Tag Archives: oxburgh

Kelly’s Comments

Andrew Montford has succeeded in prying some important documents from the Oxburgh “inquiry”. These raise several important issues. The attachments here include Michael Kelly’s notes – see page 81 on. These offer a few glimpses of sanity that were suppressed by Oxburgh in the “report”. Here is an interesting comment about IPCC (leaving aside, for […]

British Due Diligence – Royal Society Style

The Oxburgh “report” said that the eleven “representative” publications that it reviewed had been “selected on the advice of the Royal Society”. The eleven articles were so implausible a representation that it seemed scarcely credible that they could have been selected by any person with any expertise in the field. I asked the Royal Society […]

House of Lords c/o University of East Anglia

In response to requests for mundane information such as the terms of reference of the Oxburgh Inquiry, Oxburgh pretty much laid down a gauntlet for an FOI inquiry, asserting that no relevant documents existed. I am afraid that I am not able to be very helpful as none of the documents about which you inquire […]

Oxburgh Refuses to Answer

I asked Ronald Oxburgh, chairman of what may be the most [self-snip] “inquiry” in recent experience, a few simple questions about the terms of reference and documentation of this “inquiry” – an “inquiry” in which, to their shame, Kerry Emanuel, David Hand, Herbert Huppert, Lisa Graumlich, Michael Kelly and Huw Davies, were complicit. Oxburgh sent […]

Beddington and the Oxburgh Inquiry

The UK government has provided an incomplete response to Andrew Montford’s FOI request for copies of “correspondence or documentation” related to “the appointment of the [Oxburgh} panel or its deliberations”. However, even the incomplete information so far shows that UK government Chief Scientist John Beddington played a critical role. In addition, it contains the remarkable […]

Yamal and the Vaganov Network

As a spin-off from looking at Mann of Oak proxies, I did (what I regard) as a pretty bit of decoding of some measurement data in the Climategate documents. The Climategate directory documents/briffa-treering-external/stepan/ contains a large number of tree ring measurement files dated July 1996 (with the characteristic suffix .rwl) with 3-character labels, “ala” “all” […]

Laundering Oxburgh’s Interview

The LA Times laundered Oxburgh’s BBC interview, a laundering which tricked even Pielke Jr. In the original BBC interview, Oxburgh was asked: Obviously there has been a lot of concern from climate change sceptics who brought this matter to the public eye. If you look at the wording of the emails, the fact is that […]

A “Fair Sample”?

The Oxburgh “Report” states that the eleven CRU publications that they examined are “representative”, “were selected on the advice of the Royal Society” and that CRU agreed that they are a “fair sample” of CRU’s work. The eleven representative publications that the Panel considered in detail are listed in Appendix B. The papers cover a […]

Oxburgh on Proxy Reconstructions

The Oxburgh “report” on proxy reconstructions is about 1.5 pages long and doesn’t take long to parse – which I’ll begin below. No one should construe the fact that I’m commenting on these nine paragraphs as endorsing the idea that nine paragraphs – especially these none paragraphs – constitute a thorough review of CRU proxy […]

Oxburgh’s Trick to Hide the Trick

The Oxburgh report ” is a flimsy and embarrassing 5-pages. They did not interview me (nor, to my knowledge, any other CRU critics or targets). The committee was announced on March 22 and their “report” is dated April 12 – three weeks end to end – less time than even the Parliamentary Committee. They took […]