the Air Vent

Because the world needs another opinion

The Right Review

Posted by Jeff Id on December 6, 2009

I haven’t seen this group highlighted. While not as dramatic as hide the decline it’s pretty plain that those chosen are on the team. It’s hard for me to imagine that Ben Santer would give any warming paper an unbiased review.

From: Phil Jones
To: Kevin Trenberth
, Grant Foster
Subject: Re: ENSO blamed over warming – paper in JGR
Date: Wed Aug 5 16:14:34 2009
Cc: “J. Salinger” , James Annan , b.mullan@niwa.co.nz, Gavin Schmidt , Mike Mann , j.renwick@niwa.co.nz

Hi all,
Agree with Kevin that Tom Karl has too much to do. Tom Wigley is semi
retired and like Mike Wallace may not be responsive to requests from JGR.
We have Ben Santer in common ! Dave Thompson is a good suggestion.
I’d go for one of Tom Peterson or Dave Easterling.
To get a spread, I’d go with 3 US, One Australian and one in Europe.
So Neville Nicholls and David Parker.
All of them know the sorts of things to say – about our comment and
the awful original, without any prompting.

Cheers
Phil

At 15:50 05/08/2009, Kevin Trenberth wrote:

Hi all
I went to JGR site to look for index codes, and I see that the offending article has
been downloaded 128 times in past week (second). All the mnore reason to get on with
it.
see below
Kevin
Grant Foster wrote:

Gentlemen,
I’ve completed most of the submission to JGR, but there are three required entries I
hope you can help me with.
1) Keyword
Please provide 1 unique keyword

global temperatures, statistical methods, El Nino-Southern Oscillation, global warming

2) Index Terms
Please provide 3 unique index terms

1600 GLOBAL CHANGE
1616 Climate variability
3309 Climatology
1694 Instruments and techniques

3) Suggested Reviewers to Include
Please list the names of 5 experts who are knowledgeable in your area and could give
an unbiased review of your work. Please do not list colleagues who are close associates,
collaborators, or family members. (this requires name, email, and institution).

Tom Wigley [1]wigley@ucar.edu NCAR
Ben Santer [2] Lawrence Livermore
Mike Wallace [3] U Washington [May not be most responsive]
Dave Thompson [4] Col State Univ
Dave Easterling [5] NCDC

Sincerely,
Grant
___________________________________________________________________________________

8 Responses to “The Right Review”

  1. Brian B said

    –While not as dramatic as hide the decline it’s pretty plane that those chosen are on the team.–

    Is that an aeronautical engineer joke?

  2. Viv Evans said

    Forgive me for going OT so early, but please see this, from the Times/London (Link: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/copenhagen/article6946281.ece)

    “Jean-Pascal van Ypersele, vice-chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), said the theft from the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit (CRU) was not the work of amateur climate sceptics but a sophisticated and well-funded attempt to destroy public confidence in the science of man-made climate change.

    He said the fact that the e-mails were first uploaded to a sceptic website from a computer in Russia was an indication that the culprit was paid.

    “It’s very common for hackers in Russia to be paid for their services.
    If you look at that mass of e-mails a lot of work was done, not only to download the data but it’s a carefully made selection of e-mails and documents that’s not random at all. This is 13 years of data and it’s not a job of amateurs.” …”

    Yeah, right – it was Putin after all!

  3. Don B said

    Bishop Hill is looking for some reviews. (A repeat of the link posted in the last thread, but for different reasons.)

    http://bishophill.squarespace.com/blog/2009/12/6/climate-of-fear.html

  4. boballab said

    Check this little story out. It will bring a chuckle or two:

    http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2009/dec/06/treading-lightly-environment/

  5. timetochooseagain said

    Off topic: Another climate scientist speaks out on Climategate:

    http://www.thegwpf.org/opinion-pros-a-cons/218-petr-chylek-open-letter-to-the-climate-research-community.html

  6. FrancisT said

    I think they actually have a point in this paper. You can (or could) download drafts of the Tamino et al comment via a link in one of those emails and they way I read it the orginal McLean ENSO paper seems to have done some very odd filtering. Here’s how Tamino et al describe the method:

    For all monthly time series (the global and tropical MSU temperature estimates from UAH and the SOI from the Australian Government Bureau of Meteorology), the analysis of MFC09 first takes 12-month moving averages of the data, then takes differences between those values which are 12 months apart. The first step filters out the high-frequency variation from the time series, while the second step filters out low-frequency variation. The latter step is perhaps the most problematic aspect of their analysis. It approximates taking the time derivative of the smoothed series, and therefore (as we illustrate in Section 4) any underlying linear trend which may be present in the original data will be replaced by an additive constant in the filtered time series. Since an additive constant makes no contribution to the variance of a time series, it can have no effect on the correlation between time series. Therefore subsequent correlation-based analysis of the differenced time series can tell us nothing about the presence or causes of trends in the original data.

  7. Jim said

    A very nice radio interview by
    Aynsley Kellow Professor and Head of the School of Government at the University of Tasmania. Via Seth Roberts who has some interesting comments on the peer review process.
    Jim

  8. Kondealer said

    “Please list the names of 5 experts who are knowledgeable in your area and could give
    an unbiased review of your work. Please do not list colleagues who are close associates,
    collaborators, or family members. (this requires name, email, and institution)”

    So this is who Grant Foster suggested.

    Tom Wigley [1]wigley@ucar.edu NCAR
    Ben Santer [2] Lawrence Livermore
    Mike Wallace [3] U Washington [May not be most responsive]
    Dave Thompson [4] Col State Univ
    Dave Easterling [5] NCDC

    The lying bastard.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: