Category Archives: Santer

Santer and the 4 NOAA Coauthors

Apparently none of Santer’s four NOAA coauthors either received or sent any correspondence to Santer regarding the monthly data series used in Santer et al 2008. What a strange way to run a railroad.

Santer Refuses Data Request

On Oct 20, 2008, I sent Santer the following request: Dear Dr Santer, Could you please provide me either with the monthly model data (49 series) used for statistical analysis in Santer et al 2008 or a link to a URL. I understand that your version has been collated from PCMDI ; my interest is […]

This Gets Even More Amusing

Can anyone on the Team actually hit a target? A couple of days ago, I reported that Santer’s own method yielded failed t-tests on UAH when data up to 2008 (or even 2007) was used. I also reported that their SI (carried out in 2008) included a sensitivity test on their H1 hypothesis up to […]

The Santer "S.D."

Lucia has written an interesting post – see here, continuing the effort to figure out the Santer brainteaser. I can shed a little more light (I think) on what Santer’s “S.D” is in operational terms. I was able to replicate Santer’s Table III values using the line item from Table 1 entitled “Inter-model_S.D._T2LT” which is […]

Does the Endpoint of Santer H2 "Matter"?

Yes. Perhaps the first thing that I noticed about this article was the endpoint for analysis of 1999 – this seemed very odd. I mentioned that a Santer coauthor wrote to me, saying that the endpoint didn’t matter relative to the Douglass endpoint of 2004. That turns out to be true, but why would anyone […]

Lucia on Santer

Excellent post here. Please comment at Lucia’s.

Replicating Santer Tables 1 and 3

Has anyone tried to replicate Santer’s Table 1 and 3 results? It’s not as easy as it looks. What’s tricky is that the table looks pretty easy (and most of it is), but, if you assume that it’s done in a conventional way, you’ll get wrongfooted. In fairness, Santer provided an equation for the unconventional […]

Resolving the Santer Problem

In today’s post, I think that I’ve developed an interesting approach to the Santer problem, which represents a substantial improvement to the analyses of either the Santer or Douglas posses. I think that the approach proposed here is virtually identical to Jaynes’ approach to analyzing the difference between two means, as set out in the […]

Santer and the Closet Frequentist

In many interesting comments, beaker, a welcome Bayesian commenter, has endorsed the Santer criticism of Douglass et al purporting to demonstrate inconsistency between models and data for tropical troposphere trends. (Prior post in sequence here) Santer et al proposed revised significance tests which, contrary to the Douglass results, did not yield results with statistical “significance”, […]

Santer et al 2008

As a diversion from ploughing through Mann et al 2008, I took a look at Santer et al 2008 SI, a statistical analysis of tropospheric trends by 16 non-statisticians and, down the list, Doug Nychka, a statistician who, unfortunately, is no longer “independent”. It is the latest volley in a dispute between Santer and his […]