Posted by Jeff Id on August 23, 2011
At Bishop Hill blog, an FOI was denied for the release of my and others correspondence with Dr. Paul Dennis because the record was lost. I just reviewed it again now and it was on November 19th 2009 that Paul Dennis sent me an email regarding his paper on Antarctic isotope analysis. I hadn’t realized it was on the same day as climategate until now. That would certainly be of interest to the understandably climate-ignorant investigators. Perhaps that coincidence changes some of the possibilities of motivation for the Guardian article promoting a silly unstated hypothesis regarding the Doctor?
I don’t see any replies from me back to him as I was somewhat distracted by climategate for the next couple of months. Hopefully, I’m forgiven for the lack of politeness. He only left 3 other comments on public blog threads here that I found, all prior to this time which were constructively, and unfortunately for me ,correctly, critical of my understanding of various aspects of ice cores at the time.
In other words, here is to my knowledge, the complete unabridged (except for email addresses) version of our email communications.
Dennis Paul Mr (ENV) P.xxxxxxxx to firstname.lastname@example.org date Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 10:22 AM subject New paper on Antarctic Peninsula mailed-by hide details 11/19/09
I read your blog, and others, with great interest and often a smile. I think it’s fantastic that so many are involving themselves in the debate and thinking with clarity about the issues. and notably the statistics.
Anyway that’s beside the point. I’ve attached a short GRL paper we’ve just published on an ice core from the base of the Antarctic Peninsula. It obviously has relevance to the ongoing debate, the work of Eric Steig et al. and your own analysis of this paper.
Head of Stable Isotope Laboratories
School of Environmental Sciences
I suppose that a scientist discussing his own work is a little unusual. ;) I should do a post on his paper, it was interesting as I recall.