<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: A Summary of MBH98 Replication Issues</title>
	<atom:link href="http://climateaudit.org/2005/06/28/a-summary-of-mbh98-replication-issues/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://climateaudit.org/2005/06/28/a-summary-of-mbh98-replication-issues/</link>
	<description>by Steve McIntyre</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 21 May 2013 05:19:05 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dave Dardinger</title>
		<link>http://climateaudit.org/2005/06/28/a-summary-of-mbh98-replication-issues/#comment-34150</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dave Dardinger]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Jun 2005 21:05:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=240#comment-34150</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This is one of the sort of things which makes this site infinitely superior to RealClimate.  You have tons of actual scientific data, directly related to the Mann papers (and others).  If Mann, et. al. were confident of their results they would be discussing at least some of these  items to show that they were invalid complaints.  It wouldn&#039;t take many disproofs of your many items to make people doubt everything you present.  But instead they&#039;ve circled the wagons and haven&#039;t even brought up one point to discuss on their site.  Instead they discuss issues designed to advance Global Warming as a fact without defending their own proported facts.

I think their lack of desire to engage on the issues is colored by the anti-Lomborg fiasco of a few years ago.  Complaints were made about his work, but he was able to rebut them and the complainers were left with egg on their faces.  Now it appears the plan of the Hockey Team is to answer as little as possible and hope their problems go away.

At any rate, I know that if they actually did issue attempted rebuttals you&#039;d be on them like a chicken on a junebug.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is one of the sort of things which makes this site infinitely superior to RealClimate.  You have tons of actual scientific data, directly related to the Mann papers (and others).  If Mann, et. al. were confident of their results they would be discussing at least some of these  items to show that they were invalid complaints.  It wouldn&#8217;t take many disproofs of your many items to make people doubt everything you present.  But instead they&#8217;ve circled the wagons and haven&#8217;t even brought up one point to discuss on their site.  Instead they discuss issues designed to advance Global Warming as a fact without defending their own proported facts.</p>
<p>I think their lack of desire to engage on the issues is colored by the anti-Lomborg fiasco of a few years ago.  Complaints were made about his work, but he was able to rebut them and the complainers were left with egg on their faces.  Now it appears the plan of the Hockey Team is to answer as little as possible and hope their problems go away.</p>
<p>At any rate, I know that if they actually did issue attempted rebuttals you&#8217;d be on them like a chicken on a junebug.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
