On the tree-ring data, I still believe something can be salvaged from such data, but this requires the science to actively study cause and effect in a contemporaneous fashion with high precision scientific measurements. This blind adherence to warmth=greater growth, etc., except when it doesn’t tell the right story, is simply indefensible.

The decision to hide the decline, and the dogged refusal to admit that this was an error, has endangered the credibility of the whole of climate science. If the rot is not stopped then the credibility of the whole of science will eventually come into question

Thank you Prof James. Not to forget Pastor Martin Niemoller

First they came for the communists, and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a communist.

Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a Jew.

Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak out for me.

Judith,

I am not a fan of Gavin, but the logic in your defense of your manuscript
based on the letter of agreement between hurricane scientists (?) is flawed.
The letter only states that living on the gulf coast is dangerous (trivial conclusion) and nothing about the accuracy of the conclusions in your manuscript.

Jerry

Jerry