[Rich]

If you've got time, have a gander at Milankovitch Cycles.

These cyclical orbital movements in eccentricity, obliquity, and precession cause variations of up to 25 percent in the amount of incoming solar radiation (insolation) at Earth’s mid-latitudes - The areas of our planet located between about 30 and 60 degrees north and south of the equator.

Yes these are absolutely key to a basic understanding of global warming theory. The climate is highly complex, but an understanding of the Milankovitch cycles, while not proving global warming, at least makes it plausible. That relative modest forcings can through positive feedbacks create significant changes in climate.

If we were to take education of our citizenry seriously, then Milankoviitch cycles would be part of every child's education. A basic grounding in maths, science and technology would also be available free for adults who failed to reach a basic standing of education as children.

[Truth To Power]

But some are countering this:

Dishonestly, because it refutes the CO2 narrative.

[Pants-of-dog]

No, that's also false. It was about this warm 1000 years ago, during the Medieval Warm Period, and significantly warmer during the Holocene Optimum 5-7000 years ago.

No. The MWP was not even global. It was primarily in western Europe. It is not logical to compare global temperature with a regional temperature. Also, Global temperature records taken from ice cores, tree rings, and lake deposits have shown that the Earth may have been slightly cooler globally (by 0.03 °C) than in the early and the mid-20th century.


As for the Holocene Optimum: A study in 2020 estimated that the average global temperature during the warmest 200 year period of the HCO, around 6,500 years ago, was around 0.7 °C warmer than the mean for nineteenth century AD, immediately before the Industrial Revolution, and 0.3 °C cooler than the average for 2011-2019.

[Truth To Power]

No. The MWP was not even global.

It was definitely global.

It was primarily in western Europe.

It was primarily in the Northern Hemisphere because the Southern Hemisphere is 90% ocean.

It is not logical to compare global temperature with a regional temperature.

All credible measures of global temperature show the MWP was global.

Also, Global temperature records taken from ice cores, tree rings, and lake deposits have shown that the Earth may have been slightly cooler globally (by 0.03 °C) than in the early and the mid-20th century.

No, that result is only obtained by dishonestly cherry picking proxies, which is the invariable practice of CO2-narrative hustlers pretending to be climatologists.

As for the Holocene Optimum: A study in 2020 estimated that the average global temperature during the warmest 200 year period of the HCO, around 6,500 years ago, was around 0.7 °C warmer than the mean for nineteenth century AD, immediately before the Industrial Revolution, and 0.3 °C cooler than the average for 2011-2019.

That 2020 study was also dishonest garbage based on cherry picking proxies.

[Pants-of-dog]

Simply insulting peer reviewed studies does not, in any way, refute them.

[late]

Simply insulting peer reviewed studies does not, in any way, refute them.

But it does put $$ in his pocket.