Also, a very well known scientist in the mesoscale meteorology world (at least, I respect him and his science very much) has written his own “review” of the peer review process here, I think some of you might be interested to read it.

Examination of the NGDC data base indicates that the original
Esper et al. reconstruction appears to be from the Boniface site. A record from
nearby St. Anne also shows many similarities to Boniface (r=0.66), extends closer in time to the present, but is also slightly shorter (the Boniface/St. Anne correlation is 0.70).

Willis E thanks much for your comments on the quoted parts of the paper. When I first read Steve M’s quotes from this paper, I am thinking is it me or does the approach in this paper just seem a bit loosey/goosey. When I read the above excerpt I was getting confused thinking Steve M had put some of his own comments in quotes.

Mackenzie Delta: The original time series (Szeicz and MacDonald 1995) provided by Esper et al. only had a 0.04 correlation with the 1880-1960 decadal average of NH temperature…We nevertheless included this site for the sake of completeness and in order to include as many long sites as possible.

That one really bothered me.

Self-Concerned Climate Scientist: where exactly is the “statistical bs” that we should lay off of?

I think that post was intentionally facetious.

Mark

Come on over to RC and discuss these issues there

My place or yours?

Jokes aside. I’ve posted two good questions in the past at RC (on the statistics of hurricane trends and on the constrainedness of GCM parametrization) and gotten next to nothing in reply. What little I got indicated a heads-in-the-sand/maintain-the-consensus attitude towards climate science. At CA you can actually generate a discussion and learn something. Example: Dr. Judith Curry and Dr. Isaac Held at CA provided answers to my questions that could not be gotten over at Consensus-Keepers.

Consensus-keeping is inherently anti-scientific. But as you point out: it’s good for Climate Science Inc.

Stick around and ask a question, or comment on a post. You might actually learn something. Or maybe you have something to teach us? What’s your take on bcp’s, Yamal, extrapolative RegEM, confidence interval estimation, and the like?

What is really p…..g me off is that these silly questions you guys are asking are making it harder for me to get my grants. How would you feel if the income you need to feed your wife and kids is threatened? Hey?