I’ve just noticed at the UCAR website that Ammann and Wahl now say that their CC re-submission was “provisionally accepted” on Dec 12. I have no information on what a "provisional acceptance" means, but it’s certainly a coincidence that the “provisional acceptance” occurred only 3 days after GRL agreed to send their previously rejected GRL comment out for review, together with an expected reply from us. This is a second coincidence: they re-submitted to CC on Sept 27, a few days after they were allowed to re-submit to GRL on Sept 25 after getting their editor changed at GRL. Maybe it’s just a coincidence; but perhaps CC acceptance is contingent on their GRL submission not being rejected another time.
Here is a summary of the chronology, showing some of the intricate timings. Note that Ammann and Wahl cited their GRL submission to CC in support of their refusal to provide cross-validation statistics in response to a reviewer request, even though the GRL submission had already been rejected.
Chronology of Ammann and Wahl Submissions
|May 11||UCAR press release http://www.ucar.edu/news/releases/2005/ammann.shtml
Their results appear in two new research papers submitted for review to the journals Geophysical Research Letters and Climatic Change. The authors invite researchers and others to use the code for their own evaluation of the method.
Ammann and Wahl’s findings contradict an assertion by McIntyre and McKitrick that 15th century global temperatures rival those of the late 20th century and therefore make the hockey stick-shaped graph inaccurate. They also dispute McIntyre and McKitrick’s alleged identification of a fundamental flaw that would significantly bias the MBH climate reconstruction toward a hockey stick shape. Ammann and Wahl conclude that the highly publicized criticisms of the MBH graph are unfounded.
|May 12||Request from CC to review Ammann-Wahl submission|
|May 23||GRL receives Ammann-Wahl comment|
|June 6||Request to CC for Ammann-Wahl to provide cross-validation statistics|
|June 6||GRL rejects Ammann-Wahl comment|
|June 10||Ammann and Wahl refuse to provide R2 and
other cross-validation statistics. In their refusal, without disclosing the rejection of their GRL submission, Ammann and Wahl use their rejected GRL comment as authority as follows: "In addition, [we] have shown in other material referenced in mss. #3321 that the analysis of McIntrye and McKitrick in GRL (2005)–which claims RE significance levels are improperly determined by Mann, Bradley, Hughes–is itself deeply flawed."
|June 15||Request to CC for a copy of Wahl.and Ammann, C.: "Stationarity and Fidelity of Simulated El Niàƒ-Southern Oscillation Climate Proxies over the Last Millenium in Forced Transient AOGCM Output". Their website shows that they used R2 statistics; it also stated: "This result indicates that modern-period validations of reconstructions based on relatively poor-quality proxies can give a strongly false sense of security about the likely long-term reliability of these reconstructions."|
|June 16||Ammann and Wahl refuse to provide copy of article, unless reviewer identifies himself|
|June 22||Letter to CC objecting to Ammann and Wahl refusal to provide cross-validation statistics, including a request for the "approximate anticipated publication date of the other material" referred to in their letter of June 10|
|June 23||Letter from Barton Committee to Mann, asking,
inter alia, whether Mann had withheld R2 and other verification
statistics and, if so, why
|July 5||Review of Ammann and Wahl submitted to CC. CC notified that Ammann and Wahl submission to GRL had been rejected, raising pointed questions about integrity of Ammann and Wahl letter of June 10, citing the rejected article.|
|July 7||EGU letter to Barton Committee referring to Ammann and Wahl press release|
|July 8||Ammann and Wahl respond to June 22 letter acknowledging that the GRL submission was "declined", but stating that "We disagree with this decision from an editorial policy standpoint, however, we are planning to submit this text to another journal besides GRL."|
|July 15||Mann letter to Barton Committee citing Ammann and Wahl article and press release|
|July 21||Houghton evidence to Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, citing the UCAR press release of May 11|
|Sept 25||Re-submission of Ammann and Wahl Comment to GRL|
|Sept 27||Revision of Ammann and Wahl submission to CC|
|Dec 9||GRL decides to move forward with review of Ammann and Wahl comment, together with reply from M&M. Notice from GRL to M&M to prepare Reply. (Email cleared on Dec. 14 due to travel to AGU Dec. 9-13)|
|Dec 12||"Provisionally accepted" at CC|
|Dec. 13||Lunch with Ammann at AGU conference|