I just got a call from Gabi, who spent the day in Washington at that NAS panel on the hockey stick. She doesn't have access to e-mail today, and so asked me to convey a message. McIntyre and McKittrick were there, and seem to have left Gabi with the strong impression that they will be insisting on having access to supporting data, etc., used to build reconstructions. Gabi says that this is making her nervous, wants to make sure that you are aware of the status of her reconstruction, and wants to be sure that you are comfortable with continuing to use it in Ch 6. She says that if you feel it necessary to exclude her reconstruction from your SOD of Ch 6, you should do so. The reconstruction is used in her Nature paper on sensitivity, which has been accepted, but the Nature paper does not describe the reconstruction or the supporting data in any detail... Francis Zwiers, Chief...Canadian Ctr for Climate Modelling and Analysis
Hat tip: AJ
Posts
3 comments:
Obviously she had no faith in her work.
This is priceless, you couldn't make it up. A researcher nervous about revealing their supporting workings for their reconstructions.
So much for robust scientific reconstructions, more like houses of cards.
Someone somewhere must surely be working on a comedy series about Climastrologists and their fantasy worlds.
The essence of any reasearch data is the ability to reproduce it. One study is worthless. Climategate has proven these are not scientists but ideological propagandists. And they like getting research grants. They are the 1%.
Post a Comment