2012
DOI: 10.5194/esdd-3-561-2012
|View full text |Cite
Preprint
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Polynomial cointegration tests of anthropogenic impact on global warming

Abstract: We use statistical methods for nonstationary time series to test the anthropogenic interpretation of global warming (AGW), according to which an increase in atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations raised global temperature in the 20th century. Specifically, the methodology of polynomial cointegration is used to test AGW since during the observation period (1880–2007) global temperature and solar irradiance are stationary in 1st differences whereas greenhouse gases and aerosol forcings are stationary i… Show more

Help me understand this report
View published versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

2
46
1

Year Published

2013
2013
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(49 citation statements)
references
References 40 publications
2
46
1
Order By: Relevance
“…These results would erroneously lead to the argument that these series are at least integrated of order one. Applying the ADF test to the first-differenced synthetic series to test for a possible integration of order two, the results are very similar to those described in some cointegration-based attribution studies 5,51 : temperatures are found to be integrated of order one while radiative forcing series are integrated of order two. These results are spurious and, as shown in the literature, they may lead to contrasting cointegration results and inferences depending on the order of integration selected.…”
Section: S8 Relation To Previous Results In the Literaturesupporting
confidence: 61%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…These results would erroneously lead to the argument that these series are at least integrated of order one. Applying the ADF test to the first-differenced synthetic series to test for a possible integration of order two, the results are very similar to those described in some cointegration-based attribution studies 5,51 : temperatures are found to be integrated of order one while radiative forcing series are integrated of order two. These results are spurious and, as shown in the literature, they may lead to contrasting cointegration results and inferences depending on the order of integration selected.…”
Section: S8 Relation To Previous Results In the Literaturesupporting
confidence: 61%
“…A recent publication based on polynomial cointegration 51 has proposed that both solar irradiance and global temperature series are integrated of order one, while greenhouse gases and aerosols forcing are integrated of order two. These authors find that, although greenhouse gases and aerosols forcing cointegrate to an integration order of one, the stochastic trend in temperatures and in the aggregated anthropogenic forcing are independent, precluding the existence of a long-term relationship between them.…”
Section: S8 Relation To Previous Results In the Literaturementioning
confidence: 99%
“…In their empirical statistical study of temperature and radiative forcing of greenhouse gases, Beenstock et al (2012) present statistical tests that purport to show that these variables have different integrability properties, and hence cannot be related unless they polynomially cointegrate. Beenstock et al (2012) then show that their constructed measure of anthropogenic forcing, an "anthropogenic anomaly", does not cointegrate with observed temperature, presenting this as evidence against anthropogenic global warming.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We outline six important hazards that can be encountered in econometric modelling of time-series data, and apply that analysis to demonstrate errors in the empirical modelling of climate data in Beenstock et al (2012). We show that the claim made in Beenstock et al (2012) as to the different degrees of integrability of CO 2 and temperature is incorrect. In particular, the level of integration is not constant and not intrinsic to the process.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation