When it comes to historical temp reconstructions, I’m wondering why there are not more references to the work of Dr. Patterson and his team from U of Sask. Or anyone else using oxygen isotopes (mainly, w/supporting proxies) for high-resolution climate reconstructions down to seasonal variations. Is there some doubt in the science?
There appears to be some conflicting evidence, RE: above,
“The warming event around 1500 A.D. is identified by climatic simulations in the Atlantic sector of the Arctic and is explained by the internal variability of atmospheric circulation. ”
Compared to:
” . . . grain cultivation had also been established throughout much of the country shortly after settlement but became limited to barley (a shorter-season crop) by the early 1200s, and by the 1500s it was abandoned altogether . . .”
That quote is from ‘Two millennia of North Atlantic seasonality
and implications for Norse colonies’:
http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2010/03/02/0902522107.full.pdf
Within the same article is this:
“Recent investigations of the marine environment off the northwest and northern coasts of Iceland have revealed significant millennial-, centennial-, and decadal-scale variability over the Holocene (14–19). These hydrographic changes on the north Icelandic shelf reflect larger scale ocean atmosphere circulation changes and regional climate variation
in the North Atlantic.”
And this:
“On the basis of δ18O data, reconstructed water temperatures for the Roman Warm Period in Iceland are higher than any temperatures recorded
in modern times.”
Are there any other papers on temp reconstructions in Greenland &/or Iceland using mollusk/isotope values? This process seems to be far more accurate (reliable?) than anything I’ve read re: tree rings or any other temperature proxy. Or am I misinformed?
I’d appreciate the thoughts of commenters here on isotope reconstructions.
-barn