The clown found (directed by WUWT or AllTricksZone) a 1977 paper by some scientist there.

Of course, Clean Air Acts in 1979 got rid of a lot of sulphate emissions from industry so CO2 caused warming started again.

Yes, we had the MWP then the LIA now we have warmed way past the MWP so tree lines have moved north, grape vines in the UK are now well north of where they were in the R[oman]WP etc.

So poor lees’ paper is not worth a small pinch of pelican poop.

Poor lees tries a comeback:


Quote:

The paper actually talks about trees above the tree line in 1977. And they have tree stumps still there above the tree line. Such a hopeless dick.

Of course, tree lines are moving polewards as the permafrost thaws out.

Whatever the situation in 1977 (with the mid century “cooling” still happening in the NH) the tree line is moving north in the NH. The tundra or permafrost is thawing out and trees moving northwards.

A 1977 paper is a bit irrelevant 47 years later.

Poor lees tries again.

The fear, the fear. . . . .of change!

Poor lees.

Hopefull lees finds a paper from 2019! Oh wow!

But we know there was a MWP followed by the LIA followed by modern warming that has taken us way past MWP temperatures.

So there are tree stumps north of the present NH tree line. But the tree line is moving north as the globe warms, the permafrost thaws etc. So the treeline will move to its previous northern limit and go past it.

450ppm CO2 will create an ice-free planet. We are already at 424ppm.

For the mentally inadequate I show the temperature record showing why tree stumps are found north of the present tree line.

Poor lees will go Marcott, hmm tut tut without offering any real reason to doubt the reconstruction. Probably will throw in a  ;) or two.

With some buffers—the permafrost in an area has to thaw etc—but then seeds from mature trees from the forest will land and a tree will grow in a “new” area  north of the existing tree line. Assumes enough water, soil etc.

---

The MWP may have been warmer than temperatures in 1977 but from 1980 temperatures rose and by the 1990s temperatures now are warmer than in the MWP. Hard for deniers to accept this but it is so all the same.

2023 was the hottest year on record and hotter than any year this interglacial.

Poor lees, getting exasperated I think.

Yes, the treeline is not as far north as it was in the MWP—trees don’t spring up overnight! As I said, an area has to get warm enough even below the surface, have the right conditions before a seed from the forest can land, sprout and grow.

Poor lees, reduced to muttering:


Quote:

You would think 50 years of AGW would have done it. I mean his comment was "warmed way past the MWP".

Obviously my comments of permafrost needing to be thawed to some depth below the surface went straight over his pointy head. Same with comments that the ground needs to be suitable for the seed to germinate, take root and grow. This probably needs a succession of weeds to create the right biological soil conditions for trees to grow.

Ah well.

A Google search on movement of the treeline northwards finds plenty of papers. First one I found:

https://www.jstor.org/stable/24551608

Discusses movement of the tree line south in the LIA and recovery and move back north.

Lees seems to have lost his mind in his latest spew of drivel.

Poor lees—a paper from 1977 is from before the rapid rise of temperatures so is worthless from some aspects.

We have the “valley” of the LIA between the MWP and the hotter modern period. So trees could have reached whatever distance to the north in the MWP, retreated in the LIA and be advancing again now. That seems pretty evident so what point exactly lees thinks he is making is pretty pointless.

Does lees misconstruct the comments by Marcot?

This is the bit I think lees gets excited by and draws a very incorrect conclusion. From lees’ own link:


Quote:

Our global paleotemperature reconstruction includes a so-called “uptick” in temperatures during the 20th-century. However, in the paper we make the point that this particular feature is of shorter duration than the inherent smoothing in our statistical averaging procedure, and that it is based on only a few available paleo-reconstructions of the type we used. Thus, the 20th century portion of our paleotemperature stack is not statistically robust, cannot be considered representative of global temperature changes, and therefore is not the basis of any of our conclusions.

https://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2013/03/response-by-marcott-et-al/

This is what I thought was meant—the instrumental record of 20th century and early 21st century warming is incontrovertible. Marcot is only talking of his work not the instrumental record.

Poor lees is flying the white flag.

Poor lees has no scientific training, is someone just petrified at the thought of change.

Jovial Monk wrote on Apr 4^th, 2024 at 7:15pm:

Poor lees is flying the white flag. Poor lees has no scientific training, is someone just petrified at the thought of change.

You do realise that you are muttering to yourself on this thread, dont you, juvenile?

Jovial Monk wrote on Apr 3^rd, 2024 at 12:46pm:

For the mentally inadequate I show the temperature record showing why tree stumps are found north of the present tree line. Poor lees will go Marcott, hmm tut tut without offering any real reason to doubt the reconstruction. Probably will throw in a  ;) or two. With some buffers—the permafrost in an area has to thaw etc—but then seeds from mature trees from the forest will land and a tree will grow in a “new” area  north of the existing tree line. Assumes enough water, soil etc.

Reduce the size of this graph, bozo, it buggers up all other posts.

Ffs. Don't you see it?? You are supposed to be a scientist.

Hello Franko! I am actually talking to lees posting in what is laughingly called the Environment board.

Frank wrote on Apr 4^th, 2024 at 7:32pm:

Reduce the size of this graph, bozo, it buggers up all other posts. Ffs. Don't you see it?? You are supposed to be a scientist.

There you go. Monk is not too smart on these matters.

---

I like it big, shows things clearer, gets through to the dunces here.