A paper at http://arxiv.org/pdf/1204.5445v1.pdf … appears to have used the swing between summer and winter to come up with the idead major changes were likely to take place as a result of low sea ice levels in 2007 (data from 2012 is too recent to be included) – see http://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2012/09/18/livina-lenton-consenseless-con… as post to Tall Bloke by Paul Vaughn. The latter comments, 'the lesson here for students is that rote application of statistical computing in the total absence of basic common sense can lead to epic misinterpretation. It is sobering to see that the existence of the annual cycle (summer followed by winter) was totally ignored by climate professionals during interpretation of algorithmic output …'. What happened, Vaughn says, is the swings between two different states, namely summer and winter, were interpreted as new phenomena indicating climatic instability.
At Pierre Gosselin's German blog, http://notrickszone.com/2012/09/18/vahrenholt-provokes-stocker-by-callin… … there is a YouTube video of a TV debate between IPCC author Thomas Stocker and Fritz Vahrenholt, co-author of The Cold Sun, in which the latter refers to the hockey stick temperature reconstruction, and ot the IPCC itself, who adopted it as their icon, as fake – not just once but on several occasions. Has anyone told Mikey Mann?
Stocker was unable to provide any kind of evidence in support of it as Vahrenholt had clearly done his homework and knew the issue inside out. For example, he knew very well what 'Hide the Decline' meant, rather than the weasel like misintepretation the CAGW side are fond of presenting, and so often quoted without any kind of query by the mainstream media, the real villains in the piece. In the US Mikey Mann has a couple of libel suits in progress after various other criticisms of him and his hockey stick graph – but these appear to have stalled as he is not willing to release the data the icon is founded on. Vahrenholt would appear to be very confident that he can ridicule the hockey stick as he made the point on several occasions, and deliberately so. Vahrenholt was, until a few years ago, a staunch supporter of CAGW advocacy and was quite happy to see King Coal and Big Oil demonised and wind and solar elevated to a near godly status. He thought he would take a look at the science after reading about qualms surrounding the hockey stick graph, and hey presto, he was astonished to find it left a lot to be desired (but it's all in the book). As a bonus, Vahrenholt also takes a leasurely swipe at the scary Schellnuber.
PS … you don't have to sit through the video as Pierre's post picks out the salient points for the reader who wants a quick overview).