As shown over the last few posts, abrupt climate changes are very unique in the study of past environmental change. That atmosphere-ocean-sea ice coupled changes that take place highlight the importance of feedbacks in the earth’s system and of an earth science approach to understand this change. Whilst conceptual advances have provided frames for theories and models about how signals in the climate system are transmitted, many questions remain. For instance, which element of the climate system is responsible for the millennial-scale climatic changes that appear in ice-core data? High-resolution synchronized ice-core data, in conjunction with high-resolution marine-sediments from the Atlantic and Southern Oceans are two ways which will approve our understanding. Furthermore, not one element (i.e. external vs internal ice-sheet dynamics debate) but a combination of factors may be responsible for millennial-scale climate variability. However, more crucially than the above, is awareness and recognition of a point.
That a divergence exists between palaeoclimate data and models (I highlighted this point all the way back in point 2, but to elaborate here, I refer to resolution). Whilst palaeoclimate records have beyond doubt increased our understanding of the earth’s climate system (which is not a point I’m at all contesting), a divergence is still apparent between these records and the processes taken into account in models used to predict the impact of increases in global mean temperature projected due to climate change. This has led to the acknowledgement of uncertainty in the context of climate change which has fuelled scepticism and potentially inaction, in regards to the appropriate policy response, at the global scale.
(The above reference can be found in Mark Maslin’s (2004) book: Global Warming: A very short introduction, to paraphrase of Wally, S. Broecker, a notable scholar who has made a significant contribution to the advancement of palaeoceanography).
