Medieval Warm Period Was a Myth?

Here is a story in the New York Times about how people in Greenland are deeply concered that global warming is making everything better there.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/28/world/europe/28g...

It is very important for the IPCC to dismiss the medieval warming period. It's existance alone disproves man made global warming. They try to dismiss it and say that it only affected the Norther Hemisphere, so it was not global. With all that warmth up north, it would have to be pretty damn cold in the south to balance it out. Even just being in the North, it still would be a rapid warming that was beneficial.

Yes there is evidence that the MWP was a northern Europe regional event and though various other areas had warm periods during several centuries it is not clear that they all were warmer at the same time.

It should also be noted that all though it was warm enough for Vikings to try growing on Greenland, they were never very successful.

You are highlighting the difference between weather and climate.

Ice laid down in areas like Greenland and Antarctica give a good indication of global weather, and particularly when there is agreement in the data from two such widely separated places.

Vikings could NEVER grow anything in Greenland.

The very name "Greenland" was a joke by the person who found it. An attempt to get settlers to go there. But there were no trees on Greenland, and nothing much of green plants either.

Wikipedia has the facts on Medieval Warm Period. Given that there was not much actual data collected at the time it is all very much conjecture. Possibly a regional variation in weather, or possibly it did not even happen. There were few people climbing mountains in those days, so gathering information on glaciers etc was simply not happening.

The consensus is

The further in the past you look, the less accurate our estimates of past conditions tend to be. This has always been a problem for paleoclimatology, as well as any other field which involves modeling or studying the deep past.

However, the evidence we have strongly suggests that the Medieval Warm Period was essentially regional (that is, confined to Europe, the east coast of North America, and directly adjacent islands and polar regions.) The planet as a whole was no warmer, and possibly a bit cooler.

Now, regional is not the same as nonexistent. If there was substantial regional warming, then of course areas of Greenland that are currently frozen would become suitable for crops.

i think of the style of trebuchets in use would correspond with climate substitute lots extra heavily than CO2. Too undesirable we won't tax trebuchets otherwise there may well be a study grant in it for me. As Beren factors out, merely because of the fact cutting-element warming become no longer led to by potential of the trebuchet, does no longer mean that medieval warming could no longer have been. i will no longer be waiting to teach the trebuchet led to medieval warming, yet evidence is for mathematicians (and attorneys, economists, engineers and any scientist no longer attempting to foretell an environmental disaster).

If the MWP was a regional occurrence, as most people here seem to suggest, then I can only conclude that it was a rather large ‘region’.

Click on the map to find the information source (mostly peer reviewed)

http://www.co2science.org/data/timemap/mwpmap.html

A description of how the links are categorized is here: http://www.co2science.org/data/mwp/tabledes.php

This may be just ‘cherry picking’ data, but then there do seem to be rather a lot of cherries!

Looks like the Warmers are sweeping that under neath the rug . You cant tell a 90

degree day with a ice core . Since Greenland was thawed and farm country

there was no ice to freeze .