The Mediterranean Sea was 3.6°F (2°C) hotter during the Roman Empire than other average temperatures at the time, a new study claims. 

The Empire coincided with a 500-year period, from AD 1 to AD 500, that was the warmest period of the last 2,000 years in the almost completely land-locked sea.  

The climate later progressed towards colder and arid conditions that coincided with the historical fall of the Empire, scientists claim. 

Spanish and Italian researchers recorded ratios of magnesium to calcite taken from skeletonized amoebas in marine sediments, an indicator of sea water temperatures, in the Sicily Channel. 

They say the warmer period may have also coincided with the shift from the Roman Republic to the great Empire founded by Octavius Augustus in 27 BC.  

The study offers ‘critical information’ to identify past interactions between climate changes and evolution of human societies and ‘their adaptive strategies’. 

It meets requests from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to assess the impact of historically warmer conditions between 2.7°F and 3.6°F (1.5°C to 2°C).  

However, the historical warming of the Med during the Roman Empire is linked to intense solar activity, which contrasts with the modern threat of greenhouse gases.  

For the first time, we can state the Roman period was the warmest period of time of the last 2,000 years, and these conditions lasted for 500 years,’ said Professor Isabel Cacho at the Department of Earth and Ocean Dynamics, University of Barcelona.

The Mediterranean is a semi-closed sea, meaning it is surrounded by land and almost only connected to oceans by a narrow outlet, and is a climate change ‘hot spot’ according to a previous paper. 

Situated between North Africa and European climates, the sea occupies a ‘transitional zone’, combining the arid zone of the subtropical high and humid northwesterly air flows.

This makes it extremely vulnerable to modern and past climate changes, such as changes in precipitation change and average surface air temperature, and is of ‘particular interest’ to researchers. 

Home to many civilisations over the years, the Med, or Mare Nostrum as it was known by ancient Roman civilisations, has become a model to study the periods of climate variation.

Reconstructing previous millennia of sea surface temperatures and how it evolved is challenging, due to the difficulty retrieving good resolution marine records.

However, the study of the fossil archives remains the only valid tool to reconstruct past environmental and climatic changes as far back as 2,000 years ago, they say. 

Compared to the subsequent period of the Roman Empire, the Mediterranean was characterised by a colder phase from around 500 BC to 200 BC. 

This corresponds with the beginning of the so-called ‘sub-Atlantic phase’ characterised by a cool climate and rainy winters which was favourable for Greek and Roman civilisations to grow crops. 

The cool and humid climate of the sub-Atlantic phase lasted until around 100 BC and covered the entire period of the monarchy in Rome. 

However, in 400 BC, cultural changes were synchronised across the Mediterranean region and more ‘homogeneous’ temperature conditions across the Med regions were established.

A distinct warming phase, running from AD 1 to AD 500, then coincided with the Roman Period and covered the whole Roman Empire archaeological period. 

‘This pronounced warming during the Roman Period is almost consistent with other marine records from Atlantic Ocean,’ the team say in their research paper, published in Scientific Reports.  

This climate phase corresponds to what is known as the ‘Roman Climatic Optimum’ characterised by prosperity and expansion of the Empire, giving warmth and sunlight to crops. 

Roman Climatic Optimum, a phase of warm stable temperatures across much of the Mediterranean heartland, covers the whole phase of origin and expansion of the Roman Empire. 

The greatest time of the Roman Empire coincided with the warmest period of the last 2,000 years in the Mediterranean. 

After the Roman Period, a general cooling trend developed in the region with several minor oscillations in temperature. 

The climate then transitioned from wet to arid conditions and this could have marked the decline of the golden period of the Roman Empire after AD 500.  

These new record correlated with data from other areas of the Mediterranean – the Alboran Sea, Menorca basin and Aegean Sea. 

‘We hypothesise the potential link between this Roman Climatic Optimum and the expansion and subsequent decline of the Roman Empire.’ 

The study provides high resolution and precision data on how the temperatures evolved over the last 2,000 years in the Mediterranean area.  

It also identifies a warming phase that’s different during the Roman Empire in the Mediterranean area and is focused on the reconstruction of the sea surface temperature over the last 5,000 years. 

‘Our study highlights the relevance of the Roman Empire to better understand the behaviour of the Mediterranean climate – specifically, the hydrological cycle – in warm conditions compared to the ones in the current climate change scene,’ said Professor Cacho.

‘This part of the research is essential to improve our ability to adapt to imminent changes.’

Full story

The post Roman Warm Period Was 2°C Warmer Than Today, New Study Shows appeared first on The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF).

via The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF)

https://ift.tt/3hCEjCt

July 24, 2020 at 10:45AM

Suicides overshadow COVID 19 deaths in Japan

It’s long known but also a tragically long ignored problem in Japan: suicide.

With all the focus on COVID-19 nowadays, other more pressing problems often fall off the radar and get ignored.

One problem in Japan is suicide. And while economic hardship intensifies as stricter measures are implemented to avert COVID-19 deaths, suicides will surely increase.

Moreover, in the media the focus remains on the daily “new cases found”, which serves for spectacular headlines which spread panic among, but distracts from the reality. Deaths from COVID-19 are tapering off in many countries

Looking at the new daily COVID-19 deaths in Japan, here we see that daily deaths are very low:

Chart source: Worldometer.

Yet, the panic continues.

Suicides: 9336, COVID 19 deaths: 973

When we compare COVID-19 deaths to those caused by suicide over the past months since COVID-19 pandemic began, we see what the much bigger problem is:

Data sources: here and here.

As the chart above depicts, there have been a total of 9336 suicides as of the end of June, compared to 973 COVID-19 deaths. Yet, all the panic is about COVID-19

In Japan, so far 0.8 people per 100,000 people have died from COVID-19. Meanwhile, 16 people per 100,000 people die due to suicide each year.

In the past when the economy deteriorated, suicide rates rose 50%, to 24 people per 100,000.

So although the lock-down measures may be reducing COVID-19 deaths, the economic hardship is causing a far greater cause of death, suicide, to soar by 50%.

The situation is similar or worse in many other developed countries. The price of preventing one death by COVID-19 death is probably many more in terms of suicides, never mind those resulting from poverty-caused illnesses.

Let’s get our eye back on the ball, and away from the sidelines.

via NoTricksZone

https://ift.tt/2CZkg1Y

July 24, 2020 at 09:34AM

via Watts Up With That?

https://ift.tt/2WSmozQ

July 24, 2020 at 08:43AM

By Paul Homewood

 

h/t Robin Guenier

 

Greta and her chums have issued their latest demands:

 

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/jul/16/pandemic-shows-climate-has-never-been-treated-as-crisis-say-scientists

 

 

The letter to EU leaders comes from Greta and three other school strike leaders from Belgium and Germany, and contains the usual nonsense:

 

https://climateemergencyeu.org/#letter

But perhaps what is most is most significant is that it is only addressed to EU leaders, and no other countries. The EU  accounts for less than a fifth of worldwide emissions, so even eliminating emissions completely would only have a negligible effect.

The letter refers to the Paris Agreement:

When you signed the Paris Agreement the EU nations committed to leading the way. The EU has the economic and political possibility to do so, therefore it is our moral responsibility. And now you need to actually deliver on your promises.

In fact the EU is delivering on its pledge to cut emissions. The reality is that most of the rest of the world got away without any cuts at all, as the letter admits:

If all countries were to actually go through with the emission reductions they have set as goals, we would still be heading for a catastrophic global temperature rise of at least 3-4°C

Obviously “leading the way” made no difference at all.

 

As the list of demands makes clear, this all goes well beyond cutting down on fossil fuels and replacement with renewables:

Net zero emissions by 2050 for the EU – as well as for other financially fortunate parts of the world – equals surrender. This target is based on a carbon budget that only gives a 50% percent chance of limiting the global heating below 1.5°C. That is just a statistical flip of a coin which doesn’t even include some of the key factors, such as the global aspect of equity, most tipping points and feedback loops, as well as already built in additional warming hidden by toxic air pollution. So in reality it is much less than a 50% chance…..

The world’s planned fossil fuel production by the year 2030 accounts for 120% more than what would be consistent with the 1.5° target. It just doesn’t add up.
When you read the IPCC SR1.5 Report and the UNEP Production Gap Report, as well as what you have actually signed up for in the Paris Agreement, even a child can see that the climate and ecological crisis cannot be solved within today’s system.

What Greta and her pals want is to completely replace the West’s economic system:

Of course we welcome sustainable investments and policies, but you must not for one second believe that ​what you have discussed so far will be even close to enough. We need to face the full picture. We are facing an existential crisis, and this is a crisis that we can not buy, build, or invest our way out of. ​Aiming to ‘recover’ an economic system that inherently fuels the climate crisis in order to finance climate action is just as absurd as it sounds. Our current system is not ‘broken’ – the system is doing exactly what it’s supposed and designed to be doing. It can no longer be ‘fixed’. We need a new system.

The letter is signed by the usual collection of hypocrites and charlatans. Names like Leo di Caprio, Emma Thompson, Michael Mann and Hans Joachim Schellnhuber tell you all you need to know.

One of the Greta’s co-writers, Luisa Neubauer, 24, a central figure in Germany’s school strikes movement, said young people were becoming increasingly frustrated with politicians.

“We are asking our leaders to take care of the most fundamental thing: the safety of us, the safety of people around the world, the safety of our futures,” Neubauer said. “It is worrying on a democratic level when you ask for such substantial things, which seem so obvious, and yet you see how leaders are widely ignoring it, or not considering it to be as important as other things.”

She must have a strange idea of democracy, if she thinks governments should ignore the votes of millions, and instead kowtow to a tiny group of eco-loons!

via NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

https://ift.tt/3g0qzkC

July 24, 2020 at 05:54AM