Comments on: Polar Urals #4: “Heartrot Bias”? http://climateaudit.org/2005/04/06/polar-urals-4-heartrot-bias/ by Steve McIntyre Sat, 18 May 2013 12:05:12 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.com/ By: TCO http://climateaudit.org/2005/04/06/polar-urals-4-heartrot-bias/#comment-32990 Sun, 18 Sep 2005 21:48:08 +0000 /?p=165#comment-32990 This is a different issue conceptually and at a different level of speculation and covering different territory (general methodoloty versus specific study). no reason to link it with Polar Urals. You link it because you’re concentrating on “mistakes by stick team” or even “bias by the stick team” rather than “what is interesting out there in the science”. but from a science standpoint, they are seperate methodological issues. Different pubs, Steve.

From a methodological standpoint, I have a lot of questions about the RCS. Implicitly they are trying to do the right thing by decomvoluting a confounding variable, but I still wonder about things like survivorship bias, epoch differences, etc. Would be easier to tear apart the RCS if it were a more established technique. Maybe you should even suggest the right way (best way, least worst way) to do RCS, Steve.

]]>