Friday, December 30, 2011

1254756944.txt

From: Phil Jones <p.jones@uea.ac.uk>
To: k.briffa@uea.ac.uk
Subject: Message from Tom Wigley
Date: Mon Oct 5 11:35:44 2009

Keith,
Here's a message from Tom. It might be worth sending anything you've got to him to have
a look through. Shorter responses are probably better. Detail can go in a poster.
Pointing out how often or not Yamal is used is useful. I don't think they have done
this. I think many people confuse this with the polar urals chronology. That is different
and it is based on density.
M&M rely on people not checking.
Cheers
Phil

Date: Mon, 05 Oct 2009 03:57:57 -0600
From: Tom Wigley <wigley@ucar.edu>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (Windows/20080421)
To: Phil Jones <p.jones@uea.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: [geo] Re: CCNet: A Scientific Scandal Unfolds
X-Canit-CHI2: 0.00
X-Bayes-Prob: 0.0001 (Score 0, tokens from: @@RPTN, f028)
X-Spam-Score: 0.30 () [Hold at 5.00] PORN_RP_NASTY,SPF(none,0)
X-CanItPRO-Stream: UEA:f028 (inherits from UEA:default,base:default)
X-Canit-Stats-ID: 32219749 - e7f62debf1d6
X-Antispam-Training-Forget:
[1]https://canit.uea.ac.uk/b.php?i=32219749&m=e7f62debf1d6&c=f
X-Antispam-Training-Nonspam:
[2]https://canit.uea.ac.uk/b.php?i=32219749&m=e7f62debf1d6&c=n
X-Antispam-Training-Spam: [3]https://canit.uea.ac.uk/b.php?i=32219749&m=e7f62debf1d6&c=s
X-Scanned-By: CanIt (www . roaringpenguin . com) on 139.222.131.184
Phil,
It is distressing to read that American Stinker item. But Keith
does seem to have got himself into a mess. As I pointed out in
emails, Yamal is insignificant. And you say that (contrary to
what M&M say) Yamal is *not* used in MBH, etc. So these facts
alone are enough to shoot down M&M is a few sentences (which
surely is the only way to go -- complex and wordy responses
will be counter productive).
But, more generally, (even if it *is* irrelevant) how does Keith
explain the McIntyre plot that compares Yamal-12 with Yamal-all? And
how does he explain the apparent "selection" of the less well-replicated
chronology rather that the later (better replicated) chronology?
Of course, I don't know how often Yamal-12 has really been used in
recent, post-1995, work. I suspect from what you say it is much less
often that M&M say -- but where did they get their information? I
presume they went thru papers to see if Yamal was cited, a pretty foolproof method if
you ask me. Perhaps these things can be explained clearly and concisely -- but I am not
sure Keith is able to do this
as he is too close to the issue and probably quite pissed of.
And the issue of with-holding data is still a hot potato, one that
affects both you and Keith (and Mann). Yes, there are reasons -- but
many *good* scientists appear to be unsympathetic to these. The
trouble here is that with-holding data looks like hiding something,
and hiding means (in some eyes) that it is bogus science that is
being hidden.
I think Keith needs to be very, very careful in how he handles this.
I'd be willing to check over anything he puts together.
Tom.

Prof. Phil Jones
Climatic Research Unit Telephone +44 (0) 1603 592090
School of Environmental Sciences Fax +44 (0) 1603 507784
University of East Anglia
Norwich Email p.jones@uea.ac.uk
NR4 7TJ
UK
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

References

1. https://canit.uea.ac.uk/b.php?i=32219749&m=e7f62debf1d6&c=f
2. https://canit.uea.ac.uk/b.php?i=32219749&m=e7f62debf1d6&c=n
3. https://canit.uea.ac.uk/b.php?i=32219749&m=e7f62debf1d6&c=s

No comments:

Post a Comment