While Steve is away, and in honor of the NAS Panel which is so convivially considering the question of the reconstruction of past climate, Dave Stockwell decided to do his own reconstruction using exactly the same methodology as the Hockey Team. As you can see, his results are clearly consistent with the results of the […]
Off to Washington this afternoon. I’ve been contacted in advance by one representative of the media who’s going to be covering the entire event. If anyone wishes to contact me, email me in the next few hours and I’ll give a cell #. I’ll post up our presentation in a few days. I appreciate the […]
An interesting article was published in Der Spiegel a week ago on the glaciers atop Mount Kilimanjaro, and the research into why the glaciers are melting. The article features Lonnie Thompson who has been taking cores from tropical glaciers for a long time, and publishing articles about them, without bothering to put the data into […]
I checked the Lauritzen series sent to me a few days ago by Moberg and found more discrepancies. I originally observed a discrepancy between the figure in the source article and the figure shown in the SI to Moberg et al [2005] as shown below. The graphic in Nature ended in the 1930s, while the […]
Briffa et al [Holocene 2002] describes a procedure for estimating confidence intervals that is applied in Jones et al [2001] as well. Bloomfield (pers. comm.) is cited as a source, although it’s inconceivable that he was aware of the Briffa truncation. I don’t see how you can claim precise confidence intervals when your post-1960 completely […]
Here’s the appearance schedule. There are 10 presentations. Hughes and Mann each get a separate speaking slot while Ross and I are combined into one. It’s a pretty blue-chip set of speakers. We get the last speaking spot on Thursday at the end of a long day, just before cocktails. Hughes and Mann get to […]
People have been wondering why there is such difference between Polar Urals versions. In many cases, the archived Osborn and Briffa [2006] version (smoothed) is consistent with the emailed Esper et al [2002] version – but not always. It’s always worthwhile examining differences and here are a few.
I’ve got to get back to the NAS presentation and this will be my last post on Polar Urals and Yamal for a while, but it is all quite delicious. Anyway, here is a spaghetti graph of 3 Polar Urals results – including the results from Esper et al [2002] just disclosed by Science, all […]
It’s interesting that the Hockey Team seems to be able to make spaghetti graphs of world temperature history when they can’t even arrive at a spaghetti graph for the Polar Urals. I posted up the difference between Briffa’s Yamal substitution and the updated Polar Urals ring widths. But before either one, there was Briffa’s Polar […]
By Stephen McIntyre
|
Posted in Briffa, Esper et al 2002, Jones et al 1998, Multiproxy Studies, Yamal and Urals
|
Tagged briffa, briffa_1995, briffa_2000, Esper, esper_2002, urals, Yamal
|
As noted a couple of days ago, I received a response from Science in respect to my request for data from Osborn and Briffa [2006]. They asked that the response be confidential, but pointed me to a file archived at WDCP on Feb. 9, 2006, which proved to contain, not original data, but smoothed versions […]
Climate Audit 
NAS News and Schedule
Here’s the appearance schedule. There are 10 presentations. Hughes and Mann each get a separate speaking slot while Ross and I are combined into one. It’s a pretty blue-chip set of speakers. We get the last speaking spot on Thursday at the end of a long day, just before cocktails. Hughes and Mann get to […]