Comment on "Polynomial cointegration tests of anthropogenic impact on global warming" by Beenstock et al.(2012) Some fallacies in econometric modelling of climate change<quoted text>
This is what you get when economists write science papers- total ignorance of the science, along with the totally misapplied statistics.
You misunderstand how science works. The fact that a paper gets published (in an obscure journal, after two previous rejections) does not mean it's true.
It means that now people who really know about the physics of AGW and statistics will look at the paper, and publish a response.
The paper has been knocking about the internet for a year or so, and various people have pointed out holes (misapplied statistics and total ignorance of the physical basis of AGW), so expect these criticisms to be formalised in the response in the literature.
For deniers of course, it says what they want to believe, so it must be true.
D. F. Hendry and F. Pretis
Department of Economics, and Institute for Economic Modelling, Oxford Martin School, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
Abstract. We demonstrate major flaws in the statistical analysis of Beenstock et al.(2012), discrediting their initial claims as to the different degrees of integrability of CO2 and temperature.