Here’s a comment on handling of Preisendorfer’s Rule N in the code dump; I’ll post some further comments on Preisendorfer on Preisendorfer’s Rule N in a few days. There is NO source code showing the application of Preisendorfer’s Rule N to tree ring networks – a battleground issue, if you will. There is some source […]
I reported recently on that the recently archived (July 2005) source code multiproxy.f shows that the cross-validation R2 statistic was calculated and not reported. Today, I’m merely going to summarize some collation details from my inspection of the code, listing input files, output files and providing a lexicon of variables. The source code requires a […]
In our GRL article, we pointed out that MBH98 had misrepresented their principal components methodology as being "conventional", when it wasn’t. At realclimate , they argued that it was an alternative centering "convention".
Just for reference: here’s the code excerpt where Mann calculates the cross-validation R2 statistics and then writes it to file. You can see the original code at ftp://holocene.evsc.virginia.edu/pub/MANNETAL98/METHODS/multiproxy.f.{Update – http://www.meteo.psu.edu/holocene/public_html/shared/research/MANNETAL98/METHODS/multiproxy.f ] Search down using corrnhem or verif1,out. There is no "if" as to whether he calculated the cross-validation R2 statistic.
Mann has just(July 2005) archived a fortran program at ftp://holocene.evsc.virginia.edu/pub/MANNETAL98/METHODS/multiproxy.f. {Update: see here] Here are my first thoughts on this.
It will take a while to go through the responses of Mann, Bradley and Hughes. I’ve taken a first look at the new source code and will commenting on it in due course. I have no information on responses from NSF and IPCC, other than what I read in the Nature interview with the Chairman […]
4 Comments have been submitted to GRL to date on McIntyre and McKitrick [2005]. We reported previously that the Wahl and Ammann comment was rejected (although this has not been acknowledged at the UCAR website.) A second comment has now been rejected. I think that there is a good chance that the other two Comments […]
In a previous post, I discussed, in general terms, the issue of the conflict of interest between being an IPCC reviewer and being an active protagonist in the field. Here I illustrate the problems with specific reference to MBH98, arguing that the running text of IPCC TAR made misleading claims about the MBH98 hockey stick […]
Mann and realclimate have argued that MBH98 was replicable on the original record. Mann cites Wahl and Ammann as support for this, but Wahl and Ammann are close associates of Mann’s (Ammann is a realclimate contributor), working recently from a much different record, hardly “independent” and their code only addresses one area of MBH98 calculations. […]
One point that many people do not understand is that merely labelling something a "proxy" and putting it in a multiproxy dataset does not mean that it has any correlation to temperature. I’ve plotted up the 22 proxy series in the 15th century MBH98 dataset so that others could see a little more clearly what […]
Climate Audit 