Comments on: Cicerone of NAS Acquiesces in Data Obstruction http://climateaudit.org/2007/07/30/cicerone-of-nas-refuses-to-require-thompson-to-archive-data/ by Steve McIntyre Sat, 18 May 2013 10:00:57 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.com/ By: K http://climateaudit.org/2007/07/30/cicerone-of-nas-refuses-to-require-thompson-to-archive-data/#comment-96791 Thu, 30 Aug 2007 20:27:32 +0000 http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=1833#comment-96791 #126, 127. O’Toole and Pittman.

I hope the matter is pursued as Pittman suggests. But in addition to asking what procedures, etc. they used I would ask them explicitly where the data is today and/or what PNAS paper meets the requirement.

Asking for the methodology they used will just let them refer you to a boilerplate handbook of standards and guidelines. It will not lead to the data.

]]> By: John F. Pittman http://climateaudit.org/2007/07/30/cicerone-of-nas-refuses-to-require-thompson-to-archive-data/#comment-96790 Thu, 30 Aug 2007 15:34:51 +0000 http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=1833#comment-96790 JIm O’Toole #126 It was my understanding that Lonnie Thompson did not meet the stated requirements. COuld you ask them their methodology for determining how Dr. Thompson met their requirements in that it appears that there is disagreemtnt and that their explanation of how Dr. Thompson met the requirements would be appreciated?

]]> By: Jim O'Toole http://climateaudit.org/2007/07/30/cicerone-of-nas-refuses-to-require-thompson-to-archive-data/#comment-96789 Thu, 30 Aug 2007 15:23:30 +0000 http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=1833#comment-96789 Re: #112,

FWIW, on August 1st, I wrote Cicerone a request as follows:

Dear Dr. Cicerone,

It has come to my attention that Lonnie Thompson of Ohio State University has failed to provide a complete archive of ice core sample data from Dunde, Dasuopu, Puruogangri, Guliya, Sajama, Huascaran and Quelccaya from which the purported 5-year averages (located at http://www.pnas.org/cgi/data/0603900103/DC1/2) or the inconsistent 10-year averages (located for Dunde at ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/paleo/icecore/trop/dunde/dunde-d18o.txt) can be calculated or to provide an archive of sample chemistry data from which his dating of these cores can be confirmed. These data averages were used in the PNAS article “Abrupt tropical climate change: Past and present”.

It is my understanding that you have been requested to require Dr Thompson to provide an adequate archive and elected not to do so. I think this is unfortunate given your stature as president of the National Academy of Sciences.

Climate change is an important issue; in order to ensure the best possible understanding, all relevant data should be archived, allowing outiside scrutiny.

I request that you re-consider your decision and ask Dr. Thompson to provide a complete archive of all relevant isotope and chemical information on a sample-by-sample basis for all ice cores discussed in the PNAS article as quickly as possible.

Regards,
Jim O’Toole
Bristol, Connecticut

On August 2nd, I received the following reply from Ken Fulton, publisher of PNAS:

I write in response to your message to NAS president Ralph J. Cicerone about data collected by Lonnie Thompson. A paper by Thompson et. al. was published in PNAS, whose editors informed Dr. Cicerone that they concur in Dr. Thompson’s statement that he has met the conditions of publication required by the policies governing materials and data availability of the journal As noted in PNAS “Information for Authors,” these policies stipulate that data be provided in a public repository and/or as supplemental information to a PNAS paper online. Dr. Thompson and his coauthors fulfilled both of those requirements.

Practices with respect to data deposition vary from discipline to discipline, and the Academies’ Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy is the midst of the major study on “Assuring the Integrity of Research Data in a Digital Age,” which will consider these and other important issues.

Best regards,
Kenneth R. Fulton
Executive Director, NAS
Publisher, PNAS

]]> By: Robert in Calgary http://climateaudit.org/2007/07/30/cicerone-of-nas-refuses-to-require-thompson-to-archive-data/#comment-96788 Sat, 04 Aug 2007 17:54:20 +0000 http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=1833#comment-96788 I ignore any posts by BCL or TCO (whether this person is one moron or a group of morons)

If people are fed up with these two, ignore them completely. Just skim by their posts.

]]> By: TCO http://climateaudit.org/2007/07/30/cicerone-of-nas-refuses-to-require-thompson-to-archive-data/#comment-96787 Sat, 04 Aug 2007 17:51:30 +0000 http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=1833#comment-96787 Paul, there are many answers I could give you. I could discuss how being honest and selfless is a form of bravery. I could cite your post as the rightie inverse of leftist faith-based world view. I could explain how my sins do not validate Steve’s sins. I could use the numbered fallacy list. But I will do none of that. I will just say…Steve: please erase 123 and then erase my response.

As debate over personalities of commenters are off topic to the Cic data request head post.b

]]> By: paul graham http://climateaudit.org/2007/07/30/cicerone-of-nas-refuses-to-require-thompson-to-archive-data/#comment-96786 Sat, 04 Aug 2007 17:38:52 +0000 http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=1833#comment-96786 TCO and BCL your arrogant posts only damage you and boost the respect that I have for Steve McIntyre.

You may think your our superiors, we should all shut up and do as we’re told; but all that does is make me trust Steve and the other contributors more.

So I ask you TCO, what give you the right to class us as hoi polloi’ and twidgety little sophists’. What are your credentials, what are the papers you’ve published and how can you call any scientist ballsy’ it’s hardly a life threatening occupation.

]]> By: TCO http://climateaudit.org/2007/07/30/cicerone-of-nas-refuses-to-require-thompson-to-archive-data/#comment-96785 Fri, 03 Aug 2007 18:48:53 +0000 http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=1833#comment-96785 “multiplicity” (darn comment box)

]]> By: TCO http://climateaudit.org/2007/07/30/cicerone-of-nas-refuses-to-require-thompson-to-archive-data/#comment-96784 Fri, 03 Aug 2007 18:48:04 +0000 http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=1833#comment-96784 Dave:

Discuss my method of commenting in Unthreaded. The flutter-clacking about “how TCO talks” is more of a distraction than my knives themselves.

Oh…and you only notice the distraction because of the enraging nature of it (even ifIF it is off topic.) and you yourself, are one of the worst offenders at off topic stuff. You speculate in content threads on my lutiplicty, etc.

]]> By: Sam Urbinto http://climateaudit.org/2007/07/30/cicerone-of-nas-refuses-to-require-thompson-to-archive-data/#comment-96783 Fri, 03 Aug 2007 17:35:38 +0000 http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=1833#comment-96783 #119 Ah, yes, as I said in #118 (which I was writing, and so didn’t even see #117) it’s a very good learning experience, isn’t it? It’s always nice to have people teaching us by example.

I had my own point made for me while I was making it myself.

But I’m sure that’s nothing more than shrill silliness.

]]> By: Dave Dardinger http://climateaudit.org/2007/07/30/cicerone-of-nas-refuses-to-require-thompson-to-archive-data/#comment-96782 Fri, 03 Aug 2007 17:24:07 +0000 http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=1833#comment-96782 re: #117 TCO,

I responded that it was not sufficient or fair

Just went back and reread your responses to Steve M in order. It’s quite clear what you do. You make a general remark, while sticking a little knife in Steve. He replies. You make a variation of your general remark and then stick in another knife. This continues as long as Steve will allow it. You never accept anything Steve says and always denegrate him in one way or another (while claiming to like him and wanting to help him). I was uncertain what you were about before this little excapade. Now I’ve arrived at the conclusion you’re just a more sophisticated troll than average. Bye.

]]>