Key Evidence for Global Warming Debunked?

If you spend a little time talking to global warming skeptics, you’ll run across some variation of this argument: the Mann Hockey Stick graph, which shows global temperatures trending dramatically upward, is flawed/faked/broken.

The so called “hockey stick” is a graph from a paper written in 1998 by Michael Mann and others (often referred to as MBH 98). It shows temperatures for the past 1000 years, with a dramatic upward swing in the 20th century. The graph attained a fair bit of notoriety when the International Panel on Climate Change featured it in its Third Assessment Report in 2001. Since then there have been several scientific papers published about it, endless websites and blog posts, and a congressional hearing, all on this single paper.

The general thrust of all this study, criticism, accusations of fraud, reworking, reexamining etc. is that there were indeed some flaws in the statistical methods used in MBH 98. However, multiple papers since then have indicated that the conclusions are valid.

Climate scientists have compared multiple datasets (called proxies) – ice samples, treerings, boreholes, historical documents, marine sediments – to get an idea of past climate variations. I’ll quote from the executive summary of the National Academy of Sciences “Surface Temperature Reconstructions for the Last 2000 Years”:

It can be said with a high level of confidence that global mean surface temperature was higher during the last few decades of the 20th century than during any comparable period during the preceding four centuries….less confidence can be placed in large-scale surface temperature reconstructions for the period from AD 900 to 1600. Presently available proxy evidence indicates that temperatures at many, but not all, individual locations were higher during the past 25 years than during any period of comparable length since AD 900….Very little confidence can be assigned to statements concerning the hemispheric mean or global mean surface temperature prior to about AD 900….


The basic conclusion of Mann et al. (1998, 1999) was that the late 20th century warmth in the Northern Hemisphere was unprecedented during at least the last 1,000 years. This conclusion has subsequently been supported by an array of evidence that includes both additional large-scale surface temperature reconstructions and pronounced changes in a variety of local proxy indicators, such as melting on icecaps and the retreat of glaciers around the world, which in many cases appear to be unprecedented during at least the last 2000 years. Not all individual proxy records indicate that the recent warmth is unprecedented, although a larger fraction of geographically diverse sites experienced exceptional warmth during the late 20th century than during any other extended period from AD 900 onward.

The Wegman report, presented to Congress in 2005, was a detailed study of the statistical methods used in MBH 1998. Although it was widely hailed by climate change skeptics as a thorough debunking of Mann’s work, it is limited in scope. It’s worth some study if you want to understand the issue more fully, and a PDF can be found here. Commentary on the Wegman report here.

Other scientists have studied Mann’s conclusions and methods and found them to be robust. Some of these papers are summarized in the Wegman report.

Also take a look here.

I draw two conclusions from this:

1. There are lots of unknowns in the study of climate – both future predictions and past climate reconstructions.

2. There is substantial evidence that the current warming is unusual and goes beyond the ranges seen in the past 2000 years.

Also note that, whatever your opinion of the hockey stick graph itself, there is still strong evidence that the earth is warming and that humans are the cause.


6 responses to “Key Evidence for Global Warming Debunked?

  1. so you think a 2000 year look at the earth’s weather is sufficient to analyse what has occurred over the last 4.5 billion year history of our planet? Interesting. On a percentage basis that would be .0000004%.I don’t think that is sufficient data.

  2. Thanks for stopping by and commenting.

    Where did I say that a ‘2000 year look at the earth’s weather is sufficient to analyse what has occurred over the last 4.5 billion year history of our planet?’

    The current situation should be analyzed according to the current conditions. Human civilization has only been around for the past 10,000 years, so what happened 4.5 billion years ago is not entirely relevant to what’s going on right now and how it will affect us.

  3. “Human civilization has only been around for the past 10,000 years” – that statement is highly debatable itself by thousands of scientists.

    More importantly, have you read Robinson et al’s report from the Oregon Institute of Science and Medice debunking global warming. It actually states that increased levels of CO2 in the atmosphere have evidence of actually being good for the earth among other fact based statements debunking global warming. Read it at and please offer your comments. Thank you!

  4. Thanks Robert. I am familiar with the OISM, and I have a post or two waiting in the wings about some of their ideas. I hope to get those up this month (Feb) but it may be a week or two.

    As for human civ being around for more than 10,000 years, you’ll have to give me something to back up your statement. I guess it depends on what you term ‘civilization’ but the consensus is that human agricultural civilization arose recently. The holocene era, that is, the time since the last ice age, is only about 10,000 years old. Climate has been relatively stable in that time.

  5. Pingback: Hooray for Global Warming! « Why Nature Matters

  6. This blog is pretty cool. Just wanted to say hi!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s