Home > AGW, Climate Change, Data, Global Warming, IPCC, Omniclimate, Science > Evidence of Climate Change in Northeastern Italy

Evidence of Climate Change in Northeastern Italy

What happens when somebody finally gets down to identify actual climatic patterns in a specific area, without the AGW/GHG credo?

This is what happens: Static and Dynamic Agroclimatology in the Veneto region – Analysis of the 1956-2004 period, PhD thesis by Alessandro Chiaudani

(Main text is in Italian, but there is a summary in English between pages 8 and 9, and most graphs should be self-explanatory).

In particular one of Chiaudani’s findings may sound truly ironic:

an important aspect of climate evolution is represented by abrupt changes with different phases separated by break-points

In other words, at regional level it is possible to identify…TIPPING POINTS…that make local climate switch from one “climatic homogeneous phase” and another.

Results show the existence of a climatic breakpoint in the ’80 with a consequent change of climatic phase. This change point is particularly evident for temperatures and evapotranspiration […] The evidence of a change of phase in the ’80 is strengthened by (i) analysis of phenological data regarding some Veneto crops (grapevine, maize and soft wheat) (ii) analysis of climatic data of other Italian regions (Emilia Romagna and Piemonte) (iii) climatic and phenological analyses referred to other European regions

So it is exactly by throwing out the fashionable all-encompassing fixation with CO2, and by looking for breakpoints in some measured climate-related variables, that Chiaudani is able to identify specific climatic changes, rather than the usual vague scenarios of increasing floods and drought episodes.

==========

However, Chiaudani’s work is not compatible with the ever-increasing temperature trends that are part-and-parcel of the AGW crowd.

And whatever Hansens has to say about tipping points, the existence of one of them around 1980 cannot easily live together with the notion that we are slowly but steadily bringing the whole planet to ruin by emitting CO2, and a catastrophe is looming (Chiaudani finds some interesting correlation between the 1980’s climatic changes the winter-time NAO index, and the EAWR – East Atlantic West Russian index).

Hence, as supreme paradox, for once that there is evidence for climate change, do not expect it to be any popular among people that blame human activities for…climate change.

Advertisements
  1. Emily R
    2008/09/21 at 02:21

    I’m the writer of the elreynolds blog that linked to your story. Thank you for the comment. I never realized that anyone would read my blog except for my professor. The ‘How Good Are Internet Sources?’ blog was just an assignment and I picked your blog randomly, so I am sorry if I wrote about it in a bad light, I was just following the guidelines. But I do agree with you about the question of how well readers deal with internet information.

  2. 2008/09/19 at 17:00

    I think there’s likely to be plenty of similar evidence scattered throughout history, and showing that we have always been adapting to changes in local conditions. For example, farmers have been able to cultivate crops at higher altitudes in the past, when it was warmer. Sea levels rising and lowering in Roman times appear to have driven changes in salt production. The shift from wine to beer drinking in northern Europe may have partly occurred because of colder conditions during the Little Ice Age. The idea of minor tipping points or trigger points is an interesting one, and a far cry from the usual AGW “one tipping point to doom us all” concept. Basically, a lot of this is common sense, such as the adaptation strategies (planting drought-resistant crops) mentioned in Chiaudani’s summary. Looking back at agriculture over the last few hundred years, diversification and technological advances are also important ways to cope with whatever the climate throws at us.

    To misquote the Borg from Star Trek: “We are human. We adapt.”

  3. nearlynormalized
    2008/09/18 at 22:31

    I hate to say but when you have just acquired indoor plumbing for the first time in eight generations it is hard to tell somebody to go backwards. I might have gone a little overboard in that sentence, but those that just got off the burro for the first time, want that Lincoln Navigator. The sell is easier to the haves then to those that are last weeks step up from the have nots.

  4. geoff chambers
    2008/09/18 at 19:38

    Excellent commentary. If enough people show on a micro level that people adapt to climate change by changing crops etc, then the whole global warming argument becomes irrelevant. If 3°C of warming means that London becomes like Paris, Paris becomes like Rome, even Rome becomes like Cairo – so what? These are all centres of world civilisation. I’ve just been following the critique of the BBC’s propaganda film “Earth – the Climate Wars” on Climate Resistance, taken up on Climate Audit, where they worry the idiotic Hockey Stick to death like dogs with a bone, and I suddenly realised how irrelevant all this is to the argument for dangerous global warming. Tree rings and ice cores are impotent against the historical evidence that the Thames froze, the Po flooded – you name it – and, precisely where we have the evidence of seesawing temperatures, ie Europe, civilisation developed and flourished. Meanwhile, in Mann country, where the rings of the bristlecone pine continued to grow, according to who knows what climatic criteria, what happened? Who knows? Who cares?

  5. 2008/09/18 at 03:46

    Climate change and global warming is happing every where around the world. We need to reduce those activities which cause the climate change, It is high time to take some action.

  6. 2008/09/17 at 23:55

    thank you John. Very briefly:

    1- They don’t just use temperatures. They analyze other aspects of the climate as well

    2- Can’t tell

    3- Of course. As I said, Chiaudani’s work cannot be used to demonstrate a nefarious role by CO2 in the climate

    4- Hopefully they’ll publish something in English too. Graphs, however, look sensible, and the analysis does not contain any “fancy footwork” ‘a la Mann

  7. John Mclean
    2008/09/17 at 23:17

    Four thoughts

    1 – Have natural or human influences altered the environments local to the temperature observation stations?

    2 – Have cloud patterns altered in the region across that period?

    3 – Evidence of climate change is NOT automatically evidence of man-made climate change

    4 – Is the statistical analysis handled correctly? We don’t want another “hockey-stick” situation where the statitiscal method was very questionable.

  1. 2012/03/20 at 23:59
  2. 2008/09/19 at 21:57
  3. 2008/09/19 at 02:07
  4. 2008/09/18 at 02:58

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: