archive-org.com » ORG » C » CLIMATEAUDIT.ORG

Total: 491

Choose link from "Titles, links and description words view":

Or switch to "Titles and links view".
  • verification r2 « Climate Audit
    www meteo psu edu holocene public html shared research MANNETAL98 METHODS multiproxy f Search down using corrnhem or verif1 out There is no if as to whether he calculated the cross validation R2 statistic By Steve McIntyre Posted in MBH98 Source Code Comments 8 MBH98 Source Code Cross validation R2 Jul 20 2005 3 35 PM Mann has just July 2005 archived a fortran program at ftp holocene evsc virginia edu pub MANNETAL98 METHODS multiproxy f Update see here Here are my first thoughts on this By Steve McIntyre Posted in MBH98 Source Code Comments 71 Cook et al 2004 Feb 4 2005 6 25 PM What is ironic in Mann s citation of Cook as authority that paleoclimatologists need not provide a range of verification statistics is that Cook et al 2004 actually provide a suite of verification statistics headed by the R2 statistic which Mann et al now object to By Steve McIntyre Posted in MBH98 Statistics Also tagged cook r2 verification statistics Comments 13 Tip Jar The Tip Jar is working again via a temporary location Pages About Blog Rules and Road Map CA Assistant CA blog setup Contact Steve Mc Econometric References FAQ 2005 Gridded Data High Resolution Ocean Sediments Hockey Stick Studies Proxy Data Station Data Statistics and R Subscribe to CA Tip Jar Categories Categories Select Category AIT Archiving Nature Science climategate cg2 Data Disclosure and Diligence Peer Review FOIA General Holocene Optimum Hurricane Inquiries Muir Russell IPCC ar5 MBH98 Replication Source Code Spot the Hockey Stick Modeling Hansen Santer UK Met Office Multiproxy Studies Briffa Crowley D Arrigo 2006 Esper et al 2002 Hansen Hegerl 2006 Jones Mann 2003 Jones et al 1998 Juckes et al 2006 Kaufman 2009 Loehle 2007 Loehle 2008 Mann et al 2007 Mann et al 2008 Mann et al 2009 Marcott 2013 Moberg 2005 pages2k Trouet 2009 Wahl and Ammann News and Commentary MM Proxies Almagre Antarctica bristlecones Divergence Geological Ice core Jacoby Mann PC1 Medieval Noamer Treeline Ocean sediment Post 1980 Proxies Solar Speleothem Thompson Yamal and Urals Reports Barton Committee NAS Panel Satellite and gridcell Scripts Sea Ice Sea Level Rise Statistics Multivariate RegEM Spurious Steig at al 2009 Surface Record CRU GISTEMP GISTEMP Replication Jones et al 1990 SST Steig at al 2009 UHI TGGWS Uncategorized Unthreaded Articles CCSP Workshop Nov05 McIntyre McKitrick 2003 MM05 GRL MM05 EE NAS Panel Reply to Huybers Reply to von Storch Blogroll Accuweather Blogs Andrew Revkin Anthony Watts Bishop Hill Bob Tisdale Dan Hughes David Stockwell Icecap Idsos James Annan Jeff Id Josh Halpern Judith Curry Keith Kloor Klimazweibel Lubos Motl Lucia s Blackboard Matt Briggs NASA GISS Nature Blogs RealClimate Roger Pielke Jr Roger Pielke Sr Roman M Science of Doom Tamino Warwick Hughes Watts Up With That William Connolley WordPress com World Climate Report Favorite posts Bring the Proxies up to date Due Diligence FAQ 2005 McKitrick What is the Hockey Stick debate about Overview Responses to MBH Some thoughts on Disclosure Wegman and North Reports for

    Original URL path: http://climateaudit.org/tag/verification-r2/ (2016-02-08)
    Open archived version from archive


  • Crowley Tries to Get Data from Jacoby « Climate Audit
    are on even more precarious grounds with respect to justifying the withholding of the data from the rest of the community Lamont Doherty director Purdy had told Crowley that the requested data had been archived in August 4532 To the best of my knowledge the data that you are requesting were deposited in the NOAA data bank in August 2008 In the morning of November 4 2008 the day of the US elections Crowley wrote to Purdy as follows 4532 copying D Arrigo Dear Mike thank you very much for your response but I think Gordon is not being entirely frank with you The data from individual trees were in fact deposited But what people really want to know is what the lead author of such a project considers the best guess composite of the individual trees none extend the entire length of the time series and they must be spliced together after making some not so simple corrections for the growth rate effect of the trees and the relative importance of site effects for different trees only the person doing the field work really understands that Gordon published his best estimate of the composite time series the one that is most valuable to other climate scientists who being less familiar with site idiosyncracies might not make the right choice in producing their own composite The analogy in geophysics might be when someone requests a composite seismic synthesis published on a particular site and all you release is the individual seismic lines and effectively say go to it Gordon has repeatedly refused to release this composite to other scientists EXCEPT to fellow Lamont scientist Ed Cook If Ed feels more comfortable with Gordon s composite than one he could produce on his won surely other scientists even more removed from the procedures must feel the same way It is therefore frustrating not only to the field that Gordon won t release his reconstruction to them it is doubly frustrating because he has been inconsistent on this matter in giving it to Ed I wrote a separate letter to Rosanne D Arrigo on this matter yesterday saying that I was at the end of my patience on this matter it has been going on almost TEN YEARS and that I am going to write the Director of NSF on the matter Gordon has still not met his obligations to the field and I intend to write that letter unless he releases it immediately I am sorry it has come to this stage I am not mad at you or Rosanne she has been caught in the middle on this fracus But the community deserves that composite and I feel the matter has come to the point where either Gordon releases the data or I go to the Director of NSF with cc s to the head of Ocean and Atmsopheric Sciences and head of Directorate I apologize in advance for the action because it seems very determined but in fact it is really due to one very obstinate person Gordon and after ten years my patience is now at an end Sincerely Tom Crowley Later that day Jones wrote Briffa and Osborn about the exchange as follows 861 saying that they would only archive cores that were used if they were mindful to lodge any series subject Fwd last chance Keith Tim These two emails came Tuesday I seem to be a blind cc on them I ve not sent them on to Ed but you can if you want I did tell Ed when I saw him in Greece that Tom Crowley had started this I am wondering what has got Tom going like this Tom used to work for 3 years at NSF so has lots of contacts there I wonder if Tom has tried to reproduce the chronology from the cores that have been lodged I would reckon that Gordon Rosanne would only lodge the cores they have used It is what we d do or what we should do if we were mindful to lodge any series Cheers Phil Crowley followed up with Purdy on November 4 the day of the US election as follows 5106 Mike I did not mean to imply that I would send anything to NSF and probably NOAA until Lamont has a last chance to shake the reconstruction out of Gordon I just meant to say the letter will go off in a few days unless I hear otherwise and again believe me I do not want to get Lamont in trouble I have many fond memories of working with Lamont scientists and overall the institution has been exemplary in sharing it is just that sometimes you wind up with difficult situations that you haven t planned for and this is certainly one of them Tom Purdy replied 5106 that they were closed for the election and that he would revert the next day Crowley wrote back that that must be exciting On November 5 Purdy wrote back 5106 providing an exact URL for the chronology Subject Re ps Tom I believe that the composite data that you are looking for are at ftp ftp ncdc noaa gov pub data paleo treering chronologies asia mong003r crn Let me know if that is not the case This is in the Solongotyn Davaa Tarvagatay Pass folder that you can get to via http hurricane ncdc noaa gov pls paleo ftpsearch treering And search on Country Mongolia and Investigator Jacoby Mike Purdy On Nov 10 Crowley wrote to D Arrigo as follows 5106 subject Fwd Re ps to Rosanne D Arrigo Rosanne I want this business to end just like you but there is one very puzzling element of this business that leads me to ask further questions if this information was available on the web why didn t you just say so why didn t Gordon just say so after getting a runaround for years the community deserves to hear the answer to this there is also the business of the Tar Pass Solongotyn Davaa extension to 262 and composites for Bairam Uul Khalzan Khamar and Khentii Uul can you give me the status of these Tom While checking I notice that measurement data was recently updated In my files I have two older versions the most recent as of 2004 Like this Like Loading Related This entry was written by Steve McIntyre posted on Dec 3 2011 at 1 46 PM filed under Archiving cg2 Uncategorized and tagged crowley jacoby Bookmark the permalink Follow any comments here with the RSS feed for this post Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed Climategate 2 0 The Cause Kinnard and the D Arrigo Wilson Chronologies 21 Comments Jean S Posted Dec 3 2011 at 2 47 PM Permalink Kindergarten games Correlation stats file Measurements file updated 11 14 2011 to extend period of record to 558 1999 AD Measurements file previously updated 6 30 2004 to extend period of record to 900 1999 AD Chronology files updated 8 25 2008 also extending period of record to 900 1999 AD Original version archived with ITRDB had period of record 1475 1994 Mann Jones 2003 version of the chronology archieved under Jones Mann 2004 goes back to AD264 So Gordon is still holding some data maybe the rest is relesed with a new update around 2015 pouncer Posted Dec 3 2011 at 2 50 PM Permalink Steve Do you take any smidgen of comfort in knowing now that you were NOT singled out for obstruction by the Team That is that they even obstruct the science as conducted by other fellow Team members not just players they view as being on the other side Steve Rob Wilson had told me that Jan Esper had been unable to get data from Hughes So I was aware of this It was however much worse for me The emails show examples of data being willingly sent to pals that was refused to me e g Mann s dirty laundry Hu McCulloch Posted Dec 3 2011 at 3 00 PM Permalink I hadn t heard of Lamont Doherty so I googled it and found that it is Columbia s Lamont Doherty Earth Observatory campus in Pallisades NY An interesting press release about a new article by Laia Andreu Hales with D Arrigo Beck Goetz and Frank popped up at http www ldeo columbia edu news events trees tundras border are growing faster hotter climate It reports a new finding that contrary to some skeptics white spruce trees indeed grow faster with higher temperatures and that the new indicator of tree ring density gets around the divergene problem that TR width sometimes does not correlate well after 1950 or so This is odd given that TR max density MXD is what Briffa s notoriously divergent series measures The press release specifically mentions that it refutes doubts arising from Climategate According to the press release trees absorb about 1 3 of human CO2 emissions But if trees gobble up human CO2 emissions could it be that those same emissions fatten up the trees There was no mention in the press release at least of any control of growth for CO2 Steve McIntyre Posted Dec 3 2011 at 3 20 PM Permalink it makes sense that trees will move north and higher with warming Treelines seem to me to be a very intuitive if low frequency proxy Lamb used treelines The Team denounced treelines as a proxy as not providing annual information Speed Posted Dec 3 2011 at 6 40 PM Permalink Kultti et al Holocene 2006 has just been published in Holocene showing higher medieval treeelines in northern Finland 27 deg E This is consistent with the more northerly distribution of oak in medieval Finland reported in Hulden 2001 discussed here and adds to the growing inventory of articles both demonstrating higher medieval treelines and using this to estimate MWP temperatures locally higher than at present some of which I ve posted about from time to time Medieval Category These local results from treelines are not limited to the north Atlantic and Greenland but extend to the Sierra Nevadas 117 W Sweden Finland Polar Urals 65 E and a Siberian transect 90 100E http climateaudit org 2006 05 16 medieval treeline in finland dougieh Posted Dec 3 2011 at 8 40 PM Permalink Steve re The Team denounced treelines as a proxy as not providing annual information can you point to where you get this impression denunciation like you to a layman me treeline movement seem like a common sense overview test for trees against temp thanks Craig Loehle Posted Dec 3 2011 at 4 37 PM Permalink Obstructionism as a way of life Amazing Tom C Posted Dec 3 2011 at 5 56 PM Permalink These people are really weird Why do they feel such a strong need to own data and meter it in such byzantine fashion I ve never seen this sort of thing in any other field Streetcred Posted Dec 3 2011 at 6 06 PM Permalink Talk about climate weirding this is human weirding caused by the attachment to The Cause ZT Posted Dec 3 2011 at 6 47 PM Permalink This email indicates that Mike Hulme was complaining to Fred Pearce about data availability from fellow climatologists What specific data have you been refused access to Pearce appears to have been checking facts http climategate2011 blogspot com 2011 12 3991txt html Pearce to Hulme Thanks very much for the paper And yes I am most interested in the ECSN story I ll read your Weather piece and then get back to you Meanwhile it would be useful to have 1 names of some other people organisations likely to have the same complaint as you 2 any ideas you have about standing up the cartel charge How did it manifest itself at the recent meeting What specific data have you been refused access to Or whatever theduke Posted Dec 3 2011 at 8 48 PM Permalink I suppose my last post provides the reason they would keep the data from eachother In Steve s case the reasons for withholding have more to do with the fear of having their work refuted theduke Posted Dec 3 2011 at 9 04 PM Permalink Forgive me for thinking on the fly but it occured to me that there is one other reason some of them would not want the data made public they knew the work was refutable but they published it anyway because it aided the cause In other words the science was deliberately rigged to come to the proper conclusions and they didn t want to give anyone the tools to prove it P Solar Posted Dec 4 2011 at 3 22 AM Permalink That would seem to be a reasonable conclusion We see yet again that the very basis of science reproducibility is being deliberately and steadfastly thwarted Scientific validation requires reproduction In refusing to release his data for over ten year he is taking the very clear position that he does not want his work validating It is difficult to imagine any other motivation for this other than he knows it will not stand up to inspection Steve it s not as simple as that Jacoby was a field guy and got annoyed at his data being used in multiproxy studies that got more attention than the studies by the guys that did the collection So Mann annoyed him on that basis Jacoby s problem was that he didn t publish or archive the bad data the data that didn t show the pattern he was looking for thereby biasing the literature I think Richard T Fowler Posted Dec 4 2011 at 9 03 AM Permalink one other reason some of them would not want the data made public they knew the work was refutable but they published it anyway because it aided the cause You know I m pretty cynical when it comes to dendros but I have to admit that it strikes me as being possible that he didn t know if it was refutable but didn t want to take the chance because to do so posed a risk to the cause Just a thought RTF P Solar Posted Dec 4 2011 at 2 54 AM Permalink Both Hegerl and D Arrigo complained back to IPCC about being required to supply data and IPCC WG1 Chair Susan Solomon said that I would be expelled as a reviewer if I asked for data I think that is probably the most succinct and damning evidence I have seen of how the IPCC functions Is that response in IPCC records Geoff Sherrington Posted Dec 4 2011 at 5 36 AM Permalink Frivously Dendro has not been the same since heating and temp were replaced by eating and hemp While Dendrochronology still seems relatively ok I deleted Dendrothermometry from my reading list a year ago because it failed several essential tests of science and scientists but it s hard to avoid accidental encounters P Solar Posted Dec 4 2011 at 1 13 PM Permalink Since Ed Cook s name came up in this discussion I thought something Jeff Id found from him may be relevent Ed Cook 3253 the results of this study will show that we can probably say a fair bit about 100 year variability was like with any certainty i e we know with certainty that we know fuck all Yep that last bit sums it up nicely it would make a good by line for the next IPCC report summary for decision makers P Solar Posted Dec 4 2011 at 1 17 PM Permalink Damn wordpress screwing around again To ensure it does not remove this text with less than and greater than signs I ll post with source code tags Ed Cook 3253 the results of this study will show that we can probably say a fair bit about 100 year extra tropical NH temperature variability at least as far as we believe the proxy estimates but honestly know fuck all about what the 100 year variability was like with any certainty i e we know with certainty that we know fuck all Kenneth Fritsch Posted Dec 5 2011 at 11 59 AM Permalink It reports a new finding that contrary to some skeptics white spruce trees indeed grow faster with higher temperatures and that the new indicator of tree ring density gets around the divergene problem that TR width sometimes does not correlate well after 1950 or so This is odd given that TR max density MXD is what Briffa s notoriously divergent series measures The press release specifically mentions that it refutes doubts arising from Climategate I find these pronouncements from the consensus primarily from the media but also from the science community to be so general and vague and unconnected with specific instances and details as to be worthless I can only hope that so called skeptics and those criticizing the consensus can avoid discussions of generalities and rather delve into the details of the matter MikeN Posted Dec 12 2011 at 2 17 PM Permalink The BCS polls do not release methodology and data to the public Only one poll does and that poll was found to have an error which would have changed the 10th and 11th spots http cbssports com collegefootball story 14395939 glitch leaves lsu boise state in wrong order in final bcs Punksta Posted Dec 27 2011 at 5 14 AM Permalink The obvious answer to the data hiding problem is surely for journals to make full archiving a condition of publication delist retract or whatever the word is any papers later found to have been inadequately archived However since journals like Science and Nature are so doggedly opposed to genuine openness in science and so do not insist on archiving what can anyone do about this My suggestion is to start compiling a register

    Original URL path: http://climateaudit.org/2011/12/03/crowley-tries-to-get-data-from-jacoby/ (2016-02-08)
    Open archived version from archive

  • cg2 « Climate Audit
    occasions see http www climateaudit org tag yang The new emails show that Bradley thought that this series was to use the technical term preferred by By Steve McIntyre Also posted in Uncategorized Tagged bradley yang Comments 111 A Somewhat Late Response to Schneider Nov 25 2011 1 39 PM This post is by Ross Eight years ago in October 2003 Stephen Schneider wrote email 0020 txt to Annie Petsonk of Environmental Defense cc ing to Mann Hegerl Overpeck Briffa Hughes MacCracken Jones Bradley Santer Thompson Mosley Thompson Crowley Trenberth Osborn Wigley and a couple others The email stated in part the following sic wherever appropriate Hello all Ah By Ross McKitrick Also posted in Uncategorized Tagged mckitrick schneider Comments 102 Tahiti Nov 24 2011 9 15 AM Just for fun we ve all noticed the many mentions of just going or returning from exotic destinations when you notice an email discussing a trip to Tahiti or Hawaii or Nice etc please jot down the email date destination and traveller By Steve McIntyre Also posted in Uncategorized Tagged tahiti Comments 192 Older posts Tip Jar The Tip Jar is working again via a temporary location Pages About Blog Rules and Road Map CA Assistant CA blog setup Contact Steve Mc Econometric References FAQ 2005 Gridded Data High Resolution Ocean Sediments Hockey Stick Studies Proxy Data Station Data Statistics and R Subscribe to CA Tip Jar Categories Categories Select Category AIT Archiving Nature Science climategate cg2 Data Disclosure and Diligence Peer Review FOIA General Holocene Optimum Hurricane Inquiries Muir Russell IPCC ar5 MBH98 Replication Source Code Spot the Hockey Stick Modeling Hansen Santer UK Met Office Multiproxy Studies Briffa Crowley D Arrigo 2006 Esper et al 2002 Hansen Hegerl 2006 Jones Mann 2003 Jones et al 1998 Juckes et al 2006 Kaufman 2009 Loehle 2007 Loehle 2008 Mann et al 2007 Mann et al 2008 Mann et al 2009 Marcott 2013 Moberg 2005 pages2k Trouet 2009 Wahl and Ammann News and Commentary MM Proxies Almagre Antarctica bristlecones Divergence Geological Ice core Jacoby Mann PC1 Medieval Noamer Treeline Ocean sediment Post 1980 Proxies Solar Speleothem Thompson Yamal and Urals Reports Barton Committee NAS Panel Satellite and gridcell Scripts Sea Ice Sea Level Rise Statistics Multivariate RegEM Spurious Steig at al 2009 Surface Record CRU GISTEMP GISTEMP Replication Jones et al 1990 SST Steig at al 2009 UHI TGGWS Uncategorized Unthreaded Articles CCSP Workshop Nov05 McIntyre McKitrick 2003 MM05 GRL MM05 EE NAS Panel Reply to Huybers Reply to von Storch Blogroll Accuweather Blogs Andrew Revkin Anthony Watts Bishop Hill Bob Tisdale Dan Hughes David Stockwell Icecap Idsos James Annan Jeff Id Josh Halpern Judith Curry Keith Kloor Klimazweibel Lubos Motl Lucia s Blackboard Matt Briggs NASA GISS Nature Blogs RealClimate Roger Pielke Jr Roger Pielke Sr Roman M Science of Doom Tamino Warwick Hughes Watts Up With That William Connolley WordPress com World Climate Report Favorite posts Bring the Proxies up to date Due Diligence FAQ 2005 McKitrick What is the Hockey

    Original URL path: http://climateaudit.org/category/climategate/cg2/ (2016-02-08)
    Open archived version from archive

  • crowley « Climate Audit
    Crowley and Lowery 2000 was the non synchroneity of temperature change One of the key series in showing this was Zhu 1973 I located Zhu 1973 today It was great fun not least for Zhu crediting the teachings of Chairman Mao for inspiring his work I even reminisce a By Steve McIntyre Posted in Crowley Multiproxy Studies Also tagged chu zhu Comments 6 Crowley and North 1991 Jul 24 2005 4 10 AM A little relief from Mann source code but don t worry I m not finished with it In my post on IPCC 1990 arising out of the controversy about the WSJ editorial I referred to the following quote from the Executive Summary to chapter 7 p 200 which stated having the Younger Dryas in mind We conclude By Steve McIntyre Posted in IPCC Multiproxy Studies Also tagged North Comments 111 UCAR Webcast of Bradley Crowley Ammann Apr 6 2005 Jul 12 2005 9 44 AM The webcast of the April 6 2005 presentations by Bradley Crowley and Ammann is here There s lots that could be said about this presentation I can only pick off a few points here By Steve McIntyre Posted in News and Commentary Wahl and Ammann Also tagged ammann North Comments 74 Older posts Tip Jar The Tip Jar is working again via a temporary location Pages About Blog Rules and Road Map CA Assistant CA blog setup Contact Steve Mc Econometric References FAQ 2005 Gridded Data High Resolution Ocean Sediments Hockey Stick Studies Proxy Data Station Data Statistics and R Subscribe to CA Tip Jar Categories Categories Select Category AIT Archiving Nature Science climategate cg2 Data Disclosure and Diligence Peer Review FOIA General Holocene Optimum Hurricane Inquiries Muir Russell IPCC ar5 MBH98 Replication Source Code Spot the Hockey Stick Modeling Hansen Santer UK Met Office Multiproxy Studies Briffa Crowley D Arrigo 2006 Esper et al 2002 Hansen Hegerl 2006 Jones Mann 2003 Jones et al 1998 Juckes et al 2006 Kaufman 2009 Loehle 2007 Loehle 2008 Mann et al 2007 Mann et al 2008 Mann et al 2009 Marcott 2013 Moberg 2005 pages2k Trouet 2009 Wahl and Ammann News and Commentary MM Proxies Almagre Antarctica bristlecones Divergence Geological Ice core Jacoby Mann PC1 Medieval Noamer Treeline Ocean sediment Post 1980 Proxies Solar Speleothem Thompson Yamal and Urals Reports Barton Committee NAS Panel Satellite and gridcell Scripts Sea Ice Sea Level Rise Statistics Multivariate RegEM Spurious Steig at al 2009 Surface Record CRU GISTEMP GISTEMP Replication Jones et al 1990 SST Steig at al 2009 UHI TGGWS Uncategorized Unthreaded Articles CCSP Workshop Nov05 McIntyre McKitrick 2003 MM05 GRL MM05 EE NAS Panel Reply to Huybers Reply to von Storch Blogroll Accuweather Blogs Andrew Revkin Anthony Watts Bishop Hill Bob Tisdale Dan Hughes David Stockwell Icecap Idsos James Annan Jeff Id Josh Halpern Judith Curry Keith Kloor Klimazweibel Lubos Motl Lucia s Blackboard Matt Briggs NASA GISS Nature Blogs RealClimate Roger Pielke Jr Roger Pielke Sr Roman M Science of Doom Tamino Warwick Hughes

    Original URL path: http://climateaudit.org/tag/crowley-2/ (2016-02-08)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Kaufman et al: Obstructed by Thompson and Jacoby « Climate Audit
    many amazing quotes from CA over the last year for the How NOT to do science section that I won t be able to go over each on in class Andrew Posted Sep 12 2009 at 12 16 PM Permalink Trouble in Team paradise David Posted Sep 12 2009 at 12 25 PM Permalink The criteria are good common low and high frequency variation absence of evidence of disturbance either observed at the site or in the data and correspondence or correlation with local or regional temperature Obviously not a believer in teleconnection then I wonder what Cherry Jacoby would have to say to Mann about the inclusion of bristlecones and Tiljander lake sediment in particular in his proxy studies Taphonomic Posted Sep 12 2009 at 1 53 PM Permalink NSF is subject to FOIA requests Has anyone considered filing a FOIA request to the NSF for the data that was gathered based on NSF funding The NSF Grant Policy Manual clearly states Investigators are expected to share with other researchers at no more than incremental cost and within a reasonable time the primary data samples physical collections and other supporting materials created or gathered in the course of work under NSF grants Grantees are expected to encourage and facilitate such sharing As the grantees haven t shared the primary data a FOIA may facilitate such sharing If the data are not forthcoming a FOIA requesting all documentation of why NSF is not requiring its grant recipients to share their data and why the NSF is still funding grant recipients who do not abide by the terms of NSF Grant Policy Manual would be in order TAG Posted Sep 12 2009 at 3 50 PM Permalink If we get a good climatic story from a chronology we write a paper using it That is our funded mission It does not make sense to expend efforts on marginal or poor data and it is a waste of funding agency and taxpayer dollars The rejected data are set aside and not archived An entire book could be written about what is incorrect in this statement Geoff Sherrington Posted Sep 12 2009 at 11 05 PM Permalink Re TAG 16 If we get a good climatic story from a chronology we write a paper using it That is our funded mission It does not make sense to expend efforts on marginal or poor data and it is a waste of funding agency and taxpayer dollars The rejected data are set aside and not archived An entire book could be written about what is incorrect in this statement It could be but there is no need It can be explained in three sentences that are inarguable The first sentence says that there can be time spans with essentially no authentic significant temperature differences from year to year The second sentence says that proxies for temperature change should therefore exhibit insignificant data character over these terms The third sentence says that there is no logical basis to exclude data that are bereft of character for precisely the reason that the researcher does not know if it is simply a quiet time Alternatively the objection could be phrased in terms of false positives and their brethren and logic Scott Brim Posted Sep 13 2009 at 10 33 AM Permalink Re TAG 16 JACOBY If we get a good climatic story from a chronology we write a paper using it That is our funded mission It does not make sense to expend efforts on marginal or poor data and it is a waste of funding agency and taxpayer dollars The rejected data are set aside and not archived TAG An entire book could be written about what is incorrect in this statement The Introduction section of this book would note that in the last forty years the pressure on government funded scientific research agencies to produce useful products has turned many of their employees away from the objective of doing fundamental research into what the data is actually saying to them and accepting whatever information is revealed and towards the objective of using the data as a building block type of resource in manufacturing a product which seems to be worthy of the public funds spent on it Everyone should understand that Jacoby in his own mind believes that temperature proxies work as advertised if enough caution is used in their selection He is not doing research into basic questions he is doing QA on a developmental analysis product whose function is to produce a useful climate signal as his customers in the Global Warming Industrial Complex define it Jacoby and his colleagues have crossed the boundary between the kind of science pursued for purposes of basic research and the kind of science pursued in support of product development and manufacturing What these people are doing is actually product development research and so his statement as quoted above is perfectly consistent with the kind of science he is actually pursuing Not that he or any of his colleagues would ever admit to this Fred2 Posted Sep 12 2009 at 4 47 PM Permalink I think there is a genuine conceptual difference Mann and Jakoby etc seem to be looking for trees that are good thermometers by looking for ring patterns that match up with temperatures Then they are used further They don t seem to be interested in why some trees are better thermometers than others At least that s the gist of what I get from them Could that be it henry Posted Sep 13 2009 at 9 00 AM Permalink Re Fred2 20 They don t seem to be interested in why some trees are better thermometers than others At least that s the gist of what I get from them That s part of it They should also wonder why some trees in the same group DON T follow the temperatures at all Layman Lurker Posted Sep 12 2009 at 5 12 PM Permalink Fred2 I think that it is fair to say that some chronologies will make better thermometers than others but without archiving who is to know whether the rejected series contain signal or not Also if there is so much noise that needs to be rejected how do we know whether archived series are true signal or noise leading to false positives Gerald Browning Posted Sep 12 2009 at 5 22 PM Permalink Pat Frank 15 Well said The differential equations that describe a particular physical phenomenon have their own set of physical modes that are not related to principal components in any way You can fool some of the people Jerry Pat Frank Posted Sep 12 2009 at 7 07 PM Permalink Re Gerald Browning 22 What impresses me Jerry is that so many highly trained physical scientists have either joined the bandwagon or have remained silent about the obviously shoddy practices of proxy thermometry And after your expert explanations one can be equally amazed about the critical negligence that pervades the field of climate modeling Kenneth Fritsch Posted Sep 12 2009 at 7 11 PM Permalink If you mean this Ken you misunderstood my comment and reply to Hu M on another thread I did have a limerick in mind that would have had some fun with your comment and Hu s but then you don t read minds Do you But to the point at hand I view the response by Jacoby as an indication that he is not aware of the statistical ramifications of his selection process and not showing his rejected data He sees no need to make a case for the criteria he used in rejecting data He is not even contorting what he did by wordsmithing which makes the silence of others who one would think should know better even more puzzling Paul Penrose Posted Sep 12 2009 at 7 51 PM Permalink Fred2 I guess it s not obvious to you what s wrong with that Let s say for the sake of argument that tree rings are not good thermometers but that 10 of them randomly correlate to some temperature series Now let s say that you as the researcher select a population of trees that your theory says should contain a temperature signal in their rings so you go out and core a bunch of them Now if you just use all the cores you collected you will find that the series does not correlate well with temperature so your is nullified That s science You start over But now suppose that you only select the 10 that actually contained a signal had good correlation Now you would have fooled yourself that your theory has merit when in fact it does not This is why data snooping is such a big deal Soronel Haetir Posted Sep 12 2009 at 8 11 PM Permalink I ve commented on this before and it s really distressing to see the delusion persist here of all places that statistical analysis can grant physical meaning I don t think anyone claims that math grants meaning I thought the entire idea was to discover meaning I don t see the two processes as being equivalent Severian Posted Sep 13 2009 at 4 47 AM Permalink So far what has been the downside of obstructing attempts to obtain data Basically nothing except a few blog postings The unfortunate aspect of human nature is that unless and until there is pain applied bad behavior particularly if it profits the person doing it will persist This applies from everything to a child raiding the cookie jar a thief stealing cars or a researcher refusing to share data for whatever reason ego to shield incompetence or worse just plain sloppiness Not all of the examples are of the same legal or moral seriousness but they are of the same kind of behavior and so far no one not the NAS no one who matters and can hold their feet to the fire seems to care enough to do something about it This is also a situation that you want to avoid in auditing where the people who should be audited and overseen by neutral parties do their own audit never a good situation Until the community stops publishing and paying for research that doesn t include full disclosure of data and methods this will not end Since said research often supports the dominant political meme of the day don t expect any support from that side of the aisle either Jeff Id Posted Sep 13 2009 at 6 38 AM Permalink correspondence or correlation with local or regional temperature If a chronology does not satisfy these criteria we do not use it That s an amazing quote It would have been more amazing one year ago when I learned of M08 but in this case we have no idea of the number of proxies rejected or kept You have to be pretty trusting to accept the scribble that s left over and work more math on it M08 gave a terrible explanation that a high enough percentage of the pre hand selected data was kept to verify that the data wasn t random In this case to eliminate data in a behind the scenes undefined black box approach impressive The unprecedentedality of reconstructions vanishes if the corrections to GISS and HadCRUT weren t applied I m not saying the corrections are wrong but even a small overestimation of surface trend especially a sudden one is substantially helpful to correlation and unprecedentation of reconstructions NW Posted Sep 13 2009 at 11 34 AM Permalink There are potential theoretical reasons why some trees even of a given species might be better thermometers than others There s population variance of genotypes and phenotypes and that phenomenon can frequnetly be given plausible grounding in evolutionary game theory But unless there s a well thought out statistical methodology that supports the alternative against the null all trees of this species are equally good thermometers then the procedure of simply setting aside poor looking chronologies just doesn t fly I think of cross sectional time series techniques that is for panel longitudinal data sets There are ways to go about testing hypothesis of the kind There is no heterogeneity over the cross section the tree cores in their time series characteristics e g their correlation through the period of historical climate records with temperatures Maybe Steve or someonme else knows whether such statistical tests have been done I haven t heard any reference to such a study since I started reading this blog a few months back Layman Lurker Posted Sep 13 2009 at 1 16 PM Permalink Re NW 40 There should be a set of a priori criteria for pre determining a given sampling project The decision to archive should be a given based on these criteria Any information gained from this data is useful whether there is correlation with the insturmental record or not as it would shed light on the noise vs signal issue Sufficient sampling should enable a level of statistical confidence or lack of in those series which correlate with temperature The questionable backgrounds of the proxy selection process in team reconstructions is a strong argument for engineering discipline to be applied on process procedure and documentation NW Posted Sep 13 2009 at 1 42 PM Permalink Re Layman Lurker 43 you are making an implicit assumption about what kind of population you are sampling from and this implicit assumption is what is at issue here If individual trees are all homogenous in behavior then every sampled tree is an instance of one type the homogenous type in that sampled population But suppose instead that the population of trees is a mixture of different types within species Each distinct type genotype phenotype within the population species may have its own signal to noise aspect as a thermometer Then pooling the data across types destroys potentially useful information that is specific to specific types On a more general note I agree with much of what people are saying here The researchers in question should obviously archive all of their data More deeply they shouldn t data snoop in the way they are doing Still more deeply if you thought that trees were heterogeneous thermometers then you ought to have some scientific theory as to why and that ought to guide your statistical inquiry about it But I have to part company with the implicit assumption that a tree is a tree is a tree This may be the correct way of thinking in sciences like physics or applied fields like engineering where you tend to assume that there is but one type of electron or steel plate and it behaves the same no matter where you find it in the universe But it is usually a mistake in biological and human sciences where deep heterogeneity of observational units is both empirically real and theoretically expected Hu McCulloch Posted Sep 13 2009 at 11 56 AM Permalink RE Pete 29 This would be a mistake See for example A Note on the Use of Principal Components in Regression by Ian Jolliffe Thanks I need to learn more Can you provide a more precise reference or URL Google doesn t turn up anything with exactly this title But of course there s his 500 page 2002 book Don Keiller Posted Sep 13 2009 at 12 47 PM Permalink Let me get this straight We go out and collect a load of data We test it looking for a temperature signal A few data sets show such a signal Am it being naive here or would a subset of say tree ring records essentially composed of random noise be bound to contain some that gave an apparent match with modern temperature trends Hey presto It s a treemometer Just how many sets of bad data did Jacoby et al wade through and discard before they found their good data stephen richards Posted Sep 13 2009 at 2 12 PM Permalink In physics if you have group of trees some of which behave identically one of which does not then the assumption is that there is a flaw in the group not the singleton IE in any theory or model we are searching for the exception and not the rule because it will tell us where we have the biggest deviation form our model theory and therefore the limit s of them NW Posted Sep 13 2009 at 2 37 PM Permalink Re stephen richards 45 at the most general level of scientific method there is really no difference between what I think you describe as your practice and what I understand to be my practice If I am designing an experiment to test a theory my job as an experimenter is to try hard to kill the theory and I do that by trying to figure out how to create empirical exceptions to the theory snip way too far off topic Plus editorially I dislike discussions about philosophy of science Sorry bout that Hu McCulloch Posted Sep 13 2009 at 2 35 PM Permalink RE Pete 29 Roman found me Jolliffe s A Note on the Use of Principal Components in Regression It was in Applied Statistics 1982 vol 31 300 303 Jolliffe s point in this note is that sometimes a PC that is way down the list and which explains only a tiny proportion of the variance in the X matrix is still an important explanatory variable for the dependent variable y This may occur but then it is not clear what function PCA is serving Why not just use the raw X matrix directly PCA is potentially useful in the present context when there are more explanatory variables than observations or more proxies than observations as in Kaufman s case 23 proxies and only 14 decadal observations on temperature The whole point

    Original URL path: http://climateaudit.org/2009/09/12/the-making-of-kaufman-et-al-2009/ (2016-02-08)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Kaufman 2009 « Climate Audit
    lengths for each lake both covering at least 800AD present on By Steve McIntyre Also posted in General Tagged kaufman Comments 45 Is Kaufman Robust Sep 18 2009 1 24 PM A common meme in Team world these days is that any issues or errors are minor and that none of them matter As we peel back the layers of Kaufman et al this is the first line of Team defence The rhetorical impact of Team reconstructions largely derives from the modern medieval differential is it in the By Steve McIntyre Tagged iceberg lake kaufman Comments 100 Invalid Calibration in Kaufman 2009 Sep 18 2009 12 46 PM Darrell S Kaufman David P Schneider Nicholas P McKay Caspar M Ammann Raymond S Bradley Keith R Briffa Gifford H Miller Bette L Otto Bliesner Jonthan T Overpeck and Bo M Vinther Science 9 4 2009 propose a reconstruction of Arctic summer land temperatures for the last 2000 years using 23 diverse proxies Decadal averages of each proxy By Hu McCulloch Also posted in General Tagged kaufman mcculloch Comments 35 The Kaufman Backstory Sep 14 2009 9 34 PM The backstory to the development of the Kaufman et al 2009 reconstruction is pretty interesting A few years ago after the MM criticisms of paleoclimate reconstructions the US National Science Foundation sponsored the sampling of 30 Arctic lakes in a standardized way It s remarkable to compare the original population to the data sets used in By Steve McIntyre Also posted in Multiproxy Studies Tagged kaufman Comments 197 Older posts Tip Jar The Tip Jar is working again via a temporary location Pages About Blog Rules and Road Map CA Assistant CA blog setup Contact Steve Mc Econometric References FAQ 2005 Gridded Data High Resolution Ocean Sediments Hockey Stick Studies Proxy Data Station Data Statistics and R Subscribe to CA Tip Jar Categories Categories Select Category AIT Archiving Nature Science climategate cg2 Data Disclosure and Diligence Peer Review FOIA General Holocene Optimum Hurricane Inquiries Muir Russell IPCC ar5 MBH98 Replication Source Code Spot the Hockey Stick Modeling Hansen Santer UK Met Office Multiproxy Studies Briffa Crowley D Arrigo 2006 Esper et al 2002 Hansen Hegerl 2006 Jones Mann 2003 Jones et al 1998 Juckes et al 2006 Kaufman 2009 Loehle 2007 Loehle 2008 Mann et al 2007 Mann et al 2008 Mann et al 2009 Marcott 2013 Moberg 2005 pages2k Trouet 2009 Wahl and Ammann News and Commentary MM Proxies Almagre Antarctica bristlecones Divergence Geological Ice core Jacoby Mann PC1 Medieval Noamer Treeline Ocean sediment Post 1980 Proxies Solar Speleothem Thompson Yamal and Urals Reports Barton Committee NAS Panel Satellite and gridcell Scripts Sea Ice Sea Level Rise Statistics Multivariate RegEM Spurious Steig at al 2009 Surface Record CRU GISTEMP GISTEMP Replication Jones et al 1990 SST Steig at al 2009 UHI TGGWS Uncategorized Unthreaded Articles CCSP Workshop Nov05 McIntyre McKitrick 2003 MM05 GRL MM05 EE NAS Panel Reply to Huybers Reply to von Storch Blogroll Accuweather Blogs Andrew Revkin Anthony Watts Bishop

    Original URL path: http://climateaudit.org/category/multiproxy-studies/kaufman-2009/ (2016-02-08)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Thompson « Climate Audit
    Gore s movie and book An Inconvenient Truth he presents a graph which he identifies in the book as Dr Thompson s Thermometer Gore attributes this graph to the ice core research of Lonnie Thompson and says in the book that it provides independent evidence for the validity of the Hockey Stick temperature reconstruction of Michael Mann By Hu McCulloch Also posted in AIT Tagged Al Gore Hockey Stick Inconvenient Truth Little Ice Age Lonnie Thompson Medieval Warm Period Michael Mann Comments 152 Five Monsoon O18 Series Dec 4 2008 11 00 AM Jud Partin observed yesterday that a fantastic new record had been recently early Nov 2008 published from Wanxiang China Zhang et al report that their new record is broadly similar to the reconstructions of Esper Mann and Jones 2003 and Moberg as follows The Wanxiang record with a d18O range of 1 3 per mil By Steve McIntyre Also posted in Mann et al 2008 Proxies Speleothem Tagged China Gavin Schmidt Judd Partin Little Ice Age Mann Medieval Warm Period Monsoon Comments 107 IPCC and the Dunde Variations Feb 3 2008 12 33 PM There s not much in climate science that annoys me more than the sniveling acquiescence of government bureaucrats in Lonnie Thompson s flouting of data archiving policies To his credit Thompson has collected unique data To his shame Thompson has failed to archive data collected as long as 20 years ago This would be bad enough if By Steve McIntyre Tagged dunde Thompson Comments 21 Older posts Tip Jar The Tip Jar is working again via a temporary location Pages About Blog Rules and Road Map CA Assistant CA blog setup Contact Steve Mc Econometric References FAQ 2005 Gridded Data High Resolution Ocean Sediments Hockey Stick Studies Proxy Data Station Data Statistics and R Subscribe to CA Tip Jar Categories Categories Select Category AIT Archiving Nature Science climategate cg2 Data Disclosure and Diligence Peer Review FOIA General Holocene Optimum Hurricane Inquiries Muir Russell IPCC ar5 MBH98 Replication Source Code Spot the Hockey Stick Modeling Hansen Santer UK Met Office Multiproxy Studies Briffa Crowley D Arrigo 2006 Esper et al 2002 Hansen Hegerl 2006 Jones Mann 2003 Jones et al 1998 Juckes et al 2006 Kaufman 2009 Loehle 2007 Loehle 2008 Mann et al 2007 Mann et al 2008 Mann et al 2009 Marcott 2013 Moberg 2005 pages2k Trouet 2009 Wahl and Ammann News and Commentary MM Proxies Almagre Antarctica bristlecones Divergence Geological Ice core Jacoby Mann PC1 Medieval Noamer Treeline Ocean sediment Post 1980 Proxies Solar Speleothem Thompson Yamal and Urals Reports Barton Committee NAS Panel Satellite and gridcell Scripts Sea Ice Sea Level Rise Statistics Multivariate RegEM Spurious Steig at al 2009 Surface Record CRU GISTEMP GISTEMP Replication Jones et al 1990 SST Steig at al 2009 UHI TGGWS Uncategorized Unthreaded Articles CCSP Workshop Nov05 McIntyre McKitrick 2003 MM05 GRL MM05 EE NAS Panel Reply to Huybers Reply to von Storch Blogroll Accuweather Blogs Andrew Revkin Anthony Watts Bishop Hill Bob Tisdale

    Original URL path: http://climateaudit.org/category/proxies/thompson/ (2016-02-08)
    Open archived version from archive

  • kaufman « Climate Audit
    Oct 10 2009 most recently modified Oct 21 2009 Kaufman gives what is obviously a warm and heartfelt shout out in which they thank those who have pointed out errors and have offered suggestions More later today Note see Sep 15 post here here for a preliminary assessment of Kaufman using By Steve McIntyre Posted in General Kaufman 2009 Also tagged korttajarvi tiljander Comments 104 Atte Korhola political and social playground Oct 2 2009 9 41 AM There is an interesting and in my opinion very bold comment dated 9 27 here in Finnish Google Translation in a Finnish web journal by professor Atte Korhola entitled Recession in Climate Science Korhola Esitän kärkeen heti teesin jonka mieluusti alistan julkiseen kritiikkiin kun myöhemmät polvet tutustuvat ilmastotieteeseen he luokittelevat 2000 luvun alun tieteen historian noloihin lukuihin By Jean S Posted in Kaufman 2009 News and Commentary Also tagged korhola korttajarvi tiljander Comments 82 Loso Varve Thickness and Nearest Inlet Sep 23 2009 12 32 PM One excellent feature of the Alaskan varvochronologists is that unlike say Bradley and his coterie some of them show and archive their work The Kaufman student MSc theses are good at this So too is Michael Loso s work on Iceberg Lake Thus while one can raise an eyebrow at and criticize their statistical peregrinations at By Steve McIntyre Posted in General Also tagged iceberg lake loso varve Comments 43 Older posts Tip Jar The Tip Jar is working again via a temporary location Pages About Blog Rules and Road Map CA Assistant CA blog setup Contact Steve Mc Econometric References FAQ 2005 Gridded Data High Resolution Ocean Sediments Hockey Stick Studies Proxy Data Station Data Statistics and R Subscribe to CA Tip Jar Categories Categories Select Category AIT Archiving Nature Science climategate cg2 Data Disclosure and Diligence Peer Review FOIA General Holocene Optimum Hurricane Inquiries Muir Russell IPCC ar5 MBH98 Replication Source Code Spot the Hockey Stick Modeling Hansen Santer UK Met Office Multiproxy Studies Briffa Crowley D Arrigo 2006 Esper et al 2002 Hansen Hegerl 2006 Jones Mann 2003 Jones et al 1998 Juckes et al 2006 Kaufman 2009 Loehle 2007 Loehle 2008 Mann et al 2007 Mann et al 2008 Mann et al 2009 Marcott 2013 Moberg 2005 pages2k Trouet 2009 Wahl and Ammann News and Commentary MM Proxies Almagre Antarctica bristlecones Divergence Geological Ice core Jacoby Mann PC1 Medieval Noamer Treeline Ocean sediment Post 1980 Proxies Solar Speleothem Thompson Yamal and Urals Reports Barton Committee NAS Panel Satellite and gridcell Scripts Sea Ice Sea Level Rise Statistics Multivariate RegEM Spurious Steig at al 2009 Surface Record CRU GISTEMP GISTEMP Replication Jones et al 1990 SST Steig at al 2009 UHI TGGWS Uncategorized Unthreaded Articles CCSP Workshop Nov05 McIntyre McKitrick 2003 MM05 GRL MM05 EE NAS Panel Reply to Huybers Reply to von Storch Blogroll Accuweather Blogs Andrew Revkin Anthony Watts Bishop Hill Bob Tisdale Dan Hughes David Stockwell Icecap Idsos James Annan Jeff Id Josh Halpern Judith Curry Keith Kloor Klimazweibel Lubos Motl

    Original URL path: http://climateaudit.org/tag/kaufman/ (2016-02-08)
    Open archived version from archive



  •