To: Keith Briffa <email@example.com>
Subject: email #1: some background info first...
Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 11:47:16 -0500
Thanks again for your phone call, and the (informal) opportunity to help out where I can.
I'm perfectly happy in that role (as an informal contributor and a formal reviewer, for
example), if you and Peck, for example, are both comfortable with that.
First, "RealClimate" should be helpful. It deals w/ the skeptic claims, etc. but using the
peer-reviewed research as a basis for the discussion.
The "hockey stick" overview should be helpful:
as well as itemized esponses to the various contrarian propaganda/myths:
and the specific discrediting of the claims of McIntyre and McKitrick, based both on our
response to their rejected Nature comment:
and the discussion of the analysis in the Rutherford et al (2004) paper in press in Journal
of Climate, that independently discredits them:
In the following emails, I'll attach some other materials (submitted papers) that deal w/
the McIntyre and Mckitrick matter, and the von Storch matter,
Please let me know if there is anything we discussed that I forget to provide you. Will
also draft an email to the small group (you, me, Scott, Caspar, Gene) about the prospective
additional RegEM/Mann et al method model analyses,
Professor Michael E. Mann
Department of Environmental Sciences, Clark Hall
University of Virginia
Charlottesville, VA 22903
e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org Phone: (434) 924-7770 FAX: (434) 982-2137