Modern Polar Bear Habitat Among
Coldest Of The Last 10,000 Years
Image Source: slideshare.net
The habitat range for polar bears extends across the circumpolar boundaries of the Arctic Ocean, primarily inclusive of North America (Canada), coastal Greenland, and northern Russia (Siberia, Northern Europe). However, about 70 percent — 13 of 19 subpopulations — of the Earth’s polar bears reside in Canada. And Canada not only has not been warming to any unusual degree in the last few centuries, modern temperatures are still colder now than they have been for most of the last 10,000 years.
A Benighted Short-Term Climate Perspective
The media-popularized viewpoint that insists polar bears are sweltering under an imminent threat of extinction due to global warming in general and Arctic warming in particular is benighted by a lack of appreciation or understanding of a long-term geological context.
For most advocates of the position that climate changes in the Arctic are predominantly caused by the explosive rise in anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions since the mid-20th century, there is a conspicuous hyper-focus on the climate monitoring period beginning in the 1950s…or the late 1970s, when the satellite era began (and polar sea ice could be monitored). The problem with this short-term perspective, of course, is that the 1950s to 1980s were a cold period in the Arctic, so any trend line beginning in those years will skew towards the point of view that more recent warming is unusual, if not unprecedented. As the graphs below illustrate, the 1920s to 1940s were a relatively warm period in the Arctic — similarly as warm as the most recent decades. The willful selection of the coldest decades of the last 100 years as the prerequisite starting point for examining modern climatic trends is reflective of the tendentious narrow-mindedness afflicting most advocates of the position that we humans pose a dangerous threat to the biosphere. Expanding one’s perspective and focus beyond the last 60 or 70 years, or even a cursory look at the long-term climatic context as presented in the scientific literature, severely undercuts the perspective that recent climate changes in the Arctic are unusual, remarkable, or unprecedented.
Yamanouchi, 2011 (Arctic)
Graph adapted from Climate4you, HadCRUT4 data
Using A Long-Term Context, Canada Has Not Been Warming
A few million years ago, the Canadian Arctic’s mean annual temperatures were about 18°C warmer than they are now. During the summers many regions of the Arctic Ocean were sea-ice-free. And yet polar bears survived these balmy, sea-ice-free climates anyway.
“Pliocene Arctic Ocean summer SSTs were appreciably warmer than modern and seasonally sea-ice free conditions existed in some regions. … At Lake El’gygytgyn (Lake ‘‘E’’) in Siberia summer temperatures were 8°C warmer than modern and at Ellesmere Island, Canada, summer and MAT [mean annual temperatures] were 11.8°C and 18.3°C higher than today.”
“[A] seasonally ice-free marginal and central Arctic Ocean was common … regionally during the early Holocene [6,000 to 10,000 years ago]. … Some species thought to be dependent on summer sea ice (e.g., polar bears) survived through these periods.”
Although not as warm as a few million years ago, the polar bears’ Canadian habitat was nonetheless multiple degrees Celsius warmer than now as recently as a few thousand years ago. Not only that, but the “reconstructed temperatures [for the Canadian Arctic] do not indicate a warming” during the last 150 years. In other words, the (1) modern day Arctic temperature trends, the (2) sea ice loss trend observed via satellites since the late 1970s, and the (3) modern seal-hunting practices of the “endangered” 21st century polar bear…are all well within the range of what has occurred naturally, or without human interference, for the last several thousand years. Polar bears have survived much warmer temperatures than this in the past, and the likelihood they will continue to survive in today’s relatively cold Arctic climate is high too.
Below are samples of available climate reconstructions for Canada and other locations (Siberia, Greenland, Northern Europe) where polar bears live. Each demonstrate that there is nothing unusual about the modern day Arctic climate…other than it may be colder than most of the last 10,000 years. And each demonstrate that the hand-wringing about polar bear species extinction potentialities due to today’s non-global warming is, to put it bluntly, much ado about nothing.
Fortin and Gajewski, 2016 (Canadian Arctic)
“Biological production decreased again at ~ 2 ka and the rate of cooling increased in the past 2 ka [2,000 years], with coolest temperatures occurring between 0.46 and 0.36 ka [460 and 360 years ago], coinciding with the Little Ice Age. Although biological production increased in the last 150 yr, the reconstructed temperatures do not indicate a warming during this time. … Modern inferred temperatures based on both pollen and chironomids are up to 3°C cooler than those inferred for the mid-Holocene.”
Moore et al., 2001 (Canadian Arctic)
“Summer temperatures at Donard Lake [Canadian Arctic] over the past 1250 yrs averaged 2.9 °C. At the beginning of the 13th century, Donard Lake experienced one of the largest climatic transitions in over a millennium. Average summer temperatures rose rapidly by nearly 2 °C from 1195–1220 AD [+0.80 °C per decade], ending in the warmest decade in the record (~4.3 °C).“
[The 19th century average was higher than the 20th century average, and the 20th century average was lower than the average of the last 1,250 years.]
Cook et al., 2009 (Canadian Arctic)
Renssen et al., 2009 (Canada, Eastern)
Viau and Gajewski, 2009 (Canada, Central)
Naulier et al., 2015 (Canada)
Polar Bears’ Siberian Habitat Is Colder Now Than Most Of The Last 10,000 Years
Hantemirov and Shiyatov, 2002 (Siberia, Northwestern)
Tarasov et al., 2009 (Siberia, Southern)
Polar Bears’ Greenland Habitat No Warmer Now Than In The 1920s, 1930s
Zhao et al., 2016 (Greenland Ice Sheet)
Hasholt et al., 2016 (Southeast Greenland)
“We determined that temperatures for the ablation measurement periods in late July to early September were similar in both 1933 and the recent period [1990s – present], indicating that the temperature forcing of ablation within the early warm period and the present are similar.”
Greenland Is Colder Now Than Most Of The Last 10,000 Years
Lecavalier et al., 2013 (North Greenland)
Thomas et al., 2016 (Greenland, West)
“Paired climate and ice sheet records from previous warm periods can elucidate the factors influencing GrIS mass balance on time scales longer than the observational record [Briner et al., 2016]. During the middle Holocene, temperature on Greenland was ~ 2°C higher than present [Cuffey and Clow, 1997; Axford et al., 2013].”
Aizen et al., 2016 (Asia, Greenland Ice Sheet)
“[P]eriods warmer than modern periods occurred for ∼6.5 ka [6,500 years] including during the HCO [Holocene Climate Optimum] and Medieval Warm Period.”
Northern Europe Is Colder Now Than Most Of The Last 10,000 Years
Esper et al., 2014 (Northern Europe)
This is getting repetitive.
This graph alone is telling the whole story:
https://notrickszone.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/Arctic-Surface-Temps-1920-2016.jpg
either temperature was extremely erratic in the past, or we are talking about crazy error bars that need to be added.
Data never was your strong point, sob, which is why you ALWAYS try to avoid it..
No significant change in temperature. Get over it. !!!
Just the AMO pattern as shown in basically all surface data from the region, and in fact most of the Northern Hemisphere.
And yes, we have been living in a particularly benign period climate-wise.
Sod, what was your point here?
He never has any..
“Sod, what was your point here?”
look at the graph:
https://notrickszone.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/Arctic-Surface-Temps-1920-2016.jpg
It looks like in the 30s we had massive changes in temperature, going from +7°C to -3°C.
Those rapid changes vanished entirely afterwards, if we ignore a single dip in the 40s, which also looks like an outlier.
Now please ask yourself: was temperature behaving totally differently in the 30s, or could this be an instrumental issue?
yes, modern equipment responds quicker to short warm periods.
Shown by empirical evidence to add up to 0.9C extra in cool regions.
You can see that the 30’s was obviously warmer than now.
Ah but wait for the voices crying that recent weather has melted the polar ice. For them looking for real reasonable explanations beyond CO2 is just too difficult.
Unfortunately the Arctic Ice is not a good proxy indicating the global temperature trends in the short term, it is subjected to too much transitory oceanic and weather effects. No for that the other pole is a much finer site.
It may not be a good proxy, but:
1) It’s record low in both Arctica and Antartica: http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/charctic-interactive-sea-ice-graph/
2) Also oxygen content in the ocean is declining, because of warming: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v542/n7641/full/nature21399.html
1. Let’s totally ignore climate history and the fact that Arctic sea ice levels were much lower for most of the first 3/4 of the Holocene.
2. There is absolutely no way they have enough data to make the statement they have done.. its all ASUMPTION driven models.
SebastianH, missing the entire point of the article (again), and failing to appreciate the difference between a decadal-scale trend and a monthly anomaly writes:
Whoop-de-doo. Here’s the Arctic sea ice anomalies for the last 3,000 years…notice that extent was lower than now for most of the last hundreds to thousands of years.
https://notrickszone.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/NTZ-Arctic-Sea-Ice-Late-Holocene-Human-Influence.jpg
It’s like pointing out that global temperatures have cooled by -0.7 C within the last year…
http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/rss/from:2016.1/to:2017.1/plot/rss/from:2016.1/to:2017.1/trend
… and then concluding that something statistically significant has happened in the last 12 months.
Between 2013 and 2015, Antarctica set 15 first place monthly records for sea ice growth/extent. Can I assume that when each of those “record high” sea ice events happened, you were sure to point that out to the non-believers? Or did you just ignore those “record” growth monthly anomalies because they didn’t support your beliefs? I will surmise it’s the latter.
What was the oxygen content of the oceans during the 1920s to 1940s, SebastianH? How about the oxygen content during the Medieval Warm Period, when the Pacific Ocean (0-700 m) was 0.65 C warmer than now (Rosenthal et al., 2013)?
What year did humans take over from natural forcing factors in causing variations in ocean heat content? Please support your answer scientifically. You can do that, right?
You prove my point admirably!
Perspective?
@SebastianH 16. February 2017 at 7:58 PM
From your link 2.
As I said above please get some perspective!
This linked document is a model, you are presupposing that those that have done this work understand the totally of how nature works and can model it.
I maintain these people do not. The form on modeling nature from scant data-set and extrapolating catastrophe has a long and, for some, amusing history. Legions of coming disasters from CO2 mediated global warming have been forecast, and are at best a massive expensive joke on the public, at worst evidence of fraµÐ.
But then again, is there another way for a peaceful society to tolerate so many individuals with limited life experience, narrowly educated, and prone over-excitability to the point of derangement, be set among the rest of us?
It is rather amazing just how selective global warming is.
Very interesting to see the much wider variation of arctic temps,in the 1930s than now.
“Very interesting to see the much wider variation of arctic temps,in the 1930s than now.”
Those are garbage.
an artefact caused by the proxies.
In the real world, those spies should raise an alarm and would mostly end as bigger error bars.
So what were the “true” temperatures in the Arctic during the 1920s to 1940s, sod, since you’ve decided that the HadCRUT4 instrumental record is “garbage”?
Do you believe that these scientists have come to a “garbage” conclusion too:
—
http://polarmet.osu.edu/PolarMet/PMGFulldocs/box_yang_jc_2009.pdf
Meteorological station records and regional climate model output are combined to develop a continuous 168-yr (1840–2007) spatial reconstruction of monthly, seasonal, and annual mean Greenland ice sheet near-surface air temperatures. The annual whole ice sheet 1919–32 warming trend is 33% greater in magnitude than the 1994–2007 warming.
—
http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/full/10.1175/1520-0442%282004%29017%3C4045%3ATETWIT%3E2.0.CO%3B2
The warming event in the first part of the twentieth century, considered at the time by some as the first sign of climate warming caused by increasing CO2 (Callendar 1938), had its largest amplitude in the higher latitudes of the Northern Hemisphere. The largest warming occurred in the Arctic (60°–90°N) (Johannessen et al. 2004) averaged for the 1940s with some 1.7°C (2.2°C for the winter half of the year) relative to the 1910s. … [T]he total anthropogenic forcing was larger in the 1940–60 period, when cooling occurred, than in the 1920–40 warming period, thereby rejecting the idea that anthropogenic forcing caused the 1920–40 warming.
—
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v509/n7499/full/nature13260.html
[A] substantial portion of recent warming in the northeastern Canada and Greenland sector of the Arctic arises from unforced natural variability.
—
https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/sola/6A/SpecialEdition/6A_SpecialEdition_1/_pdf
Since the decadal variation of the AO is recognized as the natural variability of the global atmosphere, it is shown that both of decadal variabilities before and after 1989 in the Arctic [cooling, then warming] can be mostly explained by the natural variability of the AO not by the external response due to the human activity.
—
http://eae.sagepub.com/content/22/8/1069.abstract
Arctic Warming is Not Greenhouse Warming
After two thousand years of slow cooling Arctic, warming suddenly began more than a century ago. It has continued, with a break in the middle, until this day. The rapid start of this [Arctic] warming rules out the greenhouse effect as its cause.
—
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2006GL027817/abstract
[T]he available records support a direct, zero-lag, antiphased relationship between the rate of change of global ice volume and summertime insolation in the northern high latitudes. Furthermore, variations in atmospheric CO2 appear to lag the rate of change of global ice volume. This implies only a secondary role for CO2 – variations in which produce a weaker radiative forcing than the orbitally-induced changes in summertime insolation – in driving changes in global ice volume. … [A]tmospheric CO2 lags, or is at most synchronous with, dV/dt. In other words, variations in melting precede variations in CO2. Thus, the relatively small amplitude of the CO2 radiative forcing and the absence of a lead over dV/dt both suggest that CO2 variations play a relatively weak role in driving changes in global ice volume compared to insolation variations.
—
http://www.clim-past-discuss.net/11/2341/2015/cpd-11-2341-2015.pdf
Conclusion: The solar activity and internal Arctic climate dynamics are likely the main factors influencing the temperature in northern Greenland.
Sod,says….,
bla bla bla….,bla bla….
Zzzzz.
“Those are garbage.”
YOUR posts are the main GARBAGE around here, sob, then seb’s. Invariably unsupportable propaganda pap.
An excellent article Kenneth.
I’m going to tell him off a bit though.. 😉
Try to keep articles about the same time period, together.
eg… all the post-1900 articles one after the other,
… then comment on the story they tell.
Cheers.. ps love ya work Kenneth 🙂
If this is indeed constructive criticism, which I heartily welcome, please clarify what is meant here. Because I’m not sure what you’ve written is intended to mean. Do you mean keep only the 20th century graphs together, and not include the Holocene?
Yep, intended ONLY as constructive. 🙂
Keep the 20th Century ones together.. then the Holocene ones as a separate group if possible. Don’t mix them up, is what I’m saying.
Then you can pull the 20th Century ones together with an overall conclusion about them.. eg the obvious AMO pattern in every one of the,
Then after the Holocene group, comment on the general downward trend and Neoglaciation period.
Maybe consider giving them Fig Nos for easier reference from within comments.
Cheers 🙂
Another useful post 1900 graph
https://realclimatescience.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/40980-1.png
Again the 1940’s peak matching the AMO. 🙂
Don’t forget the Hansen 1981 paper (Science Volume 213) essentially adopts that profile as the temperature profile for the Northern Hemisphere. See Fig 3 from that paper (unfortunately, I cannot cut and past it but it is worth adding to the list especially since it is Hansen).
In 1981, Hansen accepted that the Northern Hemisphere was cooler in 1980 than it was in 1940. On page 961 he notes:
“Northern latitudes warmed ~0.8degC between 1880 and 1940, and then cooled 0.5degC, between 1940 and 1970, in line with other analyses”
One of the other supporting analyses he referred to was the NAS 1975 Article, and a paper by P Jones & T Wigley (1980).
So at one time “The Team” were all in agreement about the Northern Hemisphere warming and that it peaked in 1940 and was warmer than 1980.
Just eyeballing Fig 3 from the 1981 Hansen paper, it appears that in the Northern Hemisphere 1940 was some 0.4degC warmer than 1980.
Personally, I do not consider that we have any worthwhile data on the Southern Hemisphere which is too sparsely sampled (a point that Hansen notes) and since we have no useful SH data, we have no global data.
We only have reasonable data on the NH, but unfortunately due to endless adjustments and homogenisation that has been bast@rdised.
The Hansen paper is set out at:
http://www.atmos.washington.edu/~davidc/ATMS211/articles_optional/Hansen81_CO2_Impact.pdf
OT……. Brilliant.
Everybody, and I mean EVERYBODY, should watch the video. 🙂
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2017/02/16/president-trump-signs-bill-repealing-obamas-lame-duck-coal-regulation-video/
With the USA going back to much cheaper, and MUCH more reliable, coal fired power, places like Germany will desperately have to re-assess their energy supply systems.
They CANNOT continue to survive with massively high cost, unreliable electricity. Competition will not allow it.
Manufacturing has built the developed world.. yet the green agenda seeks to DESTROY it.
Greenies, go and live in the unpowered wilderness.
seb, sob.. just continue being hypocrites.
I suggest removing the reference to “the polar bears’ habitat” millions of years ago since the DNA evidence supports their separation from brown bears 400,000 to 600,000 years ago.
There does not appear to be a “consensus” on this….
—
http://www.unis.no/polar-bears-much-older-than-assumed/#sthash.0cV4r0SP.dpuf
“New DNA studies suggest that polar bears evolved into a distinct species as many as 4-5 million years ago.”
—
https://www.adn.com/arctic/article/polar-bears-diverged-4-5-million-years-ago-interbred-brown-bears-0/2012/07/23/
“Polar bears diverged 4 to 5 million years ago, but interbred with brown bears”
—
“Whether polar bears are 350,000 years old or 6 million years old, unless we take action to curb greenhouse gas emissions, they face a future where the climate will continue to warm. And this warming will be unlike anything polar bears have survived before.” — Polar Bears International
I thought that someone caught a “growler” or something recently..
It seems that polar and grizzly got together way more recently 😉
WOW…. I was just looking at the Russian arctic “old ice” and comparing 2103 to 2017…
https://s19.postimg.org/vfxz0w8s3/MYI_growth.png
In NSIDC, Arctic sea ice extent for 2017 has just overtaken 2016.
The “less cold” blob has been displaced by a “more cold” blob in two crucial regions.
https://s19.postimg.org/5pr6iut0z/more_cold.png
Arctic sea ice for this year will now probably overtake several other years as well.
And still a good 4 weeks or so to go…
The cold edge is now pushing out towards Iceland and Scandinavia, as well as pushing out through the Bering Sea and the Sea of Okhotsk..
If that keeps up, there will be a steep increase in the extent of Arctic sea ice.
Will be fun watching the Arctic ice Worriers trying to rationalise.
A wind & temperature graph is better in terms of visualizing the current situation in the Arctic:
https://earth.nullschool.net/#current/wind/surface/level/overlay=temp/orthographic=-331.67,92.37,574/loc=142.872,87.384
OT..
Scott Pruitt confirmed as head of EPA. 🙂
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/02/17/heads-are-exploding-senate-confirms-pruitt-to-lead-epa/
That will make thing very interesting..
Buy shares in popcorn !!
“Scott Pruitt confirmed as head of EPA. 🙂”
We are talking on an international blog. You should be aware, that most Germans reading this news will immediately come to the conclusion that Trump and a significant part of americans are simply insane.
Pruitt will do massive damage and everyone can see already, that there will be an environmental disaster soon, which will demonstrate this to everyone.
Everyone around the world will understand, that China is behaving normal (for example on climate change), while the USA under Trump are not. The administration will be the laughing stock of the whole science community.
Expect people to fight back hard.
Describe in detail what “massive” and damaging “environmental disaster” will be caused by the director of an agency in the U.S. Or are you thinking that CO2 emissions themselves are an “environmental disaster”? Probably.
China alone accounts for 29% of the world’s CO2 emissions, and 50% of the world’s coal consumption. Meanwhile, the U.S. and Canada are the only two wealthy countries that actually reduced their coal consumption between 2009 and 2013…
—
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/jun/08/five-g7-nations-increased-their-coal-use-over-a-five-year-period-research-shows
Five of the world’s seven richest countries have increased their coal use in the last five years despite demanding that poor countries slash their carbon emissions to avoid catastrophic climate change, new research shows.
Britain, Germany, Italy, Japan and France together burned 16% more coal in 2013 than 2009 and are planning to further increase construction of coal-fired power stations. Only the US and Canada of the G7 countries meeting on Monday in Berlin have reduced coal consumption since the Copenhagen climate summit in 2009.
—
Apparently you didn’t realize that alongside their renewables projects, China and India are also planning to build about 1,600 new coal plants in the next decade and a half.
—
http://www.climatechangenews.com/2015/12/01/india-china-planned-coal-plants-could-blow-un-warming-target/
India and China alone plan to build 1617 new coal power plants by 2030
—
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-power-coal-idUSKCN0ZT09B
China’s coal-dominated thermal power sector has continued to expand rapidly amid an unexpectedly sharp slowdown in energy consumption growth, as well as a state-led effort to tackle smog, cut carbon emissions and encourage cleaner forms of electricity. According to National Energy Administration (NEA) data, China’s total thermal capacity [largely driven by coal] grew 7.8 percent in 2015 to 990 GW, outstripping a 0.5 percent increase in consumption. Another 24 GW went into operation in the first five months of 2016.
—
The Chinese shun “green” cars…
http://www.u.tv/News/Chinas-love-affair-with-the-car-shuns-green-vehicles/71e73dfb-d63f-4268-8777-c9aceffe911d
According to a report by the trade journal Ward’s, 35m new cars and lorries were sold worldwide last year – the second-biggest increase ever recorded. That is 95,500 extra vehicles being added to the global traffic jam every day. Between 2000 and 2010, the number of cars and motorcycles in China increased twentyfold. In the next 20 years it is forecast to more than double again, which means there will be more cars in China in 2030 than there were in the entire world in 2000.
—
The Chinese have increased their air travel by 500% in 15 years.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/flights/2013/01/20/china-air-travel/1846595/
As recently as 1995, Beijing’s Capital International Airport served 15 million fliers … But by 2011, the number of fliers using the Beijing hub had soared to 78.7 million.
—
Or is this not what you meant by saying that “China is behaving normal…on climate change”?
No sob.. only the MORONIC Germans.
REAL Germans are about to WAKE UP thanks the Donald Trump.
You watch what happens in your next election, ;little worm ! 😉
And you really are being totally fooled by MSM reports of China.
They are going gung-ho with coal, at home and abroad.
Their comments about unreliables are for brain-dead morons like you, to Suck you in.. and you, being the GULLIBLE twit that you are, fall for it every time
You really DO NOT have a functional brain, do you sob !!!
China is acting normally; it does not give a damn about climate change, and that is why under the Paris Agreement it is committed not to the reduction of CO2, but rather to increase its CO2 emissions between now and 2030. After 2030, who knows what it will do, but my bet is on China carrying on increasing its CO2 emissions after 2030. This is material since China is already the largest emitter of CO2.
What all countries need to do is to act normally like China and not be at all concerned by reducing CO2 emissions.
America is merely following the example set by China and is now going to increase its CO2 emissions over the next coming years. Good for America, and good for this planet since this planet has too little CO2 and for that matter is too cold, but unfortunately it does not appear that CO2 has any significant impact upon temperatures, if it did that would be another reason to emit CO2.