The WX42B δ18O record presents an apparent negative correlation to the local precipitation (r=-0.64) and a strong positive correlation with local temperature after the 1960′s (r=0.8) .

In other words, if you throw away the first decade of temperature data (1950-1960) there is a good correlation with temperature (0.80). However, this struck me as a strange claim … why not include all the data? I digitized their post 1950 data, and I agree with their post-1960 figure of 0.8.

What they neglect to mention is that if you throw away the last decade of data (1990-2000) the correlation with temperature drops to a miserable (and no longer statistically significant) 0.32 … I weep for the death of science.

Finally, the monsoons are driven by the summer temperature difference between the ocean and the land. Accordingly, there should be more rain when there are hotter summers … but their data indicates the opposite. What’s up with that?

w.

http://www.wtop.com/?nid=220&sid=1512340

I can’t seem to find the original paper referenced. But this article implies that this is a non-European proxy showing a medieval warm period.

“Back to business.”

You go first. I’ve noticed a paucity of messages lately but we got 200+ messages on a one day thread. Could you come up with a moderately provocative climate thread which would get those of us trying to detox from the US election back on track? Maybe something like how long it will take / has taken for the current economic downturn to affect the slope of the CO2 emissions / CO2 atmospheric concentration curves? In fact I wonder if ocean SSTs have been declining (due to PDO or whatever) and if that will make it difficult to observe any economic impact since colder SSTs should result in increased uptake of atmospheric CO2.

Thanks, UC.

Here’s a decent beginner’s guide to Multivariate Calibration:
http://dbkgroup.org/WhitePapers/imc.htm

Best, Pete Tillman

-http://climateaudit101.wikispot.org/Glossary_of_Acronyms

CPS is a technique that’s been discussed dozens of times here and if you do the site google, you get dozens of references on this site alone. Having said that, it should have been in the list of acronyms, which I haven’t been keeping up to data – my apologies – and I’ve added to it.

PS someone posted up a comment suggesting a link to a better list of acronyms. If they’ll refresh this, I’ll attend to it.

Even where you can find one proxy that seems to show a sensitivity similar to another at one time period somewhere else in time there are massive divergences. What does averaging (or any other inappropriate stat) tell you about the collected data.

1) They are not the same
2) They are not measurements or approximations to any single or related group of constants that is understood
3) er..

This is not apples v pears or even Cherries v cherry pie more like Barbara Cartland’s novels v Magna Carta.

They share some vagaries of common language and nothing else.

Astrology for the 21st Century

In fact, Googling “composite plus scale” finds no more than about 40 hits on the entire Web, virtually all of them related to Mann and temperature reconstructions. Wikipedia has a long list of things called “CPS” but this is not one of them. There doesn’t seem to be anything standard about it.