Tag Archives: muir russell

Muir Russell and The Peer Review Three

We’ve all had an interesting time trying to get a straight answer as to the eleven publications said by Oxburgh to have been selected on the advice of the Royal Society. After much evasion, Trevor Davies has admitted that he selected them, using the references in the CRU submission to the SciTech Committee as a […]

Link to Muir Russell at SciTech

9.20 am UK time. http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Main/Player.aspx?meetingId=6785 Beddington is also appearing. Too early for me. I guess that I’ll see the replay. Update: Report webpage Muir Russell evidence Oxburgh evidence Report Additional evidence

An “Objective Arbiter” CRU-Style

Muir Russell reported Briffa’s claim that “Wahl was asked for comment on text as a knowledgeable and objective arbiter”. The indolent Muir Russell did not comment on whether Briffa’s description of Wahl as “objective” was plausible. In a Climategate letter of July 27, 2006, Wahl wrote to Briffa (733. 1155402164.txt): I’ve also been a lot […]

“Without oversight or challenge”

One of my long-standing concerns of Climate Audit and its readers has been a concern over the role of Eugene Wahl in changing the IPCC assessment of the McMc-Mann dispute in the Final Report – a role that Fred Pearce described in The Climate Files as a “subversion” of IPCC policies of openness and transparency. […]

Muir Russell Tries to Cooper Up Website

In preparation for his appearance at the SciTech Committee, Muir Russell has, at the last possible minute, attempted to cooper up his webpage by amending the list of FOI requests to include the David Holland FOI request for off-balance-sheet IPCC review comments that prompted Phil Jones’ notorious delete-all-emails request. Amazingly, this request had been left […]

Climategate Inquiries

Andrew Montford’s review of the Climategate Inquiries is released today and is online here. Ross McKitrick’s is online here.

UEA “Welcomes” Untrue Muir Russell Finding

Shortly after the release of the Muir Russell report, I criticized their wrongheaded and untrue finding that there had not been an outstanding FOI request at the time of the notorious Jones’ request to delete all emails seeking information on IPCC correspondence that, in Fred Pearce’s words, was a ‘subversion” of IPCC policy on openness […]

CRU: “We had never undertaken any reanalysis…”

At the close of Boulton’s April 9 interview with CRU, the only such interview relevant to the proxy reconstruction controversies that constitute 99% of the Climategate emails, Boulton asked CRU to comment on Ross McKitrick’s National Post op ed last October during Yamal. The response was given to Muir Russell on or after June 16 […]

Blatant Misrepresentation by Muir Russell Panel

The Muir Russell panel blatantly misrepresented the facts surrounding Jones’ notorious request to “delete all emails”, a misrepresentation that, in my opinion, was done, at a minimum, either recklessly or out of gross negligence.

Inquiry Disinformation about CRUTEM

In the Guardian debate, George Monbiot’s opening question (made in good faith on his part) pertained to CRUTEM, George noting that the inquiry had been able to derive a CRUTEM-like result from GHCN data and challenging me that this had somehow rebutted my “crusade” on this point. I tried to deal with this as quickly […]

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 3,422 other followers