The “Index of Leading Environmental Indicators 2005” of the Pacific Research Institute says the following:
“The “hockey-stick” graph, believed to be one of the leading indicators of global warming, is now being called “rubbish.” Scientists have shown that the graph’s underlying equation would generate the same result for any series of random numbers."
In another location, a Pacific Research writer says:
Scientists agree that global temperatures have risen about 0.6 degree Celsius over the past century. But the famous "hockey stick" graph claiming to prove that the past 25 years have been the warmest in the past 1,000 years cannot be taken seriously. Experts have shown that the computer algorithm used to generate the graph would produce similar results from any series of random numbers.
The “rubbish” claim is based on a quote from von Storch, although we obviously do not disagree with von Storch on this matter. Making the reasonable assumption that the last statement of each excerpt refers to our work, neither version is exactly what we said. Ross has sent them an email me notifying them of our actual statements. In connection with an article, I re-visited MBH simulations and did some simulations, which confirm that the generation of hockey-stick shaped PC1s carried into hockey-stick shaped reconstructions. The hockey stick shape is somewhat attentuated, but the degree of attenuation in the simulations almost exactly matched the attenuation between the MBH98 NOAMER PC1 and their reconstruction. Very high spurious RE levels carry over. more