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 […]
Shortly after the release of the Muir Russell report, I criticized their wrongheaded and untrue finding that there had not been an outstanding FOI request at the time of the notorious Jones’ request to delete all emails seeking information on IPCC correspondence that, in Fred Pearce’s words, was a ‘subversion” of IPCC policy on openness […]
Almost none of Oxburgh’s testimony to the Science and technology Committee can be taken at face value. Even on something as simple as climate background of Lisa Graumlich and Kerry Emanuel, Oxburgh’s statements to the committee were untrue.
Climate Audit 