Another excellent article from Prof. Ross McKitrick on the failing models of the hoaxers and a more plausible explanation.
So what’s all this about? The statistical evidence in question can be thought of as a rival explanation of climate change over land since 1979. It contrasts to the approach Allen and his many colleagues have pursued for several decades. They have built about two dozen large computer systems called General Circulation Models (GCMs), which represent the behaviour of the global climate largely on the assumption that greenhouse gases play the dominant role in climate change. These models underpin the conclusions of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) about the role of greenhouse gases in 20th-century warming, and its forecasts for much more warming in the future.
The rival model explains patterns of warming over land as a result of urbanization and the varying patterns of socioeconomic and industrial development. A series of studies over the past decade have shown this hypothesis to have significant explanatory power, even though it has nothing to do with greenhouse gases.
Of course, both models might be partly right. But the IPCC has taken an extreme position, that the socioeconomic patterns have no effect and any temperature changes must be due to global “forcings” like carbon dioxide emissions. Studies that claim to detect the effects of CO2 emissions on the climate make this assumption, as do those that estimate the rate of greenhouse gas-induced warming. As Allen says, if this assumption isn’t true, there are a lot of papers that would have to be retracted or redone.