hockey stick controversy

Hockey stick controversy - disputes over these reconstructions.

The Union of Concerned Scientists described it as making basic errors based on claims from the hockey stick controversy taken out of context.

The book describes both the hockey stick controversy and the broader context of skepticism in science and contrarians rejecting evidence of human influence on climate.

In May 2007, Hans von Storch reviewed the changes in thought caused by the hockey stick controversy writing:

While perusing the site, Montford noticed that new readers often asked if there was an introduction to the site and the story of the hockey stick controversy.

In 1998, he was a co-author with Michael E. Mann and Raymond S. Bradley on a paper which later spurred the hockey stick controversy.

His research has been part of the Hockey stick controversy with his temperature reconstructions, that have been cited as being evidence for both sides of the controversy.

The test showed that the method used in MBH98 would inherently underestimate large variations had they occurred; but has subsequently been challenged: see hockey stick controversy for more detail.

Lawson raises several issues regarding the IPCC process and its findings, including the Hockey stick controversy, and criticizes the Stern Report.

In the hockey stick controversy, contrarians have asserted that the Medieval Warm Period was warmer than at present, and have disputed the data and methods of climate reconstructions.

In addition to scientific debate over methodology and proxies, the validity of the reconstructions has been disputed with the "hockey stick controversy" forming part of the more general global warming controversy.

In addition to his work in the field of statistical computing, Wegman is notable for contributing to the 2006 Committee on Energy and Commerce Report investigation which inquired into the Hockey stick controversy.

The series began on November 28, 2006 with its debut article, Statistics needed, describing Edward Wegman's report to the United States House Committee on Energy and Commerce on the Hockey stick controversy.

A version of MBH99 featured prominently in the 2001 IPCC Third Assessment Report, and attacks on the graph by those opposing action on global warming became politically prominent in the Hockey stick controversy.

Mann's earlier work had been targeted by climate change deniers in the hockey stick controversy, and allegations against him were renewed in late 2009 in the Climatic Research Unit email controversy but found to be groundless in a series of investigations.

It was disputed by various contrarians, and in the politicisation of this hockey stick controversy the New York Times of 14 February 2005 hailed a paper by businessman Stephen McIntyre and economist Ross McKitrick (MM05) as undermining the scientific consensus behind the Kyoto agreement.