Tag Archives: wahl

More NOAA Disinformation and an Appeal to the UK ICO

On March 9, 2011, NOAA scientist Eugene Wahl claimed that the “emails [he] deleted” were “all” “in the public domain” since the Climategate dossier was released. This is more disinformation from NOAA. “All” of the emails are not in the public domain. Attachments to the deleted emails – including Wahl’s changes to AR4 that are […]

What Did Penn State Know?

In an interview yesterday, Mann told Eli Kintisch of Science (see here) that it has been “known for a year and half” that he forwarded Jones’ delete request to Wahl. If Mann’s claim is true (and I do not believe it to be true), then this raises serious questions about statements in the Penn State […]

Wahl Transcript Excerpt

From Capitol Hill come excerpted notes from the interview transcript between the NOAA Inspector General and Eugene Wahl. I am advised that it’s not a continuous chain, with some back and forth between the paragraphs excluded. I am advised that the excluded sections, often lengthy, do not place the excerpts in any different light than […]

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. […]

East Anglia Covers Up Their Trick on Channel Four

Yesterday, I reported that the University of East Anglia had refused to release attachments to Climategate emails, attachments that would confirm that Wahl and Briffa had knowingly violated IPCC rules on review comments. Their excuse was, in effect, that Wahl and Briffa had agreed their violation of IPCC rules would be done in secret and […]

Pielke Jr discusses the Bishop and the Stick

Roger Pielke Jr has written a gracious post , following up on Bishop Hill’s post and considering the issues as they pertain to science policy, and, in particular, the processes of peer review and due diligence, which have informed many of my posts. He refers to and reconsiders a post that I wrote for Prometheus […]

Bishop Hill: Caspar and the Jesus Paper

Reader Perry writes in reporting an interesting narrative of the Caspar Ammann affair at Bishop Hill’s blog here. IT is a detailed narrative written in a lively style of a story that’s been followed here for a few years and re-visited last week with the release of the Ammann SI. The article is very flattering […]

Reconciling to Wahl and Ammann

When Wahl and Ammann’s script first came out, I was able to immediately reconcile our results to theirs – see here. As Wegman later said: when using the same proxies as and the same methodology as MM, Wahl and Ammann essentially reproduce the MM curves. Thus, far from disproving the MM work, they reinforce the […]

Caspar Ammann, Texas Sharpshooter

The Texas Sharpshooter fallacy is a logical fallacy where a man shoots a barn thirty times then circles the bullet holes nearest each other after the fact calling that his target. It’s of particular concern in epidemiology. Folks, you are never going to see a better example of the Texas Sharpshooter work itself out in […]

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 3,253 other followers