Retired science teacher Peter Foster, of Waikouaiti,
believes the case for global warming is anything but settled.
Here he explains his views (links are in
Multi proxy temperature for last 2000 years. Please click
on image to view graph
The basis for climate alarm stems from two sets of
climate graphs, one covering the last 1000 years - the hockey
stick graph used by Al Gore in his film, and the other set are
the temperature changes over the last 150 years. Without either
no one would give a toss about CO2.
The 1990 IPCC report showed that in the last 1000 years the
medieval warm period (MWP) 900-1300 AD was slightly warmer
than the present time, but its 2001 and subsequent reports
contained the Michael Mann based graphs showing unprecedented
warming in late 20th century with no MWP and no little ice
In a peer reviewed 2005 paper, McIntyre and
McKitrick took Mann's graph to task. Basically Mann
was funded by US Congress and through them was forced to make
available his data and algorithms. McIntyre showed that you
can take a set of random numbers in Excel, apply Mann's
methodology and you will get a hockey stick graph.
As a result of the McIntyre & McKitrick paper the US
Congress ordered two reviews into the matter, both of which
condemned the hockey stick graph, as did the Penn State
University investigation by
Wegmen et al, which in polite speak said Mann's
paper was rubbish. A readable analysis of the appalling
construction of this graph by McKitrick
can be found here.
Mann's graph was followed by similar ones in the Amman and
Wahl papers which all suffered from the same problems and
were rejected by several science journals but somehow made it
into the IPCC 4th Assessment Report. You can read this sorry
this web site.
Next came the Briffa graph based on 12 selected tree cores
from the Yamal peninsular in Russia. They were selected from
46 cores of still growing trees because they "fitted the
hockey stick" - what sort of science do you call that? When
the other 34 equivalent cores were added in the medieval warm
period reappeared and the modern warm period ceased to show
any unprecedented modern warming, see here for full
analysis. (tree rings are affected by many things,
CO2 and water strongly affect rings as well as temperature).
Nordic Temperatures over 150 years. Please click on image
to view graph
Next Mann produced his latest incarnation but inverted
the data he was using called the Tiljander series, so inverting
the temperatures. How can you have any faith in guys like
There is plenty of evidence from pollen distribution and
other proxies, and from historical accounts of where plants
grew then but cannot grow now, that the medieval warm period
was warmer than the present warm period. Therefore, when one
sees graphs showing the opposite it should cause any
scientist to question either the construct of that graph or
the data that suggests otherwise and the latter is pretty
The hockey stick and its re-incarnations are products
of poor science and/or faulty statistical analysis and
it is time that that was recognised. The 2006 NAS report,
relied on by many people, is out of date.
What is left after all of this, is the original research that
was published in the 1990 IPCC report based on proxies as
shown in the accompanying graph.
e.g. Loehle These proxies show no unprecedented
warming in the late 20th century.
Now to the last 100 years or so.
Recently the Hadley Climate Research Unit (HadCRU) at the
University of East Anglia was hacked into and the emails and
computer programs used there were released onto the Internet.
For a brief outline of poor science, manipulation of science
journals and the thinking of these high priests of global
warming refer to
the Telegraph and various articles
HadCRU hold the largest database of world temperatures and is
the most influential source of information on global warming
for the IPCC, consequently errors from HadCRU have huge