edhoskins
December 5, 2017 at 4:31 am

According to ice core records, the last millennium 1000AD – 2000AD has been the coldest millennium of our current Holocene interglacial. This point is more fully illustrated with ice core records on a millennial basis back to the Eemian period here:
https://edmhdotme.wordpress.com/2015/06/01/th...pogenic-global-warming-2/

Our current, warm, congenial Holocene interglacial, although cooler than the Eemian, has been the enabler of mankind’s civilisation for the last 10,000 years, spanning from mankind’s earliest farming to recent technology. Viewing the current Holocene interglacial on a century by century and on a millennial basis is realistic. But it seems that, driven by the need to continually support the Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming thesis / religion Climate scientists and Climate alarmists examine the temperature record at too fine a scale, weather event by weather event, month by month, or year by year.

However from the broader perspective, each of the notable high points in the current 11,000 year Holocene temperature record, (Holocene Climate Optimum – Minoan – Roman – Medieval – Modern), have been progressively colder than the previous high point.

The ice core record from Greenland for its first 7-8000 years, the early Holocene, shows, virtually flat temperatures, an average drop of only ~0.007 °C per millennium, including its high point known as the “climate optimum”. But the more recent Holocene, since a “tipping point” at around 1000BC, 3000 years ago, has seen temperature fall at about 20 times that earlier rate at about 0.14 °C per millennium .

The Holocene interglacial is already 10 – 11,000 years old and judging from the length of previous interglacial periods, the Holocene epoch should be drawing to its close: in this century, the next century or this millennium.

Nonetheless, the slight and beneficial warming at the end of the 20th century to a Modern high point has been transmuted by Climate alarmists into the “Great Man-made Global Warming Alarm”.

The recent warming since the end of the Little Ice Age has been wholly beneficial when compared to the devastating impacts arising from the relatively minor cooling of the Little Ice Age, which include:
• decolonisation of Greenland
• Black death
• French revolution promoted by crop failures and famine
• the failures of the Inca and Angkor Wat civilisations
• etc., etc.

As global temperatures, after a short spurt at the end of the last century, have already been showing stagnation or cooling over the last nineteen years or more, the world should now fear the real and detrimental effects of cooling, rather than being hysterical about limited, beneficial or probably now non-existent further warming.

Warmer times are times of success and prosperity for man-kind and for the biosphere. For example during the Roman warm period the climate was warmer and wetter so that the Northern Sahara was the breadbasket of the Roman empire.

But the coming end of the present Holocene interglacial will eventually again result in a mile high ice sheet over much of the Northern hemisphere.

As the Holocene epoch is already about 11,000 years old, the reversion to a true ice age is becoming overdue. That reversion to Ice Age conditions will be the real climate catastrophe.

With the present reducing Solar activity, significantly reduced temperatures, at least to the level of another Little Ice Age are predicted quite soon, later in this century.

Whether the present impending cooling will really lead on to a new glacial ice age or not is still in question.
https://edmhdotme.wordpress.com/2015/06/01/th...pogenic-global-warming-2/

Cooling or heating ? Take your pick, but beware of short term developments.
The summer of 2017 in Denmark was the lousiest one I recall, and sure enough:
The Danish Meteorlogical Institute reports that the ’hottest day’ was registered in May
It rang in at 26.8C (80.24F to be very precise).
’This is the lowest hot measured since beginning of the registrations in 1874’, they say.

Jan Ingenhousz from the Netherlands
'.... was the first person to notice that oxygen was produced by leaves in sunlight, while carbon dioxide was produced in darkness.'
I'm not that bright, David Autumns/Google.
Would it help if we kept the light on all night?
In the woods and the parks?
Or would that cost too much CO2 to generate all that electircity?

Al Gore and Bill Nye FAIL at doing a simple CO2 experiment
The most egregious faked presentation in that video was the scene with the split screen thermometers, edited to appear as if the temperature in the jar of elevated CO2 level was rising faster than the jar without elevated CO2 level.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/climate-fail-file...-a-simple-co2-experiment/

At low penetration levels, solar production can in fact reduce stress
on the electrical grid, however, that does not hold true as
penetration levels increase.
•
Peak solar generation occurs early in the afternoon, while peak
electricity demand typically occurs during early evening. This
mismatch presents a scenario called the “duck curve,” in which
operators are forced to rapidly scale up other generation sources
as solar generation ceases in order to seamlessly meet peak
demand.
•
By requiring operators to maintain backup capacity to address this
duck curve, solar generation amounts to an imposed cost.
•
When solar PV exceeds a 6-percent market share, the capacity
value of additional solar PV falls to zero.
http://instituteforenergyresearch.org/wp-cont...lue-Cliff-August-21-1.pdf