Rahmstorf/Schellnhuber Confirm No Anthropogenic Climate Change!

The Moving Finger writes; and, having writ,
Moves on: nor all thy Piety nor Wit
Shall lure it back to cancel half a Line,
Nor all thy Tears wash out a Word of it.

– Omar Khayyám

Scratch off the Potsdam Institute For Climate Impact Research from the alarmist list. No kidding!

The European Institute For Climate and Energy has a new piece written by Raimund Leistenschneider that takes a look at two interesting papers dug up from 2003. I wonder if Rahmstorf and Schellnhuber are going to feign amnesia on this. Big hat tip to NTZ reader Ike!

Rahmstorf 2003 paper shows pronounced cooling

The paper by Prof Stefan Rahmstorf confirms that today’s temperatures are actually quite cool compared to temperatures earlier in the Holocene.

In a paper he authored: “Timing of abrupt climate change: A precise clock“, Geophys. Res. Lett.. 30, Nr. 10, 2003, S. 1510, doi:10.1029/2003 GL017115, Ramhstorf examined the Dansgaard-Oeschger (DO events).

These events are rapid climate changes occurring 23 times during the last ice age between 110,000 and 23.000 BP and were reconstructed from the GISP-2-ice cores from Greenland. The following chart is a plot in Rahmstorf 2003 paper showing the temperature over the last 50,000 years.

 The next graphic shows the temperature for the last 50,000 years and the last 9,000 up close below, also derived from the GISP-2-ice cores.

On Rahmstorf’s paper, EIKE writes:

Easy to recognize, at least using the studies done by Rahmstorf, we are living in a comparably cold time today. During the MWP 1000 years ago, when the vikings were farming Greenland, it was 1°C warmer than today. During the Roman Optimum 2000 years ago, when Hannibal crossed the Alps with his elephants in the wintertime, it was even 2°C warmer than today. And during the Holocene climate optimum 3500 years ago it was about 3°C warmer than today. Since about  3200 years ago, there has been a cooling of about 2°C.

Multiple studies confirm that the warming was not a regional phenomena.

Schellnhuber could not discern any warming back in 2003

Meanwhile Prof. Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, Rahmstorf’s boss at the Potsdam Institute, was unable to discern any warming when examining a multitude of worldwide temperature records back in 2002 and 2003.

In a paper published in 2003, using their own studies, the authors concluded there had been no global warming over the last decades. (J.F. Eichner, E. Koscielny-Bunde, A. Bunde, S. Havlin, and H.-J. Schellnhuber: Power-law persistence and trends in the atmosphere, a detailed study of long temperature records, Phys. Rev. E 68 2003),

The temperature records of 95 stations distributed over the globe were studied. In the paper’s summary discussion, Schellnhuber and his colleagues wrote:

In the vast majority of stations we did not see indications for a global warming of the atmosphere.


Most of the continental stations where we observed significant trends are large cities where probably the fast urban growth in the last century gave rise to temperature increases.

And la pièce de resistance!

The fact that we found it difficult to discern warming trends at many stations that are not located in rapidly developing urban areas may indicate that the actual increase in global temperature caused by anthropogenic perturbation is less pronounced than estimated in the last IPCC Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change.

Last I checked, global temperatures have gone nowhere since 2003. So where’s the warming?

Copyright reminder: It is not allowed to reproduce this post without first obtaining permission from No Tricks Zone. You may cut and paste max. 25% of the content, and then followed by a link to this site. Thanks!

30 responses to “Rahmstorf/Schellnhuber Confirm No Anthropogenic Climate Change!”

  1. DirkH

    There is a scientist hidden inside Rahmstorf and Schellnhuber that sometimes wants to do real science, you know, using measured data, not only computer fabrications, with open minds, writing down whatever conclusion the data drives them to. And they can’t suppress it forever, and once in a blue moon, when the itching becomes too hard, they write a paper with real results.

    And then they carry on with computer models, TV interviews and care for their funding and spread panic.

    And that’s why they react so aggressively towards skeptics. They hate us because they want to be free like us.

    The Rahmstorf paper looks very good, it shows warming periods very much like the current warming since the end of the LIA.

  2. Brian H

    Note the papers’ dates.

    1. DirkH

      Well; do you have reason to believe the findings have been invalidated or debunked by newer research? And it should better be no debunking by computer model 😉

  3. Mike Davis

    The Holocene Optimum was about 8 K years ago and the Minoan Warm period was 32 to 35 hundred years ago or there abouts. The globe has been cooling for more than 5 K years with minor warm bumps that have been getting smaller/ colder.

    If you look really close at the right side of the graph you can see the Hockey stick! 😉

    1. bruce

      This pattern is first noted by B. Frenzel in the 1966 WMO conference proceedings in London on World climate 8000-0 BC, and affirmed by hundreds of different proxy studies, not all published.

  4. Casper

    I hope for extreme winter or Ice Age 😉

    1. DirkH

      Be careful what you wish for.

      1. Casper

        Don’t worry DirkH. Whatever will be, we pay for it. God bless the German Government 😛

  5. Ike

    I just stumbled over this English (!) article on welt online….its author is Bjørn Lomborg!


  6. woodNfish

    This is interesting. I m going to point it out to Lubos and maybe he can look at their studies a bit closer.

  7. Gator

    This is old news for geologists. “It requires a very unusual mind to undertake the analysis of the obvious.”
    Alfred North Whitehead

  8. Greg Furnell

    Naw – nothing to worry about then. All we gota do is tell that to the thousands of species that are going extinct………

    1. peter laux

      Greg, I am constantly dumbfounded by the wistful ‘species extinction’ card from alarmists. Its third trump to 1/ ‘the children’ (spoken in a simper) and 2/ ‘the grandchildren’ (spoken with the gush from the wellspring of moral rectitude).
      It is so cliche, not only do I find it comical, I can correctly deduce ‘no real thought life here’. Just sloganeering.
      Most rare and endangered species are at the end of their evolutionary time, it’s the way of nature.
      The palaeontologists tell us that over 99% of every creature that has ever lived is extinct – and nature not we, slaughtered them. The earth has had at least 5 major extinction events as well – we didn’t do it.
      Come the overdue next ice age, if it follows the past ones , Nth America and Nth Europe will be covered in over a kilometre of ice, the Amazon with its bio-diversity will revert to savannah. Forestation will shrink, desertification will increase. Species will vanish. Thats the earth, thats her climate change.

    2. sunsettommy

      Greg Furnell,

      From reading YOUR comments in the thread.I get the impression that you are a pretending environmentalist babbler.

      Why not drop the woe we are destroying everything drivel,that are always misleading and dishonest.To address real problems and that the habit of ecojerks who are misleading us with unverified numbers,will fail to compel us to deal with them.

      Why not concentrate on valid environmental concerns such as ocean pollution from garbage and other chemical littering?

      Crying about largely made up numbers of vanishing life species will not make us be better environmentalists.When what you and other do is to promote lies and deception.To further your naked power grab over the life of others.

      I hate being given bullshit by dishonest lying environmentalists who attempt to try leading me by my nose.

  9. Greg Furnell

    Listen to current events. When people take action, species extinctions can be prevented – watch the news; clue up before sounding off.

    This is because people can influence the environment – for better or worse.

    Now why won’t you step up to the table and accept that people do affect the environment??

    1. DirkH

      We finish off the warmists and you care for rare species in the meantime, ok?

    2. sunsettommy

      Classic prose of an environmentalist babbler.

  10. Greg Furnell

    How mean to you plan the times to get DH?

    1. DirkH

      You’re a script, right?

  11. Greg Furnell
    1. DirkH

      Read Björn Lomborgs “The Skeptical Environmentalist”; he explains where this assumption comes from; and it is really not more than an assumption, there is no evidence behind it.

  12. Niklaus

    The graphics you show are not actually from the Rahmstorf 2003 paper. The second set come from NOAA’s archive. The GISP chronology dates backward from 1900 [51y before BP, BP =1950],and of course is only for that one high altitude site in Greenland. “Multiple studies” do not confirm EIKE’s claims for high confidence in MWP,RWP,etc temps,relative to todays.

    Why did you you not reproduce the whole of Eichner et al 2003 conclusions,and why is page 2 missing? You do not discuss the reasons for or implications of their choice of methodology or stations. You ignore their findings about mountain stations and half the island stations. Of course they could ‘..discern [any] warming back in 2003’,contrary to your bold sub-heading: the mix of stations they chose was largely urban,and they could not confidently attribute the warming detected to more than local effect. Other sites showed warming that could not be attributed to local effect. They say their findings “..may indicate that the actual increase in global temperature caused by anthropogenic perturbation is less than estimated..” in IPCC TAR 2001.

    Whatever they are discerning ,it is not compatible with your handling

    1. DirkH

      Do you have a link for Eichner et al 2003?

  13. Stefan Rahmstorf, Michael Mann – Little Yellow Men In Their Heads

    […] Yesterday I wrote about Professor Stefan Rahmstorf’s hissing and fitting reaction to a piece written by EIKE, the humble sceptic organisation that had the audacity to bring up one of Rahmstorf’s old, yet embarrassing papers here, which I wrote about here. […]

  14. Greenland Overall Temperature Trend Shows Nothing Alarming. Schellnhuber Confirmed.

    […] Read more here. […]

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this. More information at our Data Privacy Policy