the Air Vent

Because the world needs another opinion

SI 1 Images

Posted by Jeff Id on February 13, 2011

There is a lot of silliness going on in the believer community about which reconstructions are correct. It should be rather obvious by now and Ryan has some more work on that soon, but this image was one of my favorite from the initial submission. Of course it’s about the only one I contributed to, but what this shows is that our choice of Kgnd (left two columns) created a fairly accurate representation of actual measured trends (right column – closest station infilling). Column 3 was done well after 1 and 2 had already been completed so there was no back-changing for a better match.

It is a demonstration that the methods we were using worked as intended. With further complaints from Reviewer A who still today argues about Kgnd, iRidge was suggested for a fourth and fifth column comparison which doesn’t use Kgnd but a weighted function rather than simple truncation of high order PC’s. It was done again with very similar results. Now IMO you can argue Kgnd all day, but when the result is invariant to the methods, the result is probably right and an open mind has little choice but to accept it for what it is.

3 Responses to “SI 1 Images”

  1. The lack of warming in Antarctica is one of the elephants in room of climate alarmism; these figures are like a whole page of laughing elephants – especially noticable when you have a blue ‘eye’ 😉

  2. Anonymous said

    For a former blogger you’ve been doing pretty well lately, Mr. Id.

    When I first heard that the article had been accepted, I noted my interest in how confidence in the trends would be computed. At some point I’ll take the time to understand the details, but for now, can you give me your off-the-cuff assessment?

    I don’t mean “how confident are you that the trend confidence intervals were computed correctly given the data and the and the assumptions embedded in the model – I’m comfortable assuming the technical competence of the authors/reviewers.

    Instead, I mean this – how much do you think (educated guess, that is) problems with the quality of the data and/or the viability of the assumptions of the model might have introduced error in the estimated trends at the local and continent-wide levels.

    RyanO seems to be getting at this distinction when he says things like “if you’re going to use the model in Steig 09, this is the right way to do it” while avoiding claims that the results are objectively “true”.

  3. Morgan said

    Sorry – I was “anonymous” at 4:13pm.

Leave a Reply

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

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

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: