Category Archives: Science

Sciencemag Enforces Data Archiving

As I surmised, Science has taken a dim view of Kaufman’s failure to provide data that was supposedly “publicly available” and most of the problems have now been dealt with. There are still a couple of issues though. The three Finnish sediment series and one Canadian series have now been archived: ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/paleo/paleolimnology/europe/finland/nautajarvi2005.txt ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/paleo/paleolimnology/europe/finland/korttajarvi2003.txt ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/paleo/paleolimnology/europe/finland/lehmilampi2007.txt ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/paleo/paleolimnology/northamerica/canada/ellesmere/c2-1996.txt […]

Juckes, Yang, Thompson and PNAS: Guliya

As you can see from the plot of the Juckes’ proxies, the Yang composite is a very important contributor to the 20th century blade. The Yang Composite is a mainstay of recent Hockey Team reconstructions – its use in Team reconstructions began in Mann and Jones 2003 and was then “randomly selected” into Osborn and […]

In the Mail

I’ve reported before that Science decided not to require Osborn and Briffa 2006 to provide supporting measurement data for their Taimyr, Tornetrask and “Polar Urals” (Yamal) chronologies. While I disagree with that decision and may pursue the matter further with them, I asked Osborn to voluntarily provide the measurement data. I received a reply from […]

Graumlich Archives Two Foxtail Series

The two “lost” Graumlich foxtail series used in Esper et al 2002 were archived today at WDCP. Only the specific series that I had requested were archived; other series in Bunn et al 2005 were not archived – see prior discussion here. UPDATE May 17: Graumlich also archived two chronologies (Boreal -ca636.crn; Upper Wright – […]

Esper Methodology

Getting methodological information from Esper is a bit like dealing with Mann, a lot like dealing with Mann. It really makes me wonder whether there might be some clunker like Mann’s PC methodology lurking in Esper’s closet. Like Mann, instead of providing a comprehensive methodological desscription ideally with code as in econometrics journals, Esper would […]

Another Inch at Sciencemag

Update: Continued here I just heard back from Science on the continuing and frustrating effort to obtain data from Esper et al. [2002] and Osborn and Briffa [2006], last discussed here . I got interesting but incomplete information in February and March. The latest installment is very disappointing in comparison even though, in my opinion, […]

More Correspondence with Science

Update: Next instalment here On March 16, Science sent me 10 (out of 14) measurement data sets used by Esper; one gridcell temperature series used by Osborn-Briffa and caused Briffa to archive annual data versions at WDCP in addition to the smoothed versions. The new information has been extremely helpful to me. However, the information […]

A Reply from Science

A couple of days ago, I posted up a copy of a letter that I sent to Science on archiving or non-archiving in connection with Osborn and Briffa 2006, Esper et al [2002] and Thompson et al 1989 (Dunde); 1997 (Guliya). I received a reply from Science today, which they stated was not for “public […]

Letter to Science re Osborn and Briffa Data

The continued negligence of the major journals in ensuring that paleoclimate authors archive data in accordance with journal policies is very frustrating and, as previously noted, has reared its ugly head once again with Osborn and Briffa. I have had little luck in the past with Science (except for the Kilimanjaro sample dO18 data) but […]

New Kilimanjaro Data

A climateaudit first:- here is the first sample-by-sample àŽⳏ18 for an entire Thompson drill core – in this case KNIF2 and KNIF3 from Kilimanjaro. I had hoped that the data would be properly archived, but it was sent to me by Science and is webbed up here pending a more official archive, which will presumably […]

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 3,416 other followers