On June 10, a few days after the Gergis-Karoly-Neukom error had been identified, I speculated that they would try to re-submit the same results, glossing over the fact that they had changed the methodology from that described in the accepted article. My cynical prediction was that a community unoffended by Gleick or upside-down Mann would […]
Michael Kottek writes in the comment section: The results of my FOI request to the University of Melbourne can be seen here: http://tinyurl.com/96ey5dt I requested all correspondence between the authors and the journal regarding the paper. The referees reports were exempted as were documents relating to the resubmitted paper. I also requested correspondence between the […]
According to information from the University of Melbourne, Gergis et al was not re-submitted by the end of July, but has been delayed until the end of September. The university stated: Please see latest information below Print publication of scientific study on hold An issue has been identified in the processing of the data used […]
In a figure that took considerable work, IPCC AR5 (First Draft) compared 5 regional proxy reconstructions to model output. In Australia, they used the Gergis (Neukom) et al 2012 reconstruction, In South America, they used a Neukom et al 2011 (Clim Dyn) reconstruction. In 2011, Neukom refused to provide me with the data versions used […]
Myles Allen, a declared supporter of open data archives, has, in blog comments here, proposed “name and shame” as a first tactic against data obstructionists (as opposed to FOI). Journal editors can and should enforce a simple “disclose or retract” policy if a result is challenged, and almost all of them do: if any don’t, […]
I’m writing a response to Gavin Schmidt’s rant about Yamal, which I should finish by tomorrow. Schmidt’s rant does not refute anything in my Yamal post. Indeed, Schmidt barely touches on the actual content of my post. Most of his post has nothing to do with Yamal. In the present post, I’ll deal with the […]
Earlier this year, I reported on the refusal of Raphael Neukom, an associate of IPCC confidentiality advocate and WG1 Co-Chair Thomas Stocker at the University of Bern, to archive data used in a then recent multiproxy study, Neukom et al 2011 (Clim Dyn). In his refusal letter, Neukom stated that Most of the non-publicly available […]
Phil Jones and his coauthors in the recent multiproxy study (Neukom et al 2011, (Climate Dynamics) Multiproxy summer and winter surface air temperature field reconstructions for southern South America covering the past centuries) did not archive proxy data in the Supplementary Information. Many proxy series used in the study are not otherwise publicly archived. I […]
