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

Total: 111

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

Or switch to "Titles and links view".
  • The “Blade” of Ocean2K « Climate Audit
    by phytoplankton such as Emiliania huxleyi These simple plants convert CO2 into alkenones The thermal calibration is based on the temperature of the mixed layer The mixed layer is in contact with the atmosphere At any given atmospheric level of CO2 the dissolved concentration of CO2 increases as temperature falls so the phytoplankton live in a richer CO2 environment when the temperature is lower If the alkenone unsaturation ratio is due to the differences in availability of dissolved CO2 at different temperatures the the divergence of alkenones could just be due to rising atmospheric CO2 with the higher dissolved CO2 masquerading as lower temperature It is interesting too that there are differences in upwelling regions those Are regions where the dissolved CO2 is not in equilibrium with the atmosphere and is in part influenced by the CO2 concentration in the deeper ocean A controlled experiment in the laboratory with growth of Emiliania huxleyi at different CO2 partial pressures and different temperatures along with measured alkenone unsaturation might explain the divergence since 1900 Neville Posted Sep 20 2015 at 8 02 PM Permalink Reply So Steve is the HAD temp data accurate since 1850 or not And how can you test that accuracy over the last 165 years stevefitzpatrick Posted Sep 21 2015 at 6 05 AM Permalink Reply My comment is about a possible cause for the divergence this post discusses not about the accuracy of the historical SST record Hadley or other That said the gradual rise in sea level over the 20th century is at least consistent with warming and thermal expansion though clearly some of the sea level rise is from melting of land supported glaciers and pumping of groundwater I don t think anyone knows the exact contribution of each Neville Posted Sep 21 2015 at 8 21 AM Permalink Steve Aussie blogger Ken Stewart has looked at a number of regions of the planet and using UAH V 6 satellite data has calculated the length of the pause for each The planet has not warmed for 18 yrs 5 mths The NH has not warmed for 18 yrs 2 mths The SH has not warmed for 19 yrs 7 mths The Tropics have not warmed for 21 yrs I mth The Tropical oceans have not warmed for 22 yrs 11 months The North polar region has not warmed for 13 yrs 7 mths The South polar region has not warmed for 36 yrs 9 mths or for the entire record Australia has not warmed for 17 years 11 mths The USA has not warmed for 18 yrs 3 mths So where is the impact from extra co2 emissions And why hasn t the South polar region warmed at all since 1979 https kenskingdom wordpress com 2015 09 11 pause update september 2015 Ron Graf Posted Sep 21 2015 at 9 29 AM Permalink RSS has been diverging from HADCRUT4 since 2005 joining UAH Plot here Has anyone heard an explanation If not how far can it diverge without needing one stevefitzpatrick Posted Sep 21 2015 at 10 19 AM Permalink Not sure what point you are trying to make Do you think that there has been no warming of the ocean surface since the 1800 s If so on what basis do you draw that conclusion Jeff Norman Posted Sep 22 2015 at 1 08 PM Permalink Neville I agree with SFP your response to his experiment design suggestion seems to be non sequitor Did you respond to the right comment kim Posted Sep 20 2015 at 9 24 PM Permalink Reply I m amused that Bill Clinton once called CO2 plant food but only once I think he couldn t resist the dig at Al Gore So Steve F we re not even seeing man s warming effect in the ocean at all if your surmise is correct That s discouraging stevefitzpatrick Posted Sep 21 2015 at 6 08 AM Permalink Reply kim If the cause for the divergence could be identified and quantified then perhaps it could be taken into account in the alkenone record It s always better to understand what is happening than not understand bmcburney Posted Sep 21 2015 at 9 00 AM Permalink Reply For what it s worth this strikes me as a plausible explanation for at least part of the divergence It also seems like the kind of thing that might be testable in the lab Has anybody looked michael hart Posted Sep 21 2015 at 9 44 PM Permalink Reply While they re at it they may wish to cast their eyes over the isomerization chemistry of alkenes and ketones by UV mpainter Posted Sep 22 2015 at 1 45 PM Permalink Reply Steve you say If the alkenone unsaturation ratio is due to the differences in availability of dissolved CO2 at different temperatures the the divergence of alkenones could just be due to rising atmospheric CO2 with the higher dissolved CO2 masquerading as lower temperature That seems very unlikely The divergence examples Steve provided above come from upwelling water water which is pristine and unaffected by present day atmospheric CO2 levels The occurrence of alkenone divergence in upwelling water must have some other explanation kim Posted Sep 22 2015 at 5 24 PM Permalink Reply Well risen water to the light and CO2 diffuses rapidly Geoff Sherrington Posted Sep 20 2015 at 8 00 PM Permalink Reply A well referenced article by Schouten at al gives some of the many factors thought in year 2000 to influence the relation between temperature and alkenone properties http ceoas oregonstate edu people files mix Mix etal 2000 g3 alkenones pdf It is accepted that the art will have progressed in the 15 years since I hope so because the uncertainties listed by Schouten do not place the use of alkenones on a secure footing as a temperature proxy There are numerous other variables that need to be quantified if the method is to give temperature estimates In year 2000 the link between T and alkenone properties would not seem to be capable of giving better that 1 deg C of resolution about the same as hypothesised global temperature change in the lat 100 years kenfritsch Posted Sep 21 2015 at 9 49 AM Permalink Reply As I noted in a previous post the Conte paper linked by SteveM shows a graphic of temperature versus alkenone proxy response that appears very applicable for tracking large changes in temperatures like would be expected from glacial to inter glacial periods but when you are looking for 1 degree C changes as would be expected over a 2000 year past period the variation of proxy response to temperature from the Conte paper would appear to make that not practical or valid unless a large number of replicate samples were used Given the Conte data that would be an interesting analysis I suspect that if the stevefitzpatrick conjecture of anthropogenic increasing CO2 levels could be shown to cause divergence as he has suggested that any number of climate science authors would be publishing results After all it would be just this kind of divergence cause that would keep the historic part of the temperature reconstruction intact with everything else being equal After perusal of the Conte paper I would have my doubts on the use of alkenones for accurately tracking the relatively small temperature changes expected in the last 2000 years even if a reasonable explanation for the divergence could be found Alkenones and O18 fractions appear capable of tracking the expected temperatures of the interglacial and glacial periods but both have divergences in some reconstructions from the instrumental period The divergence could be and perhaps would be more readily considered as merely a random response of a proxy rather insensitive to relatively small temperature changes if we did not have the expectation and evidence that the recent response should be to a rather large temperature change The same goes for tree rings where divergence could be merely a sign of a proxy response incapable of tracking temperature above an apparent random level I have not yet read the link from Geoff Sherrington on alkenone response to temperature mpainter Posted Sep 21 2015 at 10 18 AM Permalink Reply So far the only alkenone divergence that I have seen is in the samples taken from areas of upwelling posted by Steve above If the divergence is found only in such samples from upwelling then these samples might be recording actual SST and hence the divergence problem is nil See my comment above Hu McCulloch Posted Sep 21 2015 at 11 05 AM Permalink Reply Geoff It would indeed be foolhardy to use a single such series to measure global or even local temperature swings as in David Appell s cherrypick discussed in Steve s previous post However the average of 25 such series will have only 1 5 the variance of a single such series etc if we may assume the variances are finite so that there is hope that a suitable composite of several proxies will be meaningful kenfritsch Posted Sep 21 2015 at 1 14 PM Permalink Reply Hu McCulloch you might want to look at the graphs in the Conte paper link from a SteveM post above The graphs to which I refer are for the alkenone to temperature relationship before and after sedimentation The before relationship shows a best case range of approximately 10 data points with near the same alkenone response in the middle region of temperature of 2 to 3 degrees C and at the low and high end temperatures a range with the approximately the same number of data points as the middle of an eyeball of around 6 degrees C After adding in the variable of sedimentation the ranges in the mid temperatures nearly double and the proxy to temperature relationship varies much more with region The Helen V McGregor paper does not even reference the Conte paper kenfritsch Posted Sep 22 2015 at 6 18 PM Permalink Looking closer at the references of the McGregor paper I see that there are none that have presented data related to variability of the proxy response to temperature variability of the proxies used in their reconstruction This is not unusual unfortunately with papers dealing with temperature reconstructions The authors seem to rush to some conclusions about climate without much bother to look in detail at the proxies they use It will be interesting when I have time to use data from sources giving variability of proxy response to temperature over a range of temperatures like in Conte and doing a Monte Carlo simulation to determine the statistical significance of the trend in the McGregor paper William Larson Posted Sep 20 2015 at 9 46 PM Permalink Reply Mr McIntyre I have a naive question In Fig 4 left panel the SD is the greatest in the most recent 200 year bin the bin which also contains the most counts right panel of any bin This seems crazy to me Unless I am totally not understanding it this aspect of Fig 4 seems to be saying that the more measurements taken the worse the result Can you explain this Hu McCulloch Posted Sep 21 2015 at 9 15 AM Permalink Reply William In Fig 4 left panel the SD is the greatest in the most recent 200 year bin the bin which also contains the most counts right panel of any bin This seems crazy to me Unless I am totally not understanding it this aspect of Fig 4 seems to be saying that the more measurements taken the worse the result This might just be an artifact of the way the series were standardized by McGregor Evans Leduc et al A short sample from a highly persistent series will typically have a lower variance about its own mean than a longer sample will Swings in the shorter sample will therefore spuriously get greater weight in the composite of standardized series than will comparable swings in the longer samples Since the shorter series are concentrated at the recent end of the period there is more overall variability there in the standardized scores Note also that the boxes in Figure 4a represent the quartiles of the data before averaging not the standard error of the mean I doubt that a similar graph using the raw temperatures rather than sd units would show this effect William Larson Posted Sep 21 2015 at 4 35 PM Permalink Reply Mr McCulloch Thank you for responding to my question much appreciated This is certainly fascinating stuff Gary Posted Sep 21 2015 at 8 30 AM Permalink Reply Steve is bioturbation addressed anywhere with these high resolution cores Calculated temperatures are presented as point estimates at exact dates however activities of marine benthos even in high sedimentation regions will mix the top several centimeters of sediment continuously spread the foraminifera vertically combine older and younger specimens at each level and make age dating more uncertain Binning at least with small ranges won t help matters because of overlap at the edges of the bins mpainter Posted Sep 21 2015 at 11 33 AM Permalink Reply Good point on bioturbation I have seen ocean cores photos that is and these tend to be laminated and show any bioturbation quite well But some cores show very little bioturbation or none My point is that there is high resolution and otherwise categories for these alkenone series and presumably the investigators are familiar with such problems I could be wrong however mpainter Posted Sep 21 2015 at 12 29 PM Permalink Reply Stuck in moderation second try I would suppose that those in the ocean core business take full account of any disturbance in the sediments which could alter results Such core studies have been ongoing for over half a century tomthegreekguy Posted Sep 21 2015 at 9 48 AM Permalink Reply It s not the only issue bristlecones don t have a divergence problem I don t think that is exactly right Steve Bristlecones don t have an apparent divergence problem vis à vis temperature but that might be due to aliasing by the CO2 fertilization effect kenfritsch Posted Sep 21 2015 at 10 30 AM Permalink Reply stevefitzpatrick from the link above provided by Geoff Sherrington we have the following comment The carbon isotopic composition of alkenones or other organic compounds combined with those of foraminifera offer the potential to reconstruct the distribution of aqueous CO2 concentrations in the upper ocean Figure 4 It appears that an estimate of what would be required for the testing of your conjecture on CO2 changes might be available to climate scientists Later in this comment from above the authors point for the need to know the temperature also and suggest using alkenones This might get circular for historic times but might be useful if ocean CO2 concentration variations are sufficiently wide in the instrumental period and measured The article lists secondary effects on the alkenone response to temperature and does not mention CO2 concentration differences stevefitzpatrick Posted Sep 21 2015 at 1 32 PM Permalink Reply Yes I saw that too what they did not do was look at any effects of CO2 concentration on the unsaturation ratio used to estimate temperature they considered C12 C13 ratio only I found other papers which suggest based on lab growth that pH above 8 8 severely inhibits growth starved for CO2 but at any pH below about 8 3 growth is limited by other factors like nutrients I can find no references which explore the effect of available CO2 on unsaturation kenfritsch Posted Sep 21 2015 at 3 51 PM Permalink Reply Steve since the authors suggest determining pCO2 using carbon isotope ratios and factoring that by using the alkenone unsaturation ratio for a temperature proxy and all from the same organism they must assume that pCO2 and alkenone unsaturation are independent stevefitzpatrick Posted Sep 21 2015 at 5 47 PM Permalink Kenneth I agree that they seem to assume that I just haven t seen anything in the quick search I did to say that is in fact correct There are a number of factors which have been identified which influence unsaturation ratio so maybe someone evaluated partial pressure of CO2 I just haven t seen a reference Geoff Sherrington Posted Sep 23 2015 at 4 38 AM Permalink Ken The possible response to CO2 raises a problem for most proxies We calibrate from temperature that is most reliable over the last 50 years or more Yet this period is described as anomalous for CO2 concentrations It is hard to calibrate when two parameters T and CO2 are not behaving in a way considered normal for a thousand years or more beforehand Willis Eschenbach Posted Sep 23 2015 at 4 55 AM Permalink Posted Sep 23 2015 at 4 38 AM Permalink It is hard to calibrate when two parameters T and CO2 are not behaving in a way considered normal for a thousand years or more beforehand Not clear what you mean by this While CO2 is well outside its historical range and thus could be an issue for alkenone calculations I ve never seen a scrap of evidence showing that temperatures are not behaving in a way considered normal for a thousand years do you have a citation for that claim All the best to you w Geoff Sherrington Posted Sep 24 2015 at 1 39 AM Permalink Hi Willis I am referring to the widespread belief in global warming I do not accept it verbatim If one does then it could be said that both T and CO2 are anomalous and not showing the patterns of previous centuries I think I am right in saying that if a calibration produces say a linear response with a slope of 2 when it should be one then the proxies calibrated from it will be 0 5 of the correct value And vice versa In reference to the hiatus if the slope is zero then one can do no calibration over the period of the hiatus For this reason proxy results should not be used for the last 15 years or so with the possible exception of when the Temp pattern locally shows little hiatus admkoz Posted Sep 24 2015 at 12 47 PM Permalink One can do SOME calibration A proxy that jumps all over the place while temperatures stay about the same ain t that great a proxy EdeF Posted Sep 21 2015 at 1 51 PM Permalink Reply somebody get me a sweater Follow the Money Posted Sep 21 2015 at 4 17 PM Permalink Reply McGregor et al made no mention of this dramatic divergence in their main text instead asserting that the composite of reconstructions from tropical regions are in qualitative agreement with historical SST warming at the same locations Even if the tropical composite was in qualitative agreement a point that I will examine in a future article this implies that the extratropical divergence has to be that much worse in order to yield the actual overall divergence It is very misleading for the authors to claim qualitative agreement in the tropics without disclosing the overall divergence The paper has a thin oily film of facial plausible deniability here It cites Supplementary Fig S10 Actually it is Supp fig S10 g Tropical composite that is on topic But by omitting g I was compelled to look at all of S10 s graphs and found h Extra tropical NH composite which shows industrial era decline Sooo they disclosed the divergence to all readers responsible enough to assume material information is being hidden or obscured Explication of the tropical extra tropical divergence here would be fascinating scientifically But the authors seem to prefer to play hide the ball for the sake of the lucrative anthropogenic greenhouse gas game Back on the trail Posted Sep 22 2015 at 4 44 AM Permalink Reply I looked at the Blogpost above and saw this little gem planted by a dumbscientist dated 20th Sept I m no dendrochronologist but Wikipedia s overview seems helpful Mann Park Bradley 1995 didn t scale proxy records to obtain temperature but MBH98 was the first to use a scale factor determined by principal component analysis of the proxy records vs instrumental record PC s during the calibration period from 1902 to 1980 It would be even more interesting to know if it s ethical to quietly change the scale and units of the MBH98 reconstruction graph to hide it among a cherry picked 1 of simulations based on input noise with much longer decorrelation time than the US Congress was told It could be obvious who this is by admitting he is no dendrochronologist mpainter Posted Sep 22 2015 at 10 06 AM Permalink Reply Dumbscientist s comments have a peculiar shrill tone to them reminiscent of one W who is found stamping his trademark tone all over blogdom Willis Eschenbach Posted Sep 22 2015 at 5 23 PM Permalink Reply Unlike some including yourself I always post under my own name and sign all of my comments Whoever dumbscientist might be he she has nothing to do with me As to you throwing mud that s a sure sign you re out of real ammunition w kim Posted Sep 22 2015 at 5 26 PM Permalink When will Willard wonder well mpainter Posted Sep 22 2015 at 6 47 PM Permalink Willis I was not thinking of you see kim Willis Eschenbach Posted Sep 22 2015 at 7 46 PM Permalink Huh Who is Willard And since Kim s comment is the first mention of Willard in the thread it s still unclear what you were referring to w mpainter Posted Sep 22 2015 at 8 14 PM Permalink Reply To get up to speed see links in Steve Mc s postscript Willard is shrill Dumbscientist too Peas in a pod Willis Eschenbach Posted Sep 22 2015 at 9 16 PM Permalink Reply Thanks for the further information mpainter I try to never go to And Then There s Peabrains it makes my head hurt In any case this is why I always ask people to quote what they are referring to mistaken identity and unclear references are the bane of online discussions leading to endless misunderstanding So I appreciate you clearing up that misunderstanding w mpainter Posted Sep 22 2015 at 9 50 PM Permalink De nada dynam01 Posted Sep 22 2015 at 8 50 AM Permalink Reply Reblogged this on I Didn t Ask To Be a Blog opluso Posted Sep 22 2015 at 2 29 PM Permalink Reply An article about the use of particle accelerators to probe isotopes in minute quantities had this to say about foraminifera analyses And sticking with climate the tiny shells of ocean plankton called foraminifera form the backbone of climate records from ocean sediment cores These can go back millions of years and are now going through their own zircon revolution Piles of these little shells are typically analyzed together just as zircons were but analysis with this instrument has discovered a surprising amount of variation within individual shells Better accounting for this may improve our climate records and studying individual shells this closely may eventually lead to entirely new insights The records that people have built up for the last fifty years of glacial and interglacial periods that s real Valley said But that s based on average numbers and there s a whole lot more information there that hasn t been exploited yet We ll spend a whole day on three or five foraminifera and the people who are trying to make a record and they have a hundred meters of core to do they don t want to hear this Valley said And so one of the tricks here is to figure out which are the critical samples that deserve this extra attention http arstechnica com science 2015 09 the particle accelerator that can draw data out of specks of comet dust Neville Posted Sep 22 2015 at 9 36 PM Permalink Reply Pat Michael s World Climate Report shows here how much warmer the Holocene climate optimum was than temps today The MacDonald et al study found that forests grew up to the Arctic coastline during that period and temps were several degrees C higher than our present warming http www worldclimatereport com index php 2006 05 25 more evidence of arctic warmth a long time ago Ron Graf Posted Sep 22 2015 at 11 51 PM Permalink Reply Neville just to bring the contrary view the argument is the LIA and MWP were NH events Does anyone have references to tree ring studies in the Andes or other SH evidence And the Holocene optimum is explained by orbital cycles Milankovitch So the consensus argument is orbital influence is cooling Earth now with sporadic pauses chaotic variability but not supporting a century and a half long 0 8C climb BTW I would have thought Ocean2K would have attributed the 2K decline to M cycle but they don t Instead they put it on models validated volcanic aerosols I guess for the authors the data signal is clear as a bell Or maybe they shunned risk of paying gratitude to CO2 for averting a 100K year glaciation admkoz Posted Sep 23 2015 at 12 27 PM Permalink Reply If the claim is that orbital influence is cooling Earth with sporadic pauses doesn t it follow that the only reason there wasn t an MWP is because before it things were even warmer Matt Skaggs Posted Sep 23 2015 at 4 02 PM Permalink Reply Does anyone have references to tree ring studies in the Andes or other SH evidence http ruby fgcu edu courses twimberley EnviroPhilo CookPalmer pdf Jeff Norman Posted Sep 23 2015 at 7 50 PM Permalink Reply Thank you Matt I d seen that before but misplaced the link Geoff Sherrington Posted Sep 24 2015 at 1 44 AM Permalink Reply Matt Australia lacks publications in which new proxy information is reported The reason evades my I am cynical enough to suggest that proxy work that has been done does not tell the right story and so is not published Even in the full 2K very little if any is on the Australian mainland with a little of Ed Cook s dendro work on Huon pines in Tasmania where the problems of finding a reasonable temperature record are off putting Jeff Norman Posted Sep 23 2015 at 7 42 PM Permalink Reply And to be counter contrary while it often asserted the MWP and the LIA were regional events limited to Western Europe and the Northern Atlantic it appears places like Alaska the Yukon Chile South Africa Siberia and New Zealand must have moved since then to where they are today Neville Posted Sep 23 2015 at 1 47 AM Permalink Reply Ron the Calvo study found a warmer Med WP in S OZ and the PAGES 2K study also found that Antarctica was warmer than today from 141 AD to 1250 AD 1250 AD is surely a good fit for a SH Med WP Also there are a number of S America and NZ studies that show a warmer Med WP as well richardswarthout Posted Sep 24 2015 at 1 45 PM Permalink Reply Steve Is it unnecessary to analyze the high resolution dataset regionally vs globally Regards Richard Hu McCulloch Posted Sep 25 2015 at 8 49 AM Permalink Reply In a comment on the last article here at http climateaudit org 2015 09 04 the ocean2k hockey stick comment 763058 I pointed out that McGregor Evans Leduc et al misuse the Wilcoxon signed rank test for the median difference between pairs of observations thereby greatly overstating the significance of bin to bin temperature changes I have now looked at the textbook they cite in order to check whether it leaves some ambiguity as to how to perform the test or even mis represents it The source they cite is Statistics and Data Analysis in Geology by John C Davis 2002 Although the Davis text discusses the related Mann Whitney Wilcoxon rank sum test for the equality of two distributions it in fact makes no mention at all of the signed rank test itself They must therefore have based their test on a different source Two standard treatments of the signed rank test Wilcoxon s own article in Biometrics Bulletin 1945 and the influential textbook by Siegel and Castellan Nonparametric Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences 2nd ed 1988 make it quite clear that with n matched pairs the test looks only at the n differences of pairs not at the n 2 differences drawing from matched and unmatched pairs McGregor et al actually go one step further by even including several observations that are not part of matched pairs While I am confident that there was significant climate change before the modern CO2 period and would be surprised if this data did not support that conclusion arriving at a correct conclusion by using bad statistics is bad science even if it is peer reviewed and published in Nature Geoscience HaroldW Posted Sep 25 2015 at 1 47 PM Permalink Reply Hu Is it possible that the authors used the MWW test and merely mis stated the name of the test From your earlier comment it seems that they computed the Hodges Lehmann statistic for the two time bins that is the median of all pairwise differences Hu McCulloch Posted Sep 26 2015 at 7 17 AM Permalink Reply Harold Thanks for the reference What they in fact computed was indeed the Hodges Lehmann or H L Sen statistic for the difference of two populations which I had not heard of before your post However the H L statistic takes no account of the fact that the paired differences have much smaller variance than the unpaired differences The Wilcoxon signed difference test takes this into account by using only on the relatively very small number of paired differences The Kirchner reference you give provides a large sample normal approximation to test whether the difference is zero that takes into account the high variance of the differences under the assumption that the matched pair differences have the same high variance as the unmatched pairs However what McGregor et al said they did was to compute z scores using the Wilcoxon signed difference normal approximation but using the much larger sample size of the Hodges Lehmann statistic This enabled them to get off the chart significance from data that in fact had only marginally significant evidence of climate change kenfritsch Posted Sep 27 2015 at 7 54 AM Permalink Whatever statistic McGregor mis used it does not take into account the variability of the proxy response to temperature and further at least for alkenones that variability becomes very large towards both ends of the temperature range I would have carried out a Monte Carlo simulation to determine confidence intervals using the published proxy temperature variability for the expected site temperature and even if available data on response variability limited the simulation to alkenone proxies which make up nearly half the 57 reconstruction sites Of course I am looking at the results from skeptical point of view while with the McGregor authors probably not so much kenfritsch Posted Sep 27 2015 at 8 30 AM Permalink Also the Magnesium to Calcium ratio proxies in McGregor which with alkenones make up almost all the proxy data have a high resonse variability to temperature as shown in the linked paper here http www whoi edu cms files hbenway 2006 6 Barker QRS 2005 11406 pdf HaroldW Posted Sep 29 2015 at 10 35 AM Permalink I had a chance yesterday to look at this I ran the turnkey Matlab program provided by McGregor et al It ran without problems reproducing figure 2a of the paper and producing the 200 year binned averages However the script did not cover the calculation of bin to bin changes of Section 7 of the SI I first tried to replicate the McGregor et al calculation I computed d ij x i y j 2 where x i is the set of standardized values in the later bin and y j in the earlier bin and applied the Wilcoxon signed rank test Matlab function signrank on the d ij Divide by 2 to compute change per century as the bins are separated by 200 years I obtained slightly different results than those of section 7 Section 7 results are in parentheses below Bins dT z dT p z dT 100 300 0 03 0 03 2 19 2 51 0 03 0 01 300 500 0 07 0 07 2 94 3 58 0 003 0 0003 500 700 0 02 0 01 1 65 1 79 0 10 0 07 700 900 0 04 0 04 1 60 1 56 0 11 0 11 900 1100 0 07 0 07 5 85 5 34 1E 5 1E 5 1100 1300 0 17 0 17 15 29 14 80 1E 5 1E 5 1300 1500 0 17 0 18 14 83 14 54 1E 5 1E 5 1500 1700 0 06 0 06 4 14 3 84 0 00003 0 0001 1700 1900 0 07 0 08 5 87 5 61 1E 5 1E 5 That s reasonably close although it s surprising to see any differences using their data and a simple two step procedure I attempted two alternative tests First I used the signed rank test on matched pairs for proxies with data in both bins signrank with two arguments The result Bins Number z p 100 300 29 0 18 0 86 300 500 33 0 26 0 80 500 700 38 0 34 0 73 700 900 43 0 22 0 83 900 1100 44 0 58 0 56 1100 1300 45 3 14 0 002 1300 1500 43 2 34 0 02 1500 1700 40 0 52 0 60 1700 1900 39 1 39 0 16 Much more believable z values and only two changes are significant at p 0 05 The second alternative was to apply the Wilcoxon rank sum method equivalent to the Mann Whitney U test to the binned sets using the Matlab function ranksum This gave the following result Bins z p 100 300 0 33 0 74 300 500 0 62 0 54 500 700 0 15 0 88 700 900 0 48 0 63 900 1100 0 89 0 37 1100 1300 2 29 0 022 1300 1500 2 41 0 016 1500 1700 0 63 0 53 1700 1900 0 53 0 59 Again only two significant changes at p 0 05 This is rather deeper statistical waters than I am used to wading in so I leave discussion of the best methods to others Offhand though it strikes me as a stretch to consider the set of standardized scores in a bin as deriving from a single distribution as the proxies have been standardized over different periods Exhibit A the two bin proxies which are coerced to values 0 707 This makes any test somewhat suspect in my naive opinion Perhaps if the proxy series were standardized before binning I agree with you that the method of McGregor et al overstates the number of degrees of freedom in the set of d ij and hence the significance HaroldW Posted Sep 29 2015 at 2 56 PM Permalink One more Using the Hodges Lehmann Sen statistic per the Kirchner reference above the median and 95 range for the bin to bin change is in std dev century 100 300 0 03 0 31 to 0 19 300 500 0 07 0 29 to 0 16 500 700 0 02 0 20 to 0 17 700

    Original URL path: http://climateaudit.org/2015/09/19/the-blade-of-ocean2k/?replytocom=763458 (2016-02-09)
    Open archived version from archive


  • More Z-Score Opportunism « Climate Audit
    of increasing temperatures elsewhere or not If it is then it makes sense to invert the temperatures to proxy SSTs elsewhere But I m not convinced that s the case I don t feel like going back and re reading the old threads on the subject but it seems to me that by definition increased upwelling in one place must be matched by increased downwelling somewhere else The only thing I can think that would cause increased downwelling from higher temperatures is increased salinity But I don t see how in most areas this is likely Water may evaporate but it will cause increased rainfall and or run off True there can be currents which would move denser water to different areas but how do we tell changing current temperatures from changes of current locations etc More likely increased upwelling would be associated with ice accumulation or melting which can change salinity with more permanence Heath Posted Apr 14 2009 at 11 22 AM Permalink Can I make a request to the software guru on this site I typed an inquisitive comment about two paragraphs long and neglected forgot to include my name and e mail before submitting I got an error screen but in the process the text was lost One of those things I guess but perhaps a modification to the software could prevent this slightly irritating glitch Tim Channon Posted Apr 14 2009 at 1 37 PM Permalink Re Heath 7 Lets see what happens click Don t see much of a problem web site complains hit the browser back button and type this here Andrew Parker Posted Apr 14 2009 at 11 34 AM Permalink Heath If you value your thoughts compose your post on a word processor first save it then cut and paste into whatever web editor you are posting to This way if something happens to eat or snip your post you have a backup personal archive I hope this OT post survives long enough to get to Heath I don t mind if it disappears later tty Posted Apr 14 2009 at 12 45 PM Permalink The Moroccan upwelling system is a very old and stable feature that has apparently been going on at least since the Pliocene There is a Pliocene fossil site in Morocco that has Ostrich and Great Auk occurring together which is about as unlikely a combination that you can think of The Great Auk is gone but I remember seeing a razorbill bobbing around in Agadir harbour which is also rather odd in Africa A coastal uppwelling like this is presumably wind driven so I would expect the SST to reflect the amount of easterly or north easterly winds more than anything else jorgekafkazar Posted Apr 14 2009 at 10 00 PM Permalink Re tty 9 A coastal upwelling like this is presumably wind driven so I would expect the SST to reflect the amount of easterly or north easterly winds more than anything else Quite possibly Or possibly reduced surface seawater viscosity downwind of the upwelling That requires some solar heating but no wind anomaly Seawater viscosity is 100 times more sensitive to temperature than for example density Even so using upwelling as a proxy for temperature seems like Byzantine logic There s no extant quantified correlation between total upwelling at Point A and total temperature anomaly at Point B is there Maybe that explains the Z score juju stick Steve McIntyre Posted Apr 14 2009 at 10 08 PM Permalink Re jorgekafkazar 17 again this is NOT the first Team use of upwelling as a temperature proxy Moberg initiated this pernicious practice with his use of Arabian Sea G Bulloides David Black author of the Cariaco data set which was a good data set and promptly archived turned up here once He had viciously excoriated Soon and Baliunas for using Cariaco G Bulloides as a temperature proxy I asked him to comment on Moberg s use of G Bulloides an upwelling proxy in the Arabian Sea Unfortunately that was the last time that he showed up here as for some reason he didn t seem to want to explain the inconsistency jorgekafkazar Posted Apr 15 2009 at 10 56 AM Permalink Re Steve McIntyre 18 Yes more teleconnection mumbo jumbo qualitative hand waving without correlation Even assuming a small positive correlation between upwelling hither and temperature thither the amount of heating need not be at all significant The unstable temperature anomaly could be so minuscule as to make the proxy meaningless as well as transient David L Hagen Posted Apr 14 2009 at 1 16 PM Permalink JamesG cites Upwelling driven SSTs also vary out of phase with millennial scale changes in Northern Hemisphere temperature anomalies NHTAs and show relatively warm conditions during the Little Ice Age and relatively cool conditions during the Medieval Warm Period This is an amazing implicit affirmation of those major historic temperature changes by Trouet et al This is especially interesting after the effort to use the hockey stick graphs to erase all memory of the Medieval Warm Period prior to industrialization Heath Posted Apr 14 2009 at 4 05 PM Permalink Sorry if my complaint brought the thread off topic If it needs to be deleted I understand the desire to have an uncluttered article Not so much a complaint as an observation I was using another computer My home computer seems to keep the field information saved where my work computer doesn t Hitting the back icon on my browser erases the text Good suggestion about using microsoft word Believe me I ve done that before but sometimes i get hasty Still an improvement oportunity is there for someone with the desire Thanks Jeff Alberts Posted Apr 14 2009 at 5 08 PM Permalink Heath you don t need to use Word Notepad will do just fine bender Posted Apr 14 2009 at 9 12 PM Permalink Steve M Interesting interpretation of ITCZ shift as opposed to cool

    Original URL path: http://climateaudit.org/2009/04/14/more-z-score-opportunism/ (2016-02-09)
    Open archived version from archive

  • The Trouet Ocean Proxies « Climate Audit
    1018 http tomix homelinux org thomas eth 7 semester large scale climate variability WS 2006 2007 unterlagen edit droughts cook pdf Haug G H K A Hughen D M Sigman L C Peterson and U Rohl 2001 Southward migration of the intertropical convergence zone through the Holocene Science 293 1304 1308 Jenny B B L Valero Garcés R Villa Marti nez R Urrutia M Geyh and H Veit 2002 Early to mid Holocene aridity in Central Chile and the southern westerlies The Laguna Aculeo record 34 S Quaternary Research 58 no 2 160 170 Keigwin L D 1996 The Little Ice Age and Medieval Warm Period in the Sargasso Sea Science 274 no 5292 1503 Lund D C J Lynch Stieglitz and W B Curry 2006 Gulf Stream density structure and transport during the past millennium Nature 444 601 604 Sicre M A J Jacob U Ezat S Rousse C Kissel P Yiou J Eiríksson K L Knudsen E Jansen and J L Turon 2008 Decadal variability of sea surface temperatures off North Iceland over the last 2000 years Earth and Planetary Science Letters 268 no 1 2 137 142 Data Verschuren D K R Laird and B F Cumming 2000 Rainfall and drought in equatorial east Africa during the past 1 100 years Nature London 403 no 6768 410 414 Like this Like Loading Related This entry was written by Steve McIntyre posted on Apr 14 2009 at 11 45 AM filed under Ocean sediment Trouet 2009 and tagged alkenone Keigwin MD99 2275 ocean ocean sediment PL07 73 BC Proxies Sargasso Sea sediment sicre Trouet Bookmark the permalink Follow any comments here with the RSS feed for this post Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed More Z Score Opportunism Tropical Troposphere March 2009 12 Comments Follow the Money Posted Apr 14 2009 at 1 20 PM Permalink re Cariaco Trouet don t use Black s data but an earlier 2001 data set by Haug Black s data ends in 1990 Does Haug s stop c 1900 as per the appearance of the yellow spaghetto in the N Atlantic graph JamesG Posted Apr 14 2009 at 1 48 PM Permalink The skuppering notion appears to lie exclusively in the idea expressed by Truet that Since the NAO is no longer predominantly positive it cannot be the cause of recent higher temperatures However if you only look at one of the oscillationa then you are perhaps missing something There is a fine juxtaposition here http climateresearchnews com 2009 04 et tu trouet with the recent paper by Wang Swanson and Tsonis GRL 2009 The pacemaker of major climate shifts who consider the network of North Atlantic Oscillation NAO Pacific Decadal Oscillation PDO El Nino Southern Oscillation ENSO and North Pacific Index NPI and conclude rather differently from Trouet ie they say the entire 20th century anomaly can be explained by the collective behaviours of all cycles and that we are in for a period of cooling then warming then cooling again But the unscientific rush to judgment statements of Trouet and Mann ignore that realists have been saying all along that the oceans were more important than had been assumed Far from being skuppered we are vindicated The Trouet s of this world are in reality being forced bit by bit towards the realist side fighting a rearguard action all the way Harold Morris Posted Apr 14 2009 at 3 38 PM Permalink Am I the only one who sees the Lund chart backwards Andrew Posted Apr 14 2009 at 4 02 PM Permalink Re Harold Morris 3 It s been flipped because the years before present notation is confusing when comparing with year AD BC notation Jeff Alberts Posted Apr 14 2009 at 4 05 PM Permalink Re Andrew 4 I t ndid neve eciton Andrew Posted Apr 14 2009 at 7 03 PM Permalink Re Jeff Alberts 5 The really funny part is that your word order is right but the reverse letter order makes you read like Yoda notice even didn t I D You know I wonder if I should ask my relatives if they have noticed a transport increase we live in Florida It might also be worth noting another study by Lund and Curry in 2006 showing the MWP in the Straits of Florida Lund D C and Curry W 2006 Florida Current surface temperature and salinity variability during the last millennium Paleoceanography 21 10 1029 2005PA001218 Jeff Alberts Posted Apr 15 2009 at 5 25 PM Permalink Re Andrew 7 So certain are you Andrew Posted Apr 15 2009 at 6 07 PM Permalink Re Jeff Alberts 11 Alright knock it off or we ll get snipped Here is the graph from the paper I mentioned in 7 Now the peak is obviously earlier than the usual Mannian time period but still interesting isn t it Compare with the above current transport proxy Harold Morris Posted Apr 14 2009 at 6 20 PM Permalink Thanks Andrew I read right through the word oriented and did not catch it Then I was so fascinated with the effect that I thought I was caught in a Linux mirror Steve McIntyre Posted Apr 14 2009 at 11 00 PM Permalink I ve plotted the Sicre Iceland data which has a very pronounced MWP not surprising since Iceland is the heart of the conceded MWP but still a very pronounced result in a high resolution series Mike Lorrey Posted Apr 15 2009 at 12 00 PM Permalink What is Trouet saying about NZ and Aussie speleotherms now BTW I love the smackdown of MWP record after MWP record from all these regions This is the part of the drama where the serial killer suspect is in interrogation and the cop slaps down photo after photo evidence after evidence So when do we see a pilot show for CSI Global Warming Craig Loehle Posted Apr 15 2009 at 1 21 PM Permalink Re Mike Lorrey 9 The problem

    Original URL path: http://climateaudit.org/2009/04/14/the-trouet-ocean-proxies/ (2016-02-09)
    Open archived version from archive

  • alkenone « Climate Audit
    MD95 2011 MD95 2043 OCE326 GGC30 Comments 337 Hiding the Decline MD01 2421 Mar 17 2013 11 58 AM As noted in my previous post Marcott Shakun Clark and Mix disappeared two alkenone cores from the 1940 population both of which were highly negative In addition they made some surprising additions to the 1940 population including three cores whose coretops were dated by competent specialists 500 1000 years earlier While the article says that ages By Steve McIntyre Posted in Multiproxy Studies Ocean sediment Uncategorized Also tagged marcott md01 2421 Comments 242 The Marcott Shakun Dating Service Mar 16 2013 1 19 PM Marcott Shakun Clark and Mix did not use the published dates for ocean cores instead substituting their own dates The validity of Marcott Shakun re dating will be discussed below but first to show that the re dating matters TM climate science here is a graph showing reconstructions using alkenones 31 of 73 proxies in Marcott style comparing the By Steve McIntyre Posted in Multiproxy Studies Ocean sediment Uncategorized Also tagged marcott Comments 280 More and more concerned about our statement Apr 8 2010 6 56 PM In a previous post I reported that Coordinating Lead Author Overpeck wanted to deal a mortal blow to the misuse of supposed warm period terms and myths in the literature The MWP was one such target the Holocene Optimum was another Overpeck said that there was no need to go into details on any but By Steve McIntyre Posted in climategate Holocene Optimum Also tagged holocene optimum leduc lorenz overpeck upwelling 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

    Original URL path: http://climateaudit.org/tag/alkenone/ (2016-02-09)
    Open archived version from archive

  • geob6008 « Climate Audit
    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 Newbies Links Acronyms Latex Symbols MBH 98 Steve s Public Data Archive WDCP Wegman Reply to Stupak Wegman Report Weblogs and resources Ross McKitrick Surface Stations Archives Archives Select Month February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April

    Original URL path: http://climateaudit.org/tag/geob6008/ (2016-02-09)
    Open archived version from archive

  • geob8331 « Climate Audit
    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 Newbies Links Acronyms Latex Symbols MBH 98 Steve s Public Data Archive WDCP Wegman Reply to Stupak Wegman Report Weblogs and resources Ross McKitrick Surface Stations Archives Archives Select Month February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 October 2004 January 2000 NOTICE Click on the

    Original URL path: http://climateaudit.org/tag/geob8331/ (2016-02-09)
    Open archived version from archive

  • leduc « Climate Audit
    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 Newbies Links Acronyms Latex Symbols MBH 98 Steve s Public Data Archive WDCP Wegman Reply to Stupak Wegman Report Weblogs and resources Ross McKitrick Surface Stations Archives Archives Select Month February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May

    Original URL path: http://climateaudit.org/tag/leduc/ (2016-02-09)
    Open archived version from archive

  • marcott « Climate Audit
    using examples other than the one that they re trying to prove Marcott s uncertainty calculation is merely the most By Steve McIntyre Posted in Multiproxy Studies Uncategorized Comments 202 Marcott Monte Carlo Apr 4 2013 5 54 PM So far the focus of the discussion of the Marcott et al paper has been on the manipulation of core dates and their effect on the uptick at the recent end of the reconstruction Apologists such as Racehorse Nick have been treating the earlier portion as a given The reconstruction shows that mean global temperature By RomanM Posted in Multiproxy Studies Uncategorized Comments 266 April Fools Day for Marcott et al Apr 2 2013 2 20 PM Q Why did realclimate publish the Marcott FAQ on Easter Sunday A Because if they d waited until Monday everyone would have thought it was an April Fools joke By Steve McIntyre Posted in Multiproxy Studies Uncategorized Comments 128 The Marcott Filibuster Mar 31 2013 12 46 PM Marcott et al have posted their long promised FAQ at realclimate here Without providing any links to or citation of Climate Audit they now concede 20th century portion of our paleotemperature stack is not statistically robust cannot be considered representative of global temperature changes and therefore is not the basis of any of our conclusions Otherwise By Steve McIntyre Posted in Multiproxy Studies Uncategorized Comments 283 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

    Original URL path: http://climateaudit.org/tag/marcott/ (2016-02-09)
    Open archived version from archive



  •