Richard Kerr of Science has reported on the House Energy and Commerce Committee hearings. Having lived through the hearings, it’s interesting to see how they get characterized. For example, Kerr says: He [North] said he doesn’t disagree with Wegman’s main finding that a single year or a single decade cannot be shown to be the […]
Tag Archives: barton
Back from Washington. I think that I’ve had enough Washington for a while. It takes me a lot of time to prepare; I don’t begrudge it and it’s useful to try to put what you’re thinking about into short statements, but it still takes time and it’s tiring. It’s a nuisance that Mann couldn’t get […]
Well, back from Washington. I’m not very good at describing reactions and impressions and touchy-feely stuff like that; I’m more comfortable describing what’s different with the 53rd and 84th series out of 112, but I’ll try.
An interesting take on the controversy from the leading Swiss newspaper.
In a recent post, I showed that MBH had calculated cross-validation R2 statistics, but this information had been excluded from their summary of cross-validation statistics in their Supplementary Information here. We had surmised this in our original article, but had previously been unable to absolutely prove it. The House Committee requested information from M,B and […]
Several people have drawn attention to letters from the U.S. House of Representatives Energy and Commerce Committee to Mann, Bradley, Hughes, the director of the U.S. National Science Foundation and the chairman of the IPCC, which were posted up at the Committee website on Friday here. The letters refer to the Wall Street Journal [this […]