heat release and cooling from a major reorganization of the sea ice in the north Atlantic would have caused some wild swings in air temps, as a new system of currents organized and stabilized in the north atlantic, and most of that impact would have been relatively local to the northern hemisphere.
Like a PA system near feed back, it would have oscillated between a feed back state and a quiet state as the system sorted itself out into a stable circulation pattern.
@Larry L:
Your instincts are correct. It is an oscillator and with two stable states (cold / warm) and instability with oscillation in the period of transition of some of the parameters. This paper:
Click to access rapid.pdf
Referenced here:
So that’s the general mechanism, but what happens when we hit a cold bump in our present configuration?
FWIW, I also found a paper looking at lake sediments in Florida that showed during the Glacial cold periods, the Gulf Stream slows a bunch and the heat backs up into Florida. Florida winters become more like their present summers with more Oaks and thunderstorms – frost and pines not so much…
The link is in the D.O. linked article, but it timed out when I attempted to access it so may need a do-over on finding the paper. ( I have a saved copy “somewhere” and then there’s the Wayback Machine)… A search on the article found:
http://science.sciencemag.org/content/261/5118/198
So there’s “facts on the ground” (or in the sediments) documenting that ocean circulation switch as operating. Just sayin’… There’s a reason I’m planning a move to Florida… FWIW #2: I also found an article on Texas precipitation and the 1500 year cycle that seemed to show West Texas gets a drought when it gets cold. You likely want to read that whole article and the links in it as what happens in Texas is likely going to be related to Colorado…
From one of the links in that article:
So there’s that…
IMHO it’s the water more than the cold that matters. There’s plenty of evidence for prolonged drought in Egypt / Middle East / even up toward Greece causing collapses of empires. The above shows a similar pattern for the the USA with the dry south west particularly at issue. (There’s another paper for similar centuries long droughts in California – another reason to pack up and go…)
So plan where you go to retire around where there will be steady water supplies…
Again, the good news is that it is unlikely to be our problem.
Oh, good. I was thinking up taking up the bassoon.
Not Bob Carter but recommended reading
Ian Plimer “Not for greens”
An abrasive removal of the green coating IMO
It is a bit difficult to find info on Colorado for the little ice age period as it is often on the boundary of areas studied. But this chart shows Colorado river flow over the period and it looks like the Rockies are wet when Europe is cold. Several of the peak average river flows for the Colorado river fell in the 1300’s through the late 1600’s low flow was in the early 1900’s as the little ice age began to break down and climate returned to normal.
https://www.pnas.org/content/107/50/21283
This page shows details of a mammoth kill not far from where I live and work 12,850 years ago just as the ice age glaciation was ending, and indicate temperatures were 4-7 deg F cooler than current temps and the climate was most likely a bit wetter, so it appears cooling does not cause drought along the Colorado front range
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/299852735_Brunswig_2016_The_Dent_Site_A_Late_Ice_Age_Encounter_on_the_South_Platte_River
As a counter point this study indicates that during the full blown ice age conditions eastern Colorado was in the dry cold outflow area off the ice sheets and had lower moisture. How ever without the ice sheet I suspect that transition band moves northward and climate here in the high eastern plains is not that much different than it is now.
https://www.futurity.org/ice-age-weather-american-west-870492/
I will have to dig around to see what other info I can find. Big moisture in the eastern plains comes when the gulf moisture gets pumped up into Colorado in late summer, where winter storms bring heavy snows when a strong low pressure sets up in extreme south east Colorado and pulls moist air out of Texas into the foot hills east of the Rockies. Location of that low center and its strength makes a big difference where the moisture falls. A few tens of miles north and it dumps moisture in the Denver basin, a few tens of miles south and the flow gets cut off by the Palmer divide north of Colorado springs and the moisture falls in the Colorado springs and Pueblo areas.
What I need is sediment records from long standing lakes on the Colorado eastern plains, annual river flows in the South Platte and Republican Rivers and Arkansas river in eastern Colorado.
Will have to see if anyone has done such studies
The Tusk last year posted a pair of burn papers that detail worldwide fires following the YD impact. A lot of burning, with perhaps 9% of total biomass worldwide up in smoke. David Middleton writing in WUWT begs to differ and posts persuasive arguments against. Link goes to both burn papers and supporting materials. Note that we also have the black mat on 5 contents which is described as evidence of massive burn. Cheers –
https://cosmictusk.com/wolbach-younger-dryas/
EM, Thanks for putting up this link to Bob Carter.I’ve been watching his 1 hr 22 minute talk over the past few days. I did not know of his work here in Oz against the Global warming scam. But it was so good to hear a plain speaking straight shooting Australian scientist saying how it was back then in 2011. Such a pity he is not here now to do some straight shooting & straight talking !