<?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: What other data series could be plugged in?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://climateaudit.org/2007/10/30/what-other-data-series-could-be-plugged-in/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://climateaudit.org/2007/10/30/what-other-data-series-could-be-plugged-in/</link>
	<description>by Steve McIntyre</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 19 Jun 2013 02:29:14 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pseudoproxies in Mann et al 2007 &#171; Climate Audit</title>
		<link>http://climateaudit.org/2007/10/30/what-other-data-series-could-be-plugged-in/#comment-330130</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Pseudoproxies in Mann et al 2007 &#171; Climate Audit]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Mar 2012 22:55:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=2304#comment-330130</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] networks constructed to emulate the MBH98 network (Huybers #2 and Reply to Huybers) also here and I&#8217;ll try to tie these three different studies [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] networks constructed to emulate the MBH98 network (Huybers #2 and Reply to Huybers) also here and I&#8217;ll try to tie these three different studies [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: UC</title>
		<link>http://climateaudit.org/2007/10/30/what-other-data-series-could-be-plugged-in/#comment-113993</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[UC]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Jul 2008 09:36:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=2304#comment-113993</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Mauri,



&lt;blockquote&gt;Shamed for my over three-week delayed reply!
&lt;/blockquote&gt;


No worries, I just read your reply (remembered this because of discussion in more recent thread, http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=3348 )  ;) .

&lt;blockquote&gt;But if you have any better ideas how to deal with tree-ring based temperature estimate confidence limits, just let us know: we try to recalculate our old data based on your instructions - and also our new one, about 1.5 more replicated data!
&lt;/blockquote&gt;


 I have some ideas, but first I&#039;d like to see a reference where the conventional method is described thoroughly.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mauri,</p>
<blockquote><p>Shamed for my over three-week delayed reply!
</p></blockquote>
<p>No worries, I just read your reply (remembered this because of discussion in more recent thread, <a href="http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=3348" rel="nofollow">http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=3348</a> )  <img src='http://s1.wp.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';)' class='wp-smiley' />  .</p>
<blockquote><p>But if you have any better ideas how to deal with tree-ring based temperature estimate confidence limits, just let us know: we try to recalculate our old data based on your instructions &#8211; and also our new one, about 1.5 more replicated data!
</p></blockquote>
<p> I have some ideas, but first I&#8217;d like to see a reference where the conventional method is described thoroughly.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mauri Timonen</title>
		<link>http://climateaudit.org/2007/10/30/what-other-data-series-could-be-plugged-in/#comment-113992</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Mauri Timonen]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Nov 2007 21:07:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=2304#comment-113992</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[UC #35 November 4th, 2007: Interesting article, short question: how did you calculate 95 % confidence limits in Figure 1 middle plot? Clearly something different than 2X sample std of calibration residuals

Sorry again for my learning to use this forum! My message was supposed to sound something like this:

Shamed for my over three-week delayed reply! But I, unfortinately, have not, during this period, had a possibility to recalculate our seven-year old data. It still seems to me that the confidence limits are most probably properly calculated. We used a simple tree-ring index to temperature conversion to create the modelled average temperature data. Deriving the confidence limits based on this approach, give more accurate results with more replications and vice versa. If you have any better ideas how to deal with tree-ring based temperature estimate confidence limits, just let us know: we try to recalculate our old data based on your instructions - and also our new one, about 1.5 more replicated data! And if you also would like to try with our data, just let us know,  and we are ready to consider to cooperate!
Cheers, Mauri!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>UC #35 November 4th, 2007: Interesting article, short question: how did you calculate 95 % confidence limits in Figure 1 middle plot? Clearly something different than 2X sample std of calibration residuals</p>
<p>Sorry again for my learning to use this forum! My message was supposed to sound something like this:</p>
<p>Shamed for my over three-week delayed reply! But I, unfortinately, have not, during this period, had a possibility to recalculate our seven-year old data. It still seems to me that the confidence limits are most probably properly calculated. We used a simple tree-ring index to temperature conversion to create the modelled average temperature data. Deriving the confidence limits based on this approach, give more accurate results with more replications and vice versa. If you have any better ideas how to deal with tree-ring based temperature estimate confidence limits, just let us know: we try to recalculate our old data based on your instructions &#8211; and also our new one, about 1.5 more replicated data! And if you also would like to try with our data, just let us know,  and we are ready to consider to cooperate!<br />
Cheers, Mauri!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mauri Timonen</title>
		<link>http://climateaudit.org/2007/10/30/what-other-data-series-could-be-plugged-in/#comment-113991</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Mauri Timonen]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Nov 2007 20:57:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=2304#comment-113991</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[UC #35 November 4th, 2007:  Interesting article, short question: how did you calculate 95 % confidence limits in Figure 1 middle plot? Clearly something different than 2X sample std of calibration residuals

Shamed for my over three-week delayed reply! But I, unfortinately, have not, during this period, had a possibility to recalculate our seven-year old data. But it still seems to me that the confidence limits are most probably properly calculated. But we used a simple tree-ring index to temperature conversion to create the modelled average temperature data. Deriving the confidence limits based on this approach, give more accurate results with more replications and vice versa. But if you have any better ideas how to deal with tree-ring based temperature estimate confidence limits, just let us know: we try to recalculate our old data based on your instructions - and also our new one, about 1.5 more replicated data!  And if you also would like to try with our data, just let us know and we are ready to consider to cooperate!  Cheers, Mauri
Cheers, Mauri!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>UC #35 November 4th, 2007:  Interesting article, short question: how did you calculate 95 % confidence limits in Figure 1 middle plot? Clearly something different than 2X sample std of calibration residuals</p>
<p>Shamed for my over three-week delayed reply! But I, unfortinately, have not, during this period, had a possibility to recalculate our seven-year old data. But it still seems to me that the confidence limits are most probably properly calculated. But we used a simple tree-ring index to temperature conversion to create the modelled average temperature data. Deriving the confidence limits based on this approach, give more accurate results with more replications and vice versa. But if you have any better ideas how to deal with tree-ring based temperature estimate confidence limits, just let us know: we try to recalculate our old data based on your instructions &#8211; and also our new one, about 1.5 more replicated data!  And if you also would like to try with our data, just let us know and we are ready to consider to cooperate!  Cheers, Mauri<br />
Cheers, Mauri!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Geoff Sherrington</title>
		<link>http://climateaudit.org/2007/10/30/what-other-data-series-could-be-plugged-in/#comment-113990</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Geoff Sherrington]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 11 Nov 2007 03:50:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=2304#comment-113990</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Re $ 29 Steve

Univariate regression, C of E marriages and alcoholism. Possibly not.

The river waters of England were so polluted for centuries that death was a common result from drinking water. You cannot marry too easily when dead, though some wives accuse husbands of a similar state. The cure was firstly to add alcohol, which killed a number of bugs. Sci-Am once had an article which concluded that for some centuries the usual condition of the European populace was &quot;inebriated&quot;, even down to small children. It had population estimates of alcoholism.

Matters improved a bit when tea came from China before 1800, because boiling the water also killed nasties and tea left a clearer mind than alcohol. Next development was chlorination of public water supplies, which started in London in 1903. We presume that this also caused a lower reliance on grog, but then one has to make a Skill Judgement based on Experience and Undoubted Intelligence and Excellence in Chosen Field of Knowledge.

The question is, with fewer people sozzled, would this lead to more marriages (through people of marriage age being more prevalent and more presentable) or fewer marriages (because sober people might think twice before tying the knot). So, the marriage rate was not a constant - it was perturbed by known secondary effects, calling for multivariate stats.

The interesting question is why the Church of England was selected for the stats comparison, and not another Church. One can predict that the Methodist Church would have a systematic bias, as Methodists did not make love standing up. (Reason? It might encourage them to dance). The Catholic Church was over-represented by people of Irish descent and as a group they drank so much that they would not accurately recall or record if they were married or not, once or more, in sequence or simultaneously.

The closest answer I can give to the Choice of C of E was that they were sexy little devils, with the males well into the art of cherry picking before, during or after marriage.

See, nothing is really very simple in stats.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Re $ 29 Steve</p>
<p>Univariate regression, C of E marriages and alcoholism. Possibly not.</p>
<p>The river waters of England were so polluted for centuries that death was a common result from drinking water. You cannot marry too easily when dead, though some wives accuse husbands of a similar state. The cure was firstly to add alcohol, which killed a number of bugs. Sci-Am once had an article which concluded that for some centuries the usual condition of the European populace was &#8220;inebriated&#8221;, even down to small children. It had population estimates of alcoholism.</p>
<p>Matters improved a bit when tea came from China before 1800, because boiling the water also killed nasties and tea left a clearer mind than alcohol. Next development was chlorination of public water supplies, which started in London in 1903. We presume that this also caused a lower reliance on grog, but then one has to make a Skill Judgement based on Experience and Undoubted Intelligence and Excellence in Chosen Field of Knowledge.</p>
<p>The question is, with fewer people sozzled, would this lead to more marriages (through people of marriage age being more prevalent and more presentable) or fewer marriages (because sober people might think twice before tying the knot). So, the marriage rate was not a constant &#8211; it was perturbed by known secondary effects, calling for multivariate stats.</p>
<p>The interesting question is why the Church of England was selected for the stats comparison, and not another Church. One can predict that the Methodist Church would have a systematic bias, as Methodists did not make love standing up. (Reason? It might encourage them to dance). The Catholic Church was over-represented by people of Irish descent and as a group they drank so much that they would not accurately recall or record if they were married or not, once or more, in sequence or simultaneously.</p>
<p>The closest answer I can give to the Choice of C of E was that they were sexy little devils, with the males well into the art of cherry picking before, during or after marriage.</p>
<p>See, nothing is really very simple in stats.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Geoff Sherrington</title>
		<link>http://climateaudit.org/2007/10/30/what-other-data-series-could-be-plugged-in/#comment-113989</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Geoff Sherrington]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 11 Nov 2007 03:15:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=2304#comment-113989</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Re # 18 MrPete

An old one but a good one:

Storks Deliver Babies (p = 0.008)  Robert Matthews
&lt;em&gt;There is a highly statistically significant correlation between stork populations and human birth rates across Europe. While storks may not deliver babies, unthinking interpretation of correlation and p-values can certainly deliver unreliable conclusions. &lt;/em&gt;]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Re # 18 MrPete</p>
<p>An old one but a good one:</p>
<p>Storks Deliver Babies (p = 0.008)  Robert Matthews<br />
<em>There is a highly statistically significant correlation between stork populations and human birth rates across Europe. While storks may not deliver babies, unthinking interpretation of correlation and p-values can certainly deliver unreliable conclusions. </em></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: AnonyMousey</title>
		<link>http://climateaudit.org/2007/10/30/what-other-data-series-could-be-plugged-in/#comment-113988</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[AnonyMousey]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Nov 2007 20:22:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=2304#comment-113988</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&quot;Tech PC1&#8243;, which I obtained by replacing bristlecones with weekly tech stock prices&quot;

Reverse the chronological order of the stock prices and try again.  It is possible that stock prices have tended to go up recently; see if the reversed order still produces a graph with a recent climb.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Tech PC1&#8243;, which I obtained by replacing bristlecones with weekly tech stock prices&#8221;</p>
<p>Reverse the chronological order of the stock prices and try again.  It is possible that stock prices have tended to go up recently; see if the reversed order still produces a graph with a recent climb.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: UC</title>
		<link>http://climateaudit.org/2007/10/30/what-other-data-series-could-be-plugged-in/#comment-113987</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[UC]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 04 Nov 2007 13:10:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=2304#comment-113987</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[#35

Mauri,



&lt;blockquote&gt;About our techniques to calibrate the index to the temperature: Helama, S., Lindholm, M., Timonen, M., Eronen, M. &amp; Meriläinen, J. 2002. Part 2: Interannual-to-centennial variability in summer temperatures in northern Fennoscandia during the last 7500 years extracted from tree-rings of Scots pine. The Holocene 12(6): 681-687
&lt;/blockquote&gt;


Interesting article, short question: how did you calculate 95 % confidence limits in Figure 1 middle plot? Clearly something different than 2X sample std of calibration residuals.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>#35</p>
<p>Mauri,</p>
<blockquote><p>About our techniques to calibrate the index to the temperature: Helama, S., Lindholm, M., Timonen, M., Eronen, M. &amp; Meriläinen, J. 2002. Part 2: Interannual-to-centennial variability in summer temperatures in northern Fennoscandia during the last 7500 years extracted from tree-rings of Scots pine. The Holocene 12(6): 681-687
</p></blockquote>
<p>Interesting article, short question: how did you calculate 95 % confidence limits in Figure 1 middle plot? Clearly something different than 2X sample std of calibration residuals.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: MrPete</title>
		<link>http://climateaudit.org/2007/10/30/what-other-data-series-could-be-plugged-in/#comment-113986</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[MrPete]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 03 Nov 2007 12:22:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=2304#comment-113986</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Cheerleading from the peanut gallery... welcome from a fellow Finn! (I&#039;m half Finnish -- Wainionpaa :) )]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Cheerleading from the peanut gallery&#8230; welcome from a fellow Finn! (I&#8217;m half Finnish &#8212; Wainionpaa <img src='http://s0.wp.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' />  )</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mauri Timonen</title>
		<link>http://climateaudit.org/2007/10/30/what-other-data-series-could-be-plugged-in/#comment-113985</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Mauri Timonen]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 03 Nov 2007 09:12:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=2304#comment-113985</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Re: 10,26,30,31,33,34
Jean S and Steven: Thanks for advising and encouraging me!

Here some references you requested:
About our RCS techniques (developed by Samuli Helama):
Helama, S., Timonen, M., Lindholm, M., Meriläinen, J. &amp; Eronen, M. 2005. Extracting long-period climate fluctuations from tree-ring chronologies over timescales of centuries to millennia. International Journal of Climatology 25 (13): 1767-1779.

About our techniques to calibrate the index to the temperature:
Helama, S., Lindholm, M., Timonen, M., Eronen, M. &amp; Meriläinen, J. 2002. Part 2: Interannual-to-centennial variability in summer temperatures in northern Fennoscandia during the last 7500 years extracted from tree-rings of Scots pine. The Holocene 12(6): 681-687

About  building the supralong Scots pine chronology:
Eronen, M., Zetterberg, P., Briffa, K., Lindholm, M., Meriläinen, J. &amp; Timonen M. 2002. Part 1: The supra-long Scots pine tree-ring record for northern Finnish Lapland; Chronology construction and initial inferences. The Holocene 12(6): 673-680.

Methodology Page:
We use several statistical approaches in our tree-ring chronology and climate constructions.  Because of continuous interest in our Finnish tree-ring studies,  I have decided to establish a separate theme page called Methodology Page on the Lustia website for describing our way of working with tree-rings.  This concerns also the sampling techniques and the sample sizes that play an emphasized role in the case of tree-ring width analyses. Compared to ring width data sampling, isotope and density data sampling, for example, are much more consistent. Making comparisons with different proxies and trying to expose the best proxy variable  as terms of the strongest climate signal, is not a very good idea for this reason. Generally, all proxies are important, because they tell about different aspects of climate.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Re: 10,26,30,31,33,34<br />
Jean S and Steven: Thanks for advising and encouraging me!</p>
<p>Here some references you requested:<br />
About our RCS techniques (developed by Samuli Helama):<br />
Helama, S., Timonen, M., Lindholm, M., Meriläinen, J. &amp; Eronen, M. 2005. Extracting long-period climate fluctuations from tree-ring chronologies over timescales of centuries to millennia. International Journal of Climatology 25 (13): 1767-1779.</p>
<p>About our techniques to calibrate the index to the temperature:<br />
Helama, S., Lindholm, M., Timonen, M., Eronen, M. &amp; Meriläinen, J. 2002. Part 2: Interannual-to-centennial variability in summer temperatures in northern Fennoscandia during the last 7500 years extracted from tree-rings of Scots pine. The Holocene 12(6): 681-687</p>
<p>About  building the supralong Scots pine chronology:<br />
Eronen, M., Zetterberg, P., Briffa, K., Lindholm, M., Meriläinen, J. &amp; Timonen M. 2002. Part 1: The supra-long Scots pine tree-ring record for northern Finnish Lapland; Chronology construction and initial inferences. The Holocene 12(6): 673-680.</p>
<p>Methodology Page:<br />
We use several statistical approaches in our tree-ring chronology and climate constructions.  Because of continuous interest in our Finnish tree-ring studies,  I have decided to establish a separate theme page called Methodology Page on the Lustia website for describing our way of working with tree-rings.  This concerns also the sampling techniques and the sample sizes that play an emphasized role in the case of tree-ring width analyses. Compared to ring width data sampling, isotope and density data sampling, for example, are much more consistent. Making comparisons with different proxies and trying to expose the best proxy variable  as terms of the strongest climate signal, is not a very good idea for this reason. Generally, all proxies are important, because they tell about different aspects of climate.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
