By Andrew Bolt ~
Four years ago an Australian study by warmist scientists, including Melbourne University’s Joelle Gergis, created breathless headlines:
The Guardian: “Australasia has hottest 60 years in a millennium, scientists find”;
The Age and The Australian led with “Warming since 1950 ‘unprecedented’.
The story was on ABC 24 and ABC news where Gergis proclaimed:” there are no other warm periods in the last 1000 years that match the warming experienced in Australasia since 1950.”
Jo Nova describes what followed:
Gergis used 300,000 dollars and took three years to produce a flawed paper. Bloggers corrected Gergis’ mistake for free in three weeks. Peer review had missed it completely in the first place, then took four years to get it right.
Four years of work later – so long! – Gergis tries again, and produces a different and less alarming picture of Australia’s temperature record to virtually no media attention:
Jo Nova picks apart this latest effort and Gergis’ excuses, and this bit is particularly interesting:
If we just look at the black PCR construction it would appear that all the extra CO2 didn’t make much difference. The proxy record has shown more variability, and similar temperatures when CO2 levels were supposedly perfect.
How do we know that last bump after 1950 is supernatural? Here’s the press release.
Climate scientists used natural climate indicators, such as tree rings, corals and cave records, in conjunction with climate modeling to delve a thousand years back into the region’s temperature history. – Phys Org
“Analysis of climate model simulations shows that the warming experienced since 1950 cannot be explained by natural factors alone, highlighting the role of human caused greenhouse gases in the recent warming of the region.”
So there you have it. Models that don’t work in this millennia, and don’t explain the bumps of the past millennia, also cannot explain the current bump. That’s modern science: you get 95% certainty and argument from ignorance in the same sentence….
As Mike E then pointed out in comments, the error margin in 2012 was larger than the result:
“The average reconstructed temperature anomaly in Australasia during A.D. 1238–1267, the warmest 30-year pre-instrumental period, is 0.09°C (±0.19°C) below 1961–1990 levels.”
…Looks like the hottest 30 year period back then, and reported to hundredths of a degree, may not have turned out to be the hottest thirty year period of that era in the new study…
The new press release even admits things have been just as warm in Australia all those years ago:
“Analysis based on the smallest subset of the palaeoclimate data network suggests that single 30-year and 10-year periods of comparable temperatures to late 20th century levels may have occurred during the first half of the millennium…”
Which wasn’t what was reported in 2012 by the media.
Read the whole thing. The many links are at the link.
Andrew Bolt writes for the Herald Sun, Daily Telegraph, and The Advertiser and runs Australia’s most-read political blog. On week nights he hosts The Bolt Report on Sky News at 7pm and his Macquarie Radio show at 8pm with Steve Price.