Hope I don’t over speculate with the following. I used to think that the instrument record must be accurate and the “declines” were simply a result of failing proxies, sorted out via the ‘tricks’. Now on reflection I don’t see why such a small region of the earth must necessarily follow the global trend, and it could well be the larger tree network is accurate in stalling around mid 20th century. This is not to cast doubt on the global instrument record but rather to suggest there may be a divergence between it and this particular region favoured as a tree ring source.

Steve: the site counts are correct. They are done within the algorithm, not from the graphic. I made the site dots large enough to see and they overprint one another. Also many Vaganov and Schweingruber sites are colocated and one overprints another.

Hence, how do trees in the southern US qualify?

(The report you refer to suggests some of the fossilized trees date back into the last ice age era (which ended 10,000 years ago according to Encarta 2005, the Pleistocene era), but shows some of that type of tree living today in the same area and says ones found in the DC area are north of their present range. IOW, baldy cypress does not grow near the tree line per se – though it has its own limit of range, is that supposedly determined by temperature?)

BTW, interesting reference in the paper to tree fossils found at 82N – that’s very far north, 2 degrees more latitude than the Eureka weather station. Did someone say recent temperatures are unprecedented? (Or did the earth gyrate – I recall magnetic poles have moved radically in the past.)