Fiona Fox is the director of the Science Media Center. She is in the news for a remarkable story here. [On June 30, Bishop Hill reported her comments on the NS Affair here.] She hosted the press conferences for Oxburgh and Muir Russell. Board members for the Science Media Center include Bob Ward, known to […]
As readers know, Raymond Bradley’s allegation that “text was just lifted verbatim from my book and placed in the Wegman Report” has been widely publicized following Bradley’s interview with USA today. The allegation pertains to Wegman’s boilerplate section (2.1) describing proxies, a section in which neither MBH98-99 nor MM2003, 2005abcd are mentioned, and on which […]
Some of the CA posts that I’ve found most interesting to write have been about identifying Chladni patterns in supposedly “significant” reconstructions when principal component methods have been applied to spatially autocorrelated red noise. (This is by no means a new observation, as warnings about the risks of building “castles in the air” using principal […]
Just a short note today on code for McShane and Wyner and its comments. The discussion of McShane and Wyner has been greatly enhanced first by their archiving of code and secondly by simplifications of the code both by the online community and discussants. Most of the McShane and Wyner analysis is in R, making […]
I’ve obviously been in a quiet blogging patch. My wife and I were visiting our daughter who lives in western Canada. I’m still amazed and flattered at my inclusion on the New Statesman list. I will post my reflections on this inclusion at some point, but I want to discuss the point more from a […]
Here’s something that sure surprised my family (and me.)
McShane and Wyner is being published as a “discussion paper” and has attracted numerous submissions so far, including a discussion by Ross and I which has been accepted. As readers have noticed, discussions by Schmidt, Mann and Rutherford and by Tingley are online. Other submissions have been made by Wahl and Ammann and by Nychka […]
The Oxburgh Report stated: The eleven representative publications that the Panel considered in detail are listed in Appendix B. The papers cover a period of more than twenty years and were selected on the advice of the Royal Society. This statement has been questioned ever since the publication of the Oxburgh Report. That the Royal […]
Andrew Montford’s review of the Climategate Inquiries is released today and is online here. Ross McKitrick’s is online here.
Who recommended Oxburgh to chair the Science Appraisal Panel? Who indeed? In their press statement announcing the “Science” Appraisal Panel, the University of East Anglia stated: His [Oxburgh’s] appointment has been made on the recommendation of the Royal Society, which has also been consulted on the choice of the six distinguished scientists who have been […]
Climate Audit 