For some reason, Michael Tobis seems to think that the Team is busy cranking out responses to an endless stream of my data requests. Nothing could be further from the truth. For me, getting data from the Team is no easier than posting at realclimate. At this point, it seems to be Team policy to […]
As noted in other posts, IPCC policies state: All written expert, and government review comments will be made available to reviewers on request during the review process and will be retained in an open archive in a location determined by the IPCC Secretariat on completion of the Report for a period of at least five […]
We’ve been following with interest David Holland’s efforts to obtain information on how IPCC review editors discharged their important duties under IPCC process, with the most recent progress report here. Here’s another update.
David Holland has written in raising an excellent point about the failure of IPCC WG1 to release the Review Editor comments. In our examination of specific issues e.g. the Briffa truncation, the handling of trends, etc., the Author Responses (online through an earlier CA initiative) show that the IPCC authors often made unconvincing and tendentious […]
In browsing AR4 chapter 3, I encountered something that seems very strange in Table 3.2 which reports trends and trend significance for a variety of prominent temperature series (HAdCRU, HadSST, CRUTem). The caption states: The Durbin Watson D-statistic (not shown) for the residuals, after allowing for first-order serial correlation, never indicates significant positive serial correlation. […]
In a website release earlier this year, NOAA proudly announced the extensive involvement of its officers in IPCC as lead authors, review authors and even the co-chair of IPCC WG1, Susan Solomon, a senior scientist of the NOAA Earth System Research Laboratory in Boulder, Colo., is co-chair of Working Group 1 (WG1), the Physical Science […]
IPCC has just written me saying that they will send me review comments on chapter 6 subject to the following restriction: As this additional form of distribution is being provided in conjunction with the review process, the compiled comments are not for re-distribution to others. Given that the review comments are supposedly in an “open […]
Today we ponder why many National Meteorological Services (NMSs), including the NMS of Germany, have provided data to CRU under confidentiality agreements which supposedly prevent Phil Jones from disclosing the identity of these stations.
Willis writes in with latest FOI refusal from CRU, saying that they are unable to provide a list of the sites used in HadCRU3.
I wrote again on Apr 17, 2007 on my FOI request observing that part (B) of my FOI request had not been answered: the identification of the stations used as comparanda in the calculations of Jones et al 1990. Thank you for your courtesy and attention in this matter, which has successfully resolved part (A) […]
Climate Audit 