Michael Mann -> Phil Jones (1680.txt)
|I have been talking w/ folks in the states about finding an investigative journalist to investigate and expose McIntyre, and his thusfar unexplored connections with fossil fuel interests.Perhaps the same needs to be done w/ this Keenan guy.|
I believe that the only way to stop these people is by exposing them and discrediting them.
Do you mind if I send this on to Gavin Schmidt (w/ a request to respect the confidentiality with which you have provided it) for his additional advice/thoughts? He usually has thoughtful insights wiith respect to such matters,
Phil Jones -> [vários] (1577.txt)
|Any work we have done in the past is done on the back of the research grants we get - and has to be well hidden. I've discussed this with the main funder (US Dept of Energy) in the past and they are happy about not releasing the original station data.|
Some of you may not know, but the dataset has been sent by someone at the Met Office to McIntyre. The Met Office are trying to find out who did this. I've ascertained it most likely came from there, as I'm the only one who knows where the files are here.
Edward Cook -> Keith Briffa (4369.txt)
|I will be sure not to bring this up to Mike. As you know, he thinks that CRU is out to get him in some sense. So, a very carefully worded and described bit by you and Keith will be important. I am afraid that Mike is defending something that increasingly can not be defended. He is investing too much personal stuff in this and not letting the science move ahead. I am afraid that he is losing out in the process. That is too bad.|
Phil Jones -> Manola (0021.txt)
|I've saved emails at CRU and then deleted them from the server. Now I'm at home I just have some hard copies.|
Rob Wilson-> [vários] (4241.txt)
|The whole Macintyre issue got me thinking about over-fitting and the potential bias of screening against the target climate parameter.|
Therefore, I thought I'd play around with some randomly generated time-series and see if I could 'reconstruct' northern hemisphere temperatures.
I first generated 1000 random time-series in Excel - I did not try and approximate the persistence structure in tree-ring data. The autocorrelation therefore of the time-series was close to zero, although it did vary between each time-series. Playing around therefore with the AR persistent structure of these time-series would make a difference. However, as these series are generally random white noise processes, I thought this would be a conservative test of any potential bias.
The reconstructions clearly show a 'hockey-stick' trend. I guess this is precisely the phenomenon that Macintyre has been going on about.
It is certainly worrying, but I do not think that it is a problem so long as one screens against LOCAL temperature data and not large scale temperature where trend dominates the correlation.
Raymond Bradley -> Keith Briffa (3373.txt)
|Also--& I'm sure you agree--the Mann/Jones GRL paper was truly pathetic and should never have been published. I don't want to be associated with that 2000 year "reconstruction".|
Phil Jones -> Tom Wigley (4789.txt)
|Bryan Weare is at US Davis. He would know about some of the things you mention. The jerk you mention was called Good(e)rich who found urban warming at all Californian sites.|