This peer reviewed study in Nature - one of the most important science journals is very significant, for it studies the same tree ring data which IPCC, in its biased examination of facts, has been distorting (hockey stick) – and comes to an entirely different conclusion:

A new study measuring temperatures over the past two millennia has concluded that in fact the temperatures seen in the last decade are far from being the hottest in history.

A large team of scientists making a comprehensive study of data from tree rings say that in fact global temperatures have been on a falling trend for the past 2,000 years and they have often been noticeably higher than they are today – despite the absence of any significant amounts of human-released carbon dioxide in the atmosphere back then.

"We found that previous estimates of historical temperatures during the Roman era and the Middle Ages were too low," says Professor-Doktor Jan Esper of the Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz, one of the scientists leading the study. "Such findings are also significant with regard to climate policy." [Source]

Link to the study.

The complete discussion

• I'm sorry Australia has such a disappointing person on its Climate Change Authority
• Strip Al Gore and IPCC of their Nobel Prize and give it to these people

• If Kevin Rudd continues to abuse those who ask questions, then Australia should bid goodbye to science
• It is not Donna Laframboise but Rajendra Pachauri who is a HUGE liar
• Now John Quiggin says that the world's top scientists are stupid! This is getting absurd.
• John Quiggin, IPCC's peer review process is riddled with holes. I now expect a detailed correction on your blog.
• John, thanks for withdrawing your allegation against Donna's integrity. Here's other stuff you and I should know.
• The total mess that is IPCC. This is very serious stuff. Please do read.
• John (Quiggin), Donna's methodology is totally transparent. Please PROVE she is a liar.
• Now John Quiggin says that Donna Laframboise is lying. I'll ask her about it.
• Second point for John Quiggin: to what extent does IPCC use peer reviewed literature?
• Response to John Quiggin re: longevity of "man-made" CO2 in the atmosphere
• Very important new study that rebuts IPCC generated panic
• Inviting input from readers re: climate change facts, to conduct a debate with John Quiggin
• John Quiggin, I suggest you review your estimate of the impact of Australian CO2 reductions

Related posts:

1. The total mess that is IPCC. This is very serious stuff. Please do read.
2. This is what IPCC said in its FIRST report in 1990 before it was overtaken by FRAUD
3. Strip Al Gore and IPCC of their Nobel Prize and give it to these people
4. Data must always trump theory. CO2 induced panic is not justified by DATA.
5. Thirty per cent of IPCC citations are NOT peer-reviewed
6. Second point for John Quiggin: to what extent does IPCC use peer reviewed literature?
7. Could any half-wit have done FAR better than IPCC?
8. IPCC is desperately trying to recover its shattered reputation, but in vain
9. Science trumps mythological models. Watch Monckton easily win the debate against panic-mongering AGW believers
10. The Himalayan blunder of the world’s top Government “scientists” (IPCC) – in gory detail