Author Archives: Stephen McIntyre

Are Review Comments Confidential?

Over the past week, there has been considerable controversy over the outing of Eric Steig as Reviewer A, together with the publication of the voluminous review comments and review responses for O’Donnell et al 2010. John Nielsen-Gammon has been a sharp critic of Ryan’s decision (see here and elsewhere.) The history of the affair is […]

Steig and the “KNUCKLEHEADED REVIEWERS”

Over the past few days, Eric Steig aka Reviewer A has made a series of increasingly puzzling and strident outbursts, as the inconsistency between his RC post of Feb 1 as Eric Steig and his conduct as Reviewer A has been exposed. Yesterday, Steig placed his latest and wildest diatribe online at two blogs – […]

A Two-Way Street

Reader Jan at Lucia’s makes the following sensible comment – one that has particular irony given Gavin Schmidt’s umbrage against Fred Pearce the day after Steig’s Feb 1 post that precipitated the present controversy: Jan writes (Comment#69196) February 11th, 2011 at 2:47 pm : I might suggest another mistake. It appeared that after the release […]

Sci Tech Committee Again

New report from the UK Sci Tech Committee. (I’m traveling – see Bishop Hill for link.) My take is that the Committee was annoyed with the University of East Anglia, being quite critical of the inquiries in the running text, but have decided that there are other more pressing priorities and that it’s time to […]

Jeff Id

I’m sorry to learn that Jeff Id has suspended operation of his blog in order to properly carry out his obligations to his business and his young family. Jeff introduced himself to Climate Audit soon after he started his blog (here)>. He began with a variety of interesting technical analyses of Mann et al 2008 […]

Was Phil Jones an IPCC Virgin?

A few days ago, I challenged Trenberth’s claim that “AR4 was the first time Jones was on the writing team of an IPCC Assessment.” Earlier this year, Real Climate stated that AR4 had been “written by over 450 lead authors and 800 contributing authors”. In my challenge to Trenberth’s claim, I observed that Jones had […]

Team Policy on Acknowledgements

After CA reported Trenberth’s lifting of text from Hasselmann 2010 verbatim or near-verbatim either without citation or, in the one citation, a citation that was inadequate given the lengthy near-verbatim quotation, Trenberth moved quickly to cooper up his presentation against plagiarism allegations by inserting citations to Hasselmann 2010, responding to each of the incidents reported […]

Trenberth and Lifting Text Verbatim #2

On January 14, 2011, I reported here that Trenberth’s AMS presentation had lifted text verbatim or near-verbatim from Hasselmann 2010 with no citation in most cases and, in the one case where Hasselmann 2010 was cited, the citation was insufficient under standard academic practices given the lengthy near-quotation. Trenberth’s original presentation is here. This post […]

Trenberth and Lifting Text Verbatim

In case readers think that Trenberth’s outburst discussed yesterday represents an isolated and unfortunate climate scientist incident, this is not the case. In fact, some of Trenberth’s most objectionable language was lifted verbatim from an article in Nature Geoscience earlier this year. Trenberth here; Hasselmann here. Trenberth’s copying from Hasselmann came in two forms: – […]

Trenberth’s Bile

Anthony draws attention to a bilious diatribe by Trenberth against “deniers”. I have some back-history with Trenberth. In 2005, Trenberth was interviewed by Paul Thacker of ES&T about the MM articles (discussed here) where he stated: There have been several examples of people who have come into the field of climate change and done incredibly […]