I previously posted up two comments on our Reply to Huybers here and here, the first of which contained some new material. Here’s the third and final instalment, discussing Huybers’ comments on principal components. While principal components were really only one aspect of our critique, the reaction of the Hockey Team and the “community” to […]
A few weeks ago, I mentioned here that the new editor-in-chief of GRL, Jay Famiglietti, had removed James Saiers as our editor, had made remarks about our papers to Environmental Science & Technology that can be construed as critical, had pulled two rejected Comments out of the garbage can (including one that had been press […]
Some of you may recall the memorable climate science phrase: We have 25 or so years invested in the work. Why should I make the data available to you, when your aim is to try and find something wrong with it. Here’s the story behind this and some updates on it.
There’s another puff piece on Raymond Bradley in the U Mass magazine entitled Never Mind The Weather. The article reports, among other things, that: Bradley says he is sickened by the coordinated and well-financed campaign to discredit the data he and others like him are generating. If Bradley were asked to name people who were […]
Ian Castles has been a frequent and welcome poster here. It must be very gratifying for him to see the following announcement on Oct. 12, 2005: The [U.K.] Chancellor announced on 19 July 2005 that he had asked Sir Nicholas Stern to lead a major review of the economics of climate change, to understand more […]
UCAR scientist Kevin Trenberth was quoted by Environmental Science & Technology as saying that newcomers to the climate field sometimes do “incredibly stupid” things. I don’t necessarily disagree with this and we have intentionally kept our published comments to very narrow matters that have been resistant to refutation attempts to date. The concern about over-reaching […]
David Stockwell has suggested a discussion of nonlinear responses of tree growth to temperature. I’ve summarized here some observations which I’ve seen about bristlecones, limber pine, cedars and spruce – all showing an upside-down U-shaped response to temperature. The implications of this type of relationship for the multiproxy project of attempting to reconstruct past temperatures […]
Update: also see posts 382, 460, 462, 460. We often hear a distinction made between “climate” and “weather”. It may surprise people that the famous mathematician, Benoit Mandelbrot, thought about this problem with completely opposite conclusions to realclimate. Mandelbrot is a prolific author who invented and popularized the concept of fractals . His popular book, […]
Marcel Crok’s article on M&M in the Dutch science magazine Natuurwetenschap & Techniek , published in their February 1, 2005 issue, has won a prestigious Dutch prize (Glazen Griffioen) for science journalism from the Free University (VU) in Amsterdam, together with the VU Medical Center and Hogeschool Hindesheim. The shortlist of three finalists all consisted […]
Naurzbaev et al [2004] is a terrific article by Naurzbaev, Hughes (yes, that Hughes) and Vaganov about deducing climate information from tree-ring growth curves in Siberia. (I find Naurzbaev’s work consistently interesting.) They studied 34 larch sites in a meridional transect from 55 to 72 N (at a longitude of about 90-100E) and 23 larch […]
Climate Audit 
Reply to Huybers #3: Principal Components
I previously posted up two comments on our Reply to Huybers here and here, the first of which contained some new material. Here’s the third and final instalment, discussing Huybers’ comments on principal components. While principal components were really only one aspect of our critique, the reaction of the Hockey Team and the “community” to […]