tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post1575055181853207567..comments2024-03-18T03:27:18.777-04:00Comments on Rabett Run: EliRabetthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07957002964638398767noreply@blogger.comBlogger28125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-16925408623410434092009-10-11T01:55:59.813-04:002009-10-11T01:55:59.813-04:00I dislike how you were treated by Bender et al ove...I dislike how you were treated by Bender et al over at CA. There is a common issue (not one of a particular side) of being unwilling to answer questions of fact, but instead wanting to shift the debate to the inferences that you think will come afterwards.<br /><br />Did Steve ask for the data from the Russians is a yes/no question. People should be more direct in answering these things. I see the problem all the time with people like Dhogza. It's not just a rightie thing. It's a human failing of the hoi polloi. I did once disarm Lucia...by just giving her direct answers and then confounding her when she jumped to an inference...assuming I had conceded more than I had.TCOnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-13067298799332322632009-10-10T14:50:45.662-04:002009-10-10T14:50:45.662-04:00Well Stevie Mac has a new "woe is me" po...Well Stevie Mac has a new "woe is me" post up. This is too bad, I was hoping for a "mea culpa" post. In it he admits that he actually did the analysis using the data he got from Hantemirov and guess what? He got pretty much the same results as those that Briffa got. And here comes the crux of the problem...<br /><br />It seems that McIntyre misunderstands what Briffa means when he says a sample is "highly replicated". McIntyre seems to believe that it means that a master chronology consists of a lot of individual chronologies, so he can't believe that a sample that consists of only 17 chronologies dating from the present or near present could be highly replicated. From <a href="http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/people/briffa/Briffa_HB_2008.pdf" rel="nofollow">this</a> it appears as though what he means is that a large number of trees, both modern and sub-fossil, are included in the sample. This is certainly the case in the Yamal series which has well over 200 trees included. This obviously is more than the estimated 62 samples necessary to create an accurate RCS curve, so there is no problem with sample size as Steve alleges in this <a href="http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=7328#more-7328" rel="nofollow">post</a>.<br /><br />Finally, why didn't he just ask Briffa to confirm or deny his result? A simple e-mail saying "here are my results from analyzing the Hantemirov Yamal data. I get the same overall results as you, but I can't believe that you used a sample with only 17 chronologies. Is this correct?" Would have done. The answer would have been yes, and Steve could have moved on to accusing him of fraud and incompetence based on McIntyre's misunderstanding of what Briffa means when he says highly replicated.<br /><br />I find it really rather pathetic to watch Steve accuse Briffa of the misuse of his own f'ing method, which he has been developing for over a decade.Rattus Norvegicushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03449457204330125792noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-91329188317279386052009-10-09T19:58:02.294-04:002009-10-09T19:58:02.294-04:00Maybe if he had Briffa's code to work with.&qu...Maybe if he had Briffa's code to work with."<br /><br />so, scientists have to lead mcIntyre by the hand, now?<br /><br />What's the matter, not competent enough to do the analysis of the data himself?<br /><br />I had to laugh when NASA GISS provided the (surface station) code for their mean temp anolmaly calculation. <br /><br />The nitwits at CA could not even manage to compile it! (apparently, they thought the GISTEMP analysis "code" just put up a big buutton on the screen and all you had to do was click on it and voila', done!<br /><br />What a bunch of f...ing idiots.<br /><br />Perhaps if they actually took a computer class or two, they might have a clue.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-43111229407705856352009-10-09T04:43:45.342-04:002009-10-09T04:43:45.342-04:00Actually dhogaza, I posted it in the comments righ...Actually dhogaza, I posted it in the comments right here, and that's where you quoted it.MikeNnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-90676376640200706502009-10-08T20:16:24.916-04:002009-10-08T20:16:24.916-04:00The e-mail from Briffa to McIntyre that I'm cr...The e-mail from Briffa to McIntyre that I'm credited with pointing out came from someone posting on Deep Climate, if not DC him/herself IIRC.<br /><br />DC has done a bunch of slogging on this crapfest and deserves a virtual toast in appreciation.dhogazanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-53389992100770479622009-10-08T14:30:24.293-04:002009-10-08T14:30:24.293-04:00I've already posted about this. This isn'...I've already posted about this. This isn't the only data Phil Trans made Briffa post. The data from Helama et al were also posted, no coauthors there.<br /><br />So Phil Trans didn't care about coauthors when they made him post data. Nature didn't care when they made Moberg post data.<br /><br />Your focus on coauthors is not logical. So if you coauthor a paper, all data you've ever used is now open? But if someone else owns the data it gets to stay secret? Why would a journal have a rule like that?MikeNnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-38304560029103287632009-10-08T14:08:51.700-04:002009-10-08T14:08:51.700-04:00Again, this data is only available now because one...<i><br />Again, this data is only available now because one journal made Briffa provide the data.<br /></i><br /><br />Anonymous you ignorant slut!<br /><br />The reason that one journal required the data to be archived is that one of the Briffa's co-authors owned the data! <br /><br />I refer the ignorant slut to: http://deepclimate.org/2009/10/07/let-the-backpedalling-begin/#comment-533<br /><br /><i><br /><br /><br />MikeN,<br />I thought I would check on who the co-authors were for Phil Trans. And guess what I found? A certain dendro named Hantemirov. But you knew that already, didn’t you.<br /><br />Nice try, though.<br /></i>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-49615135166065167512009-10-08T13:47:02.241-04:002009-10-08T13:47:02.241-04:00Maybe if he had Briffa's code to work with. B...Maybe if he had Briffa's code to work with. Before, even the data Mann posted on his site was wrong, and Mann replaced it, and accused Steve McIntyre of having bad data. Burned once, he's a bit more careful now.<br /><br />Again, this data is only available now because one journal made Briffa provide the data.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-32035853643358710972009-10-08T13:31:25.032-04:002009-10-08T13:31:25.032-04:00McIntyre's excuse is nonsense:
In response t...McIntyre's excuse is nonsense: <br /><br /><i>In response to your point that I wasn't "diligent enough" in pursuing the matter with the Russians, in fact, I already had a version of the data from the Russians, one that I'd had since 2004. What I didn't know until a couple of weeks ago was that this was the actual version that Briffa had used.</i><br /><br />All he needed to do to confirm that this was the version that Briffa used was to do the analysis with the version and see if it gave the same result as Briffa got (I find it very hard to believe that McIntyre did NOT do that).<br /><br />It's hard to escape the conclusion that McIntyre has simply been playing a game here that has nothing to do with science.<br /><br />He obviously enjoys creating the illusion that scientists are out to with-hold data from him (for whatever reason).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-50277529454108479062009-10-07T12:00:45.461-04:002009-10-07T12:00:45.461-04:00Just to let you, Steve has been in possession of t...Just to let you, Steve has been in possession of the data all the time:<br />http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=7310#comment-360284<br />Something I'm a bit disappointed to hear.Jean Snoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-78263476431115073542009-10-07T09:04:55.248-04:002009-10-07T09:04:55.248-04:00Eli,
I replied over on Ben Hale's blog. Steve ...Eli,<br />I <a href="http://cruelmistress.wordpress.com/2009/10/01/hockey-stick-redux/#comment-307" rel="nofollow">replied over on Ben Hale's blog</a>. Steve has answered your charges on his blog. Rather than split the discussion even further, I'll be watching over there (when I can... I do have a life :) )<br /><br />I am sorry that I don't have the capacity to fully engage everywhere.<br /><br />MrPeteMrPetehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11889531760730800867noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-58004212828246939272009-10-07T05:19:03.887-04:002009-10-07T05:19:03.887-04:00Eli, thanks for the detective work. I assembled so...Eli, thanks for the detective work. I assembled some of McIntyre's quotes related to this story, and will update it with these very relevant one you and dhogaza pointed out. See http://ourchangingclimate.wordpress.com/2009/10/06/mcintyres-role-in-the-latest-teapot-tempest/<br /><br />BartAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-73321873307697082322009-10-07T02:56:42.916-04:002009-10-07T02:56:42.916-04:00Sigh, I wish John Tukey were still around.Sigh, I wish John Tukey were still around.John Masheyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17786354229618237133noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-61539512209416373932009-10-06T23:32:16.312-04:002009-10-06T23:32:16.312-04:00>End of story.
No, not end of story. Why did T...>End of story.<br />No, not end of story. Why did Trans B or whatever its called require him to release his data? How are they different? It has nothing to do with the coauthors. Even if Briffa had collected the data himself, Science wouldn't have made him publish it. Why would having the data owner be a coauthor change things?<br /><br />OT, but how does the author providing permission work? Is there a head author for each paper who makes the decision? What if Shiyatov says OK, but Hantemirov says no?<br />For the Mann 98 hockey stick, what if B&H say yes and Mann says no?MikeNnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-62740173717955962642009-10-06T19:39:15.899-04:002009-10-06T19:39:15.899-04:00You say Briffa took the Science policy to the limi...You say Briffa took the Science policy to the limit. I'm asking if it was really the limit. If Briffa had published the first paper with the chronology at Science instead of QSR, would their data policy have required him to provide raw data then?MikeNnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-2731892011300427562009-10-06T17:38:35.284-04:002009-10-06T17:38:35.284-04:00If it wasn't his measurement data, why yes, Br...If it wasn't his measurement data, why yes, Briffa or whomever had to go get permission and the data owners have to be acknowledged.<br /><br />Science was pretty clear, the only thing they would require to be archived was measurement data. There was none in the paper. End of story.<br /><br />Reconstructions are not measurement data.EliRabetthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07957002964638398767noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-43760184448649536322009-10-06T17:36:13.915-04:002009-10-06T17:36:13.915-04:00Frankly Eli has played these games with Nigel befo...Frankly Eli has played these games with Nigel before. There are usually multiple copies of any data set circulating with minor differences because they were sent at different times, clear places where there are problems with the original data that are crystal clear to anyone who RTFR and similar. Nigel takes it all as VERY VERY IMPORTANT. STOP THE PRESSES<br /><br />You start playing this nonsense with him, you lose your life to his nitpicking and that is what it is. Stuff any idiot with a computer could figure out for himself in two seconds and should. Nigel is very high maintenance.EliRabetthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07957002964638398767noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-63772524341964200582009-10-06T15:57:26.824-04:002009-10-06T15:57:26.824-04:00I think the Hantemirov is an author theory breaks ...I think the Hantemirov is an author theory breaks down, because that is not the only data they published. They used several series, and Helama et al shares no authors with Briffa's 2008 paper. So did he have to go and get permission from that author? <br />PhilTransB appears to have made no distinction between the two. Why should Science?MikeNnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-80203917461518417142009-10-06T15:48:02.374-04:002009-10-06T15:48:02.374-04:00What I don't understand about all these data-w...What I don't understand about all these data-withholding kerfuffles is; don't these researchers understand that unless the raw data that their conclusions are based upon is made available, their conclusions are rendered unverifiable claims, and valueless?<br /><br />Science is supposed to be a fact-based endeavor, not faith-based.<br /><br />Anon Y. MousAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-3371159636009387782009-10-06T15:14:26.094-04:002009-10-06T15:14:26.094-04:00So Briffa published his chronology in 2000 using d...So Briffa published his chronology in 2000 using data from H&S, then published in Science in 2006.<br />What if the first paper with the chronology had been published in Science? Should they have required Briffa to provide raw data then? Do you think that is a reasonable policy- If they don't provide the data, they don't publish?Mikenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-55884328176810075872009-10-06T14:57:48.262-04:002009-10-06T14:57:48.262-04:00You are confusing Science's answer regarding O...You are confusing Science's answer regarding Osborn & Briffa 2006(whcih you have left out of your description.) They responded:<br />Osborn and Briffa did not not use raw tree-core measurements, only chronologies that had previously been assembled by others, and these have been deposited. You may want to contact those original authors or those publications if you require their raw data.<br /><br />The chronology which was deposited was produced by Briffa. The raw data was produced by H&S.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-59320646835521451822009-10-06T14:43:04.552-04:002009-10-06T14:43:04.552-04:00Eli,
In 2006, Briffa did respond to Steve Steve th...Eli,<br />In 2006, Briffa did respond to Steve Steve these data were produced by Swedish and Russian colleagues - will pass on your message to them]<br />cheers, Keith<br /><br />In response to <br />Dear Dr Briffa,<br />On April 28, 2006, I asked Tim Osborn for the measurement data for Polar Urals, Tornetrask, Yamal and Taimyr sites, supporting the chronologies used in Osborn and Briffa [2006]. Osborn says that he does not have the data, but did not say that you didn't have the data. Do you have the data? If so would you please comply with the request below and voluntarily provide the measurement data used in Briffa 2000, and relied upon in Osborn and Briffa 2006, for these sites.<br />Thank you for your attention. Steve McIntyre <br /><br />Strangely it doesn't mention Yamal.<br /><br />MikeAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-70201112205748272272009-10-06T14:11:22.271-04:002009-10-06T14:11:22.271-04:00Mike
Briffa says he using the same data, but the ...Mike<br /><br />Briffa says he using the same data, but the core counts are different between his chronology and the Russians' chronology, though they match for the time period that Steve has focused on.<br />Any explanations given as to methodology, beyond RCS? The chronology itself was not published as a separate paper.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-12994279162934023732009-10-06T11:45:58.629-04:002009-10-06T11:45:58.629-04:00And having read CA this morning, again, the bunny ...And having read CA this morning, again, the bunny was right. (see the update). Even worse, Science pretty much told him what to do, go ask for the "measurement data" which the RUSSIANS hadEliRabetthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07957002964638398767noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-82220784192093003382009-10-06T07:26:47.274-04:002009-10-06T07:26:47.274-04:00The most disquieting bit is that McIntyre almost c...The most disquieting bit is that McIntyre almost certainly went after the wrong person to get the data, probably made himself so obnoxious that no one wanted to share.EliRabetthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07957002964638398767noreply@blogger.com