Comments on: Another Try on the Wall http://climateaudit.org/2009/05/11/another-try-on-the-wall/ by Steve McIntyre Fri, 24 May 2013 07:48:03 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.com/ By: Stocker’s Earmarks « Climate Audit http://climateaudit.org/2009/05/11/another-try-on-the-wall/#comment-321754 Fri, 13 Jan 2012 00:53:02 +0000 http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=5962#comment-321754 [...] May 11, 2009, I reported my request for CRUTEM station data from the Met Office. In a comment, David Holland noted that the [...]

]]> By: “Sent loads of station data to Scott” « Climate Audit http://climateaudit.org/2009/05/11/another-try-on-the-wall/#comment-319704 Sat, 31 Dec 2011 18:12:31 +0000 http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=5962#comment-319704 [...] arose out of the very first post in the current FOI sequence. On May 11, 2009, as mentioned in a CA post here, I had noticed that the UK Met Office webpage on CRUTEM stated: To obtain the archive of raw land [...]

]]> By: UK Met Office: Refuse and Delete « Climate Audit http://climateaudit.org/2009/05/11/another-try-on-the-wall/#comment-316491 Thu, 15 Dec 2011 20:13:47 +0000 http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=5962#comment-316491 [...] couple of week ago, I noticed that the UK Met Office website contained the following statement Q. Where can I get the raw [...]

]]> By: Peer-to-Peer Review: Hvordan ”Climategate” markerer begyndelsen til en ny videnskabelig bevægelse, 2. del « Klimagate (ClimateGate) http://climateaudit.org/2009/05/11/another-try-on-the-wall/#comment-220348 Sun, 07 Feb 2010 17:52:10 +0000 http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=5962#comment-220348 [...] prøvet på at erhverve den beregningsmæssige kode fra Michael Mann og data fra Keith Briffa og Phil Jones, som var anvendt i konstruktionen af hockeystavs-graferne. Ligesom i USA, har England en [...]

]]> By: Mosher: The Hackers « Watts Up With That? http://climateaudit.org/2009/05/11/another-try-on-the-wall/#comment-218034 Tue, 26 Jan 2010 20:37:40 +0000 http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=5962#comment-218034 [...] Bern in Switzerland, to measures Holland suggests for the next IPCC report. Jones alerts Stocker to specific comments on Climate Audit, arming him for the next [...]

]]> By: » Peer-to-Peer Review (Part II): How ‘Climategate’ Marks the Maturing of a New Science Movement - Big Journalism http://climateaudit.org/2009/05/11/another-try-on-the-wall/#comment-215100 Mon, 11 Jan 2010 05:44:05 +0000 http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=5962#comment-215100 [...] attempted to acquire the computational code from Michael Mann and data from Keith Briffa and Phil Jones that were used to build the hockey stick graphs. Like the US, the UK has Freedom of Information [...]

]]> By: Craig Loehle http://climateaudit.org/2009/05/11/another-try-on-the-wall/#comment-182950 Fri, 15 May 2009 15:15:21 +0000 http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=5962#comment-182950 Re: pz (#36), It surely affects the absolute answer, but the satellite data has more complete coverage than any other data, and thus is useful.

]]> By: pz http://climateaudit.org/2009/05/11/another-try-on-the-wall/#comment-182949 Thu, 14 May 2009 23:17:50 +0000 http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=5962#comment-182949 Sorry for the piling on editorializing. I’m not sure if that was something you cut out or something that is still there, like the air conditioning statement, but I’ll try to stick to facts and questions from here.

I would still like to know, or just be directed by link if it is an old topic that doesn’t need to be rehashed, how chopping off 20 degrees of an apparently cooling part of the planet is handled statistically and why it isn’t significant. I have read at NASA’s site that ground-based stations are sparse in Antarctica, too.

Thanks for your patience and sorry for arriving late at the party. I have searched and just can’t seem to find this answer anywhere.

]]> By: Wondering Aloud http://climateaudit.org/2009/05/11/another-try-on-the-wall/#comment-182948 Thu, 14 May 2009 20:35:12 +0000 http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=5962#comment-182948 If the source data is not open to review and the method of data analysis is not public, this is by definition not science isn’t it? How does something like this survive any peer review process? How can anyone take results from such a process seriously?

]]> By: Craig Loehle http://climateaudit.org/2009/05/11/another-try-on-the-wall/#comment-182947 Thu, 14 May 2009 12:39:07 +0000 http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=5962#comment-182947 Re: pz (#30), As I understand it, the angle of the satellite precludes good coverage of the poles, and may have some issues with pure ice at ground level. Anyone else?

]]>