<?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: Five Alaskan BSi Series</title>
	<atom:link href="http://climateaudit.org/2009/09/21/five-alaskan-bsi-series/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://climateaudit.org/2009/09/21/five-alaskan-bsi-series/</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: B.C.</title>
		<link>http://climateaudit.org/2009/09/21/five-alaskan-bsi-series/#comment-194228</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[B.C.]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Sep 2009 19:23:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=7082#comment-194228</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Not being a sediment scientist, but having to keep sedimentation in mind when performing my job (prescribed burning), has any thought been given to the possibility of increased sedimentation after wildfires upstream from these lakes?  Even if the average temperature changed (up or down) for a period of time after a fire, one could reasonably surmise that there could still be increased sedimentation from erosion of exposed ground, for at least a few years, due to the short growing season in Alaska.  Any enlightenment (pro or con) would be appreciated.

Steve, thanks for all of the incredible work that you and your colleagues put into this and for your efforts at bringing sanity back into science.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Not being a sediment scientist, but having to keep sedimentation in mind when performing my job (prescribed burning), has any thought been given to the possibility of increased sedimentation after wildfires upstream from these lakes?  Even if the average temperature changed (up or down) for a period of time after a fire, one could reasonably surmise that there could still be increased sedimentation from erosion of exposed ground, for at least a few years, due to the short growing season in Alaska.  Any enlightenment (pro or con) would be appreciated.</p>
<p>Steve, thanks for all of the incredible work that you and your colleagues put into this and for your efforts at bringing sanity back into science.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Scott Brim</title>
		<link>http://climateaudit.org/2009/09/21/five-alaskan-bsi-series/#comment-194227</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Scott Brim]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Sep 2009 19:13:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=7082#comment-194227</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Re: &lt;a href=&quot;#comment-356943&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Paul Penrose (#20)&lt;/a&gt;
Re: &lt;a href=&quot;#comment-356947&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Steve McIntyre (#21)&lt;/a&gt;
.
A look at the base topography map revealed that it was perfectly OK.  The original engineer had simply interpreted the contour lines as a hole rather than as a hill, and had quite obviously not looked at the elevations that were actually assigned to those contour lines. Otherwise his design was a near perfect solution to the contractual requirements.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Re: <a href="#comment-356943" rel="nofollow">Paul Penrose (#20)</a><br />
Re: <a href="#comment-356947" rel="nofollow">Steve McIntyre (#21)</a><br />
.<br />
A look at the base topography map revealed that it was perfectly OK.  The original engineer had simply interpreted the contour lines as a hole rather than as a hill, and had quite obviously not looked at the elevations that were actually assigned to those contour lines. Otherwise his design was a near perfect solution to the contractual requirements.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steve McIntyre</title>
		<link>http://climateaudit.org/2009/09/21/five-alaskan-bsi-series/#comment-194226</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Steve McIntyre]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Sep 2009 18:45:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=7082#comment-194226</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Re: &lt;a href=&quot;#comment-356943&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Paul Penrose (#20)&lt;/a&gt;,
Yep. Maybe head office did a principal components analysis of the topography  :)]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Re: <a href="#comment-356943" rel="nofollow">Paul Penrose (#20)</a>,<br />
Yep. Maybe head office did a principal components analysis of the topography  <img src='http://s0.wp.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Paul Penrose</title>
		<link>http://climateaudit.org/2009/09/21/five-alaskan-bsi-series/#comment-194225</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Paul Penrose]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Sep 2009 18:27:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=7082#comment-194225</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Re: &lt;a href=&quot;#comment-356826&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Scott Brim (#19)&lt;/a&gt;, The solution was obvious; just invert the hill!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Re: <a href="#comment-356826" rel="nofollow">Scott Brim (#19)</a>, The solution was obvious; just invert the hill!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Scott Brim</title>
		<link>http://climateaudit.org/2009/09/21/five-alaskan-bsi-series/#comment-194224</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Scott Brim]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Sep 2009 19:13:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=7082#comment-194224</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Howard: Re: &lt;a href=&quot;#comment-356796&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Howard (#16)&lt;/a&gt;,
&lt;blockquote&gt;Always remember, the map is not the terrain.&lt;/blockquote&gt;
Thirty years ago, at a mine we were constructing in the middle of nowhere, a certain drawing indicated that the sewage drainage field for the mine shop complex had to be located just so, out to the west of the shops.
.
But when we went out to see what the ground actually looked like, a hill was found rather than a depression. So it was back to the drawing board for the Head Office engineering staff.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Howard: Re: <a href="#comment-356796" rel="nofollow">Howard (#16)</a>,</p>
<blockquote><p>Always remember, the map is not the terrain.</p></blockquote>
<p>Thirty years ago, at a mine we were constructing in the middle of nowhere, a certain drawing indicated that the sewage drainage field for the mine shop complex had to be located just so, out to the west of the shops.<br />
.<br />
But when we went out to see what the ground actually looked like, a hill was found rather than a depression. So it was back to the drawing board for the Head Office engineering staff.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: stan</title>
		<link>http://climateaudit.org/2009/09/21/five-alaskan-bsi-series/#comment-194223</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[stan]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Sep 2009 18:45:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=7082#comment-194223</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Wegman -- &quot;when there are major policy decisions to be made based on statistical assessments ...evaluation by statisticians should be standard practice.&quot;

We can dream.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wegman &#8212; &#8220;when there are major policy decisions to be made based on statistical assessments &#8230;evaluation by statisticians should be standard practice.&#8221;</p>
<p>We can dream.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Howard</title>
		<link>http://climateaudit.org/2009/09/21/five-alaskan-bsi-series/#comment-194222</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Howard]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Sep 2009 04:57:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=7082#comment-194222</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Re: &lt;a href=&quot;#comment-356786&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;bender (#12)&lt;/a&gt;,

&lt;blockquote&gt;It&#039;s just another mysterious inhomogeneity of unknown cause.&lt;/blockquote&gt;
You are right, at least theoretically.  From a geologic gut perspective, the lack of variation in actual mass production from a macroscopic hydrogeologic feature that &lt;em&gt;may be&lt;/em&gt; dependent on climate shifts is a sign of a poor proxy.  With low variation, any old fart or burp will be construed as some signal of a real movement.  In my experience, people get their panties in a knot over nothing all the time.

Always remember, the map is not the terrain.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Re: <a href="#comment-356786" rel="nofollow">bender (#12)</a>,</p>
<blockquote><p>It&#8217;s just another mysterious inhomogeneity of unknown cause.</p></blockquote>
<p>You are right, at least theoretically.  From a geologic gut perspective, the lack of variation in actual mass production from a macroscopic hydrogeologic feature that <em>may be</em> dependent on climate shifts is a sign of a poor proxy.  With low variation, any old fart or burp will be construed as some signal of a real movement.  In my experience, people get their panties in a knot over nothing all the time.</p>
<p>Always remember, the map is not the terrain.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: bender</title>
		<link>http://climateaudit.org/2009/09/21/five-alaskan-bsi-series/#comment-194221</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[bender]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Sep 2009 03:01:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=7082#comment-194221</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Re: &lt;a href=&quot;#comment-356789&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;cba (#14)&lt;/a&gt;,
&quot;a synthesis of lake seds&quot; refers to a formal review of the state of the science. It&#039;s not something you generate overnight.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Re: <a href="#comment-356789" rel="nofollow">cba (#14)</a>,<br />
&#8220;a synthesis of lake seds&#8221; refers to a formal review of the state of the science. It&#8217;s not something you generate overnight.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: cba</title>
		<link>http://climateaudit.org/2009/09/21/five-alaskan-bsi-series/#comment-194220</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[cba]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Sep 2009 02:21:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=7082#comment-194220</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[so what happens with the results when there is only a synthesis of lake seds?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>so what happens with the results when there is only a synthesis of lake seds?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: bender</title>
		<link>http://climateaudit.org/2009/09/21/five-alaskan-bsi-series/#comment-194219</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[bender]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Sep 2009 02:18:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=7082#comment-194219</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Re: &lt;a href=&quot;#comment-356779&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Steve McIntyre (#8)&lt;/a&gt;, Surely this is not representative!?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Re: <a href="#comment-356779" rel="nofollow">Steve McIntyre (#8)</a>, Surely this is not representative!?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
