The inter-glacial cycle is not a 100,000-year cycle, it is a shorter cycle with missing beats

by M.O. Jonas, 2022, WorldJ.Adv.ResReviews


Review Article
World Journal of Advanced Research and Reviews, 2022, 13(03), 388–392
Article DOI: 10.30574/wjarr.2022.13.3.0259
Publication history:
Received on 18 February 2022; revised on 20 March 2022; accepted on 22 March 2022
Abstract:
The “100,000-year problem” refers to an apparent unexplained change in the frequency of inter-glacial periods which occurred about a million years ago. Before that, inter-glacial periods seemed to occur about every 41,000 years, in line with the obliquity Milankovich cycle. But after that, they seemed to occur about every 100,000 years, in line with the orbital inclination Milankovich cycle. Examination of the data shows that there never was a 41,000-year cycle, and that there is no 100,000-year cycle, but that the most influential cycle is the approx 21,000-year precession cycle which is the major factor in the cycles of insolation at higher latitudes. Insolation at 65N is generally regarded as the most significant of these. Inspection of the data shows that every glacial termination (start of an inter-glacial period) began at a time when insolation at 65N increased from a low point in its cycle. That not every such cycle triggered a new inter-glacial period underlines the chaotic non-linear nature of Earth’s climate. Until about a million years ago, this cycle occasionally “missed a beat”, making the inter-glacial frequency average about 41,000 years. After that, the cycle started missing more “beats”, making the inter-glacial frequency average about 100,000 years. There never was an actual 41,000-year or 100,000-year inter-glacial cycle.
Keywords:
Climate; Glacial Termination; Inter-Glacial; Milankovich Cycle; Non-Linear; Precession
Full text article in PDF:

New Study: 90 Papers Were Published On The ‘Hiatus’ From 2009-2019. Now They Say It Never Happened.

by K. Richard, Apr 18, 2022 in NoTricksZone


The claimed warming rate during the (1998-2001 to 2012-’13) “hiatus” ranged from -0.07°C to +0.17°C per decade.

In late 2012, the IPCC had an ongoing dilemma about what to do about the uncooperative global temperatures. The HadCRUT3 data set government bureaucrats had been using since the first report in 1990 actually showed the global mean surface temperatures had been declining since 1998. This was not going further the we-must-act-on-global-warming-now narrative, of course.

Enter Phil Jones, the global temperature data set overseer at East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit (CRUTEM). He’s the scientist who famously admitted that when the temperature data doesn’t exist, they are “mostly made up.”

 

Jones’s CRU and the Met Office (Hadley) then jointly constructed the newer HadCRUT4 version to help advance the narrative. This version changed the data just in time for the 5th IPCC assessment (AR5, 2013). The 1998-2001 temperatures  were allowed to stay the same, but an additional 0.1 to 0.2°C was tacked on to anomalies from 2002 onwards. The effect was to transform the 1998-2012 slight cooling in HadCRUT3 into a 0.04°C per decade−1 warming in HadCRUT4.

Image Source: woodfortrees.org