Gray, V R. 2007. Temperature Trends in the Lower Atmosphere Energy and Environment 17 707-714
which refutes this claim, but I am forced to admit that if you really get down to the uncertainties associated with the "mean global surface temperature anomaly record" you would end up proving that the supposed global warming did not happen.
The above CSSP Report provided proof that the models do not work from two graphs (attached) which compare the actual temperatures in the lower troposphere with the calculations from models. Climate sceptics have published this comparison widely..
But the IPCC climate scientists had to get out of this somehow. Now
B. D. Santer 1 *, P. W. Thorne 2, L. Haimberger 3, K. E. Taylor 1, T. M. L. Wigley 4, J. R. Lanzante 5, S. Solomon 6, M. Free 7, P. J. Gleckler 1, P. D. Jones 8, T. R. Karl 9, S. A. Klein 1, C. Mears 10, D. Nychka 4, G. A. Schmidt 11, S. C. Sherwood 12, F. J. Wentz 10"
at
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/121433727/abstract?CRETRY=1&SRETRY=0
no less than seventeen of them have fossetted around to find enough uncertainties they had previously neglected, plus a dose of "noise" , to show that the difference between these two graphs can be explained by these uncertainties.
They "revisit such comparisons" with "new observational estimates", There is "no longer a serious discrepancy" which means there still is a npn-serious discrepancy. There is an "emerging reconciliation". There is an "improved procedure for adjusting for inter-satellite biases"
So after all this. thay have only "attributed" temperatures in the lower atmosphere to climate model results with some unstated level of "significance":
We look forward to a revisit of the notoriously biased "mean global surface temperature anomaly". Maybe "global warming" will disappear.
