Europe in 1328 [image credit: Wikipedia]
Echoes of the Medieval Warm Period here? Long before the spectre of fossil fuel emissions was put forward as a possible climatic factor of course. We already covered some of this here, but as this is a new article let’s have another go.
– – –
LEIPZIG, Germany — Is weather history repeating itself? asks Study Finds.
The Arctic has experienced a steady increase in temperature since the 1980s, causing meteorological patterns that resemble 14th century Europe, research shows.
Scientists from the Leibniz Institutes for the History and Culture of Eastern Europe (GWZO) and Tropospheric Research (TROPOS) [studied] weather transitions in ancient Europe in the early 1300s and discovered droughts similar to the conditions in Europe in 2018.
The droughts from 1302 and 1307 brought about a period of ice which caused a famine from 1315 to 1321.
Researchers published a study which displays the similarities between medieval and recent climate in Europe. The researchers developed the hypothesis that constant patterns in weather are followed by a transition in climate.
The Freigeist Junior Research Group compared the climate in Europe from 1309 to 1321, known as the Dantean Anomaly, to the recent heat and drought in Europe in 2018.
Due to the rapid weather change in 14th century Europe, an ice age occurred, followed by The Great Famine from 1315 to 1321. After this, Europe was plagued by the Black Death which killed approximately 30% of the population.
Researchers believe the Dantean Anomaly led to the devastation that wiped out many Europeans. High temperatures and atmospheric pressures caused extreme heat and droughts, followed by a long period of decreased temperatures and precipitation producing The Little Ice Age.
“Sources from the Middle East also report severe droughts. Water levels in the Nile, for example, were exceptionally low. Therefore, we think that the 1304-06 drought was not only a regional phenomenon but probably had transcontinental dimensions,” says Dr. Thomas Labbé, from the GWZO, in a statement.
Can past climate predict the future?
Researchers are evaluating historical sources from the regions of northern Italy, southeastern France, and east-central Europe.
“We want to show that historical climate change can be reconstructed much better if written historical sources are incorporated alongside climate archives like tree rings or sediment cores. The inclusion of humanities research contributes to a better understanding of the social consequences of climate change in the past and to conclude the future,” explains Dr. Martin Bauch, who heads the junior research group.
Crops such as wheat and the production of wine depend on certain temperatures and amounts of precipitation, making them ideal for pinpointing historical weather patterns.
Likewise, recorded fires indicate possible droughts in the area at the time, and therefore, help researchers determine possible climate changes in certain years.
Analyzing these historical climate shifts can shed light on the current climate change caused by global warming.
“Even if it was a phase of cooling in the Middle Ages and we are now living in a phase of man-made warming, there could be parallels. The transitional period between two climate phases could be characterized by smaller temperature differences between the latitudes and cause longer-lasting, large-scale weather patterns, which could explain an increase in extreme events,” notes meteorologist Dr. Patric Seifert from TROPOS, who was responsible for reconstructing the large-scale weather situations for the study.
Results indicated a correlation between urban fires and drought. “We think our analysis is the first to find a correlation between fires and droughts over a two-hundred-year period. Large urban fires usually followed droughts by a year,” says Bauch. “The wooden structures in medieval houses did not dry out immediately. However, once they did, they ignited very easily.”
Full article here.
Research paper — A prequel to the Dantean Anomaly: the precipitation seesaw and droughts of 1302 to 1307 in Europe
Tallbloke's Talkshop 
[…] Climate of modern-day Europe mimics the climate of 14th century Europe, say researchers […]
Typos excepted. I suggest the science that determines this is already well known and proven by the test many observations of nature. Viz:.
1. TIME DOMAIN: The climate now is self evidently tracking previous cycles in rate, range and period, see the time domain graph from GISP2 extended to today, which suggests no unnatural change is happening.
Range about 2 deg, period 1,000 years, rate when changing c.0.7deg pc. Was then, is now. THis is multi cyclic, so its patterns change, but the dominant (probably solar wind) cycles recur as they interfere, as with ice ages and the probably gravitational orbital forcings of the three main Milankovitch effects combine differently. Why there were Hippos in Honiton at 50 deg N in the last interglacial, the Eemian (all three frequencies at maximums).
2. FREQUENCY DOMAIN: Also watch Carl-Otto Weiss explain his analysis of the last 2,000 yrs of natural proxy temperature records. “All we see are cycles”, so change is cyclic and natural, at the levels we observe directly today. Also, on this analysis of the data there was no monotonic signal, which means no one way increase in temperature is present in the record. No monotonic AGW effect is seen in the observed change.
https://schillerinstitute.com/media/carl-otto-weiss-le-changement-climatique-est-du-a-des-cycles-naturels/
Paper available here: DOI: 10.2174/1874282301711010044
POINT: So where is the case for AGW, when the IPCC’s models are predicated on attributing all observed change to humans, when in fact all the change os natural, so this fundamental presumption of IPCC climate models is wrong on the basic facts of the observation of natural change by the ever growing evidence of geological observations.
The models are ipso facto wrong, because their presumptions are wrong as regards an AGW effect from greenhouse gasses. This has become simple denial of natural change that the evidence for is overpowering and real, something models can never be. MWP and RWP denial in particular, the most recent and hence most reliable observations.
Why do they persist when the observations prove that most change is natural? Activist academics and their whole departments of “climate science” deny the very basis of how real deterministic science is done, because their grants and jobs depend on.supporting the consensus politicians demand and funded them to support, to support agendas that are entirely political in nature and about power and managing global economies by energy rationing and pricing, not saving any planets.
So they can never admit that science is decided by what the observations say, and not by the predictions of models, programmed with their unprovable guesses and vague theories to attribute change to an effect that cannot in fact deliver the net climate change attributed to it, by them.
AGW itself is actually net zero, as observed, with natural background removed.
THis happens because, ipso facto, whatever effect there is is powerfully controlled by the natural feedback of evaporative cooling and cloud formation that negates such perturbations, and has imposed climate equilibrium for 500 MIllion years at least, when solar radiation has varied substantially, asteroids have struck, etc. The idea of tipping point associated with a small and largely saturated effect from CO2, whose predictions for from models simply don’t happen in observed reality, is simply a deceit, if considered using deterministic physics,
So, as Feynman pointed out, “if the observations don’t match the theory, it’s wrong…” QED
The Arctic has experienced a steady increase in temperature since the 1980s, Really ?
Summer temps have been at or below normal for most if not all of that period.
[…] Climate of modern-day Europe mimics the climate of 14th century Europe, say researchers […]
Reblogged this on Climate Collections.
Is this the future?
https://twitter.com/PeterDClack/status/1497701423751917572