Mann’s CoAuthor Doesn’t Like being Compared to Mann
Posted by Jeff Condon on January 29, 2009
Interesting stuff at Marohasey blog:
Dear Mr. Morano,
On the official US senate minority web site you cite a blog that accuses me of
scientific fraud. (http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=fc7db6ad-802a-23ad-43d1-2651eb2297d6)
“A critical analysis of the paper from December 21, 2008, accused the authors of the Antarctic study of making questionable data adjustments.
(See: Scientist adjusts data — presto, Antarctic cooling disappears – December
21, 2008) The analysis concluded; Looks like [study author] Steig ‘got
rid of’ Antarctic cooling the same way [Michael] Mann got rid of medieval
warming. Why not just look at the station data instead of ‘adjusting’ it (graph
above)? It shows a 50-year cooling trend; the analysis concluded.
You do not comment on this, but simply cite it. However, you are clearly
implying that you agree with it because you do not comment. Are you prepared
to either remove this from the web site immediately, or to provide evidence that I have committed fraud? This is a very extreme accusation. Indeed, it seems rather like libel to me. I would like to request a formal apology from you, in writing.
I am cc:ing several journalists on this, so hopefully inaction of your part will be noticed.
In any case, the ‘analysis’ you cite is wrong. If you look at Figure 3.7 from the IPCC report
you will see that the average temperature trend for Antarctica was positive (warming) not negative (cooling). This figure shows the average of the Antarctic station data. This demonstrates that the statement that “the station data shows a 50-year cooling trend” is plainly wrong. In the interest of being honest with the American public, don’t you think you should correct this?
Professor, Department of Earth and Space Sciences
University of Washington
Libel is a pretty strong word. I wonder how this will play out.