I reread this article.
so I will go through the first few sections of the dellingpole article to see if the critics and authors make legit arguments...
1. so the first graph is buntgen chart sure shows that northern temps were warming.
i did a search your article and no one referenced buntgen. I note we don't have a lot of proxies from that time so its quite normal to see studies of the ice at the poles or trees in the northern hemisphere. That is where the science has been done.
2. abrantes chart...
I find abrantes critique to be more political than informative. He should have said while that chart was in my paper it was not my chart... and although the chart does show the MWP to be warmer than todays temps my paper was about the fact that Ocean temps in my area have warmed recently to Medieval Warm period levels.
3. Li's chart - this segues or dovetails with Lovejoy's critque. Lovejoy wants to us to understand that he sees temperature change happening faster today than it did a long time ago. Fine.
It was misleading of him to act like dellingpole committed "fundamental but common errors". The charts in the dellingpole article were fine. They were not even Dellingpoles charts. Lovejoy has apparently done some statistical work and believes temps are rising faster now than in the past. Maybe he is right. But, I think he makes too big a deal of this because at least some proxy records are not going to show quick changes. They don't have that kind of resolution.
4 chart... Guillet starts off saying his paper never said global warming was a myth. Dellingpole actually wrote...
“Global warming” is a myth — so say
80 graphs from 58 peer-reviewed scientific papers published in 2017.
I pretty much concur with the authors point. Extreme caution must be taken when using proxy records. They should not be used to show agw is a massive lie and they really can be graphed onto instrument data to show we are warming.
"GHD records are now recognized as an important regional proxy for spring-summer temperature (Chuine et al., 2004; Meier et Pfister, 2007; Maurer et al., 2009; Garnier et al., 2011). Yet, as with any other proxy, the use of this archive for climate reconstructions comes with limitations and uncertainties. Several researchers have indeed shown that spring-summer temperatures are not the only factor influencing and/or determining grape harvest (Guerreau 1995, Rutishauser et al., 2007, García de Cortázar-Atauri et al., 2010). Changes in agricultural practices, the use of different grape varieties in the same region over time, as well as the political background (e.g. military conflicts, see Garnier et al., 2011) can influence harvest dates and bias the climate signal and therefore the climatic trends contained within the GHD series (García de Cortázar-Atauri et al., 2010).
In summary, and given the limitations listed above, extreme caution must be taken before using the French GHD records to claim that global warming is a “massive lie”. We feel that additional studies addressing the limitations of this proxy and filling the numerous gaps existing in the available French GHD series must be carried out before drawing any definitive conclusion."
I could go on... as I read it I don't really see anything standing out.
If you have any points here worth making... let me know.
Just to say and
@jem / others might find this (genuinely) of interest is the section in this 2017 article in which the above chart is included:
Analysis of "‘Global Warming’ Is a Myth, Say 58 Scientific Papers in 2017"
Published in
Breitbart, by
James Delingpole on 6 Jun 2017
Response from the authors of the “58 studies”
https://climatefeedback.org/evaluat...human-caused-global-warming-james-delingpole/
It is not often one hears from the horse's mouth as it were, certainly not in chorus. Draw your own conclusion.
Like tobacco, there is a lot of industry interference, dirty tricks & political hackery (Breitbart). Climate matters however have taken a new dimension of bias/perversion/tribalism & some flat-Earther level spin from the pubic sphere (dreadful pun intended).
