From	Phil Jones	Date	Thu Aug 4 09:49:54 2005
To	Michael E. Mann
Subject	Re: Out in latest J. Climate
Mike, Gabi was supposed to be there but wasn't either. I think Gabi isn't being objective as she might because of Tom C. I recall Keith telling me that her recent paper has been rejected, not sure if outright or not. Gabi sees the issue from a D&A perspective, not whether any curve is nearer the truth, but just what the envelope of the range might be. There is an issue coming up in IPCC. Every curve needs error bars, and having them is all that matters. It seems irrelevant whether they are right or how they are used. Changing timescales make this simple use impractical. We have a new version of HadCRUT just submitted, so soon the'll be HadCRUT3v and CRUTEM3v. The land doesn't change much. This has errors associated with each point, but the paper doesn't yet discuss how to use them. I'll attach this paper. Only just been submitted to JGR - not in this format though. This format lays it out better. Thanks for reminding Scott. Cheers Phil At 08:48 04/08/2005, you wrote: Hi Phil, Thanks for the heads up. Will be prepared for this then. I thought that Gabi Hegerl was involved with this guy? Doesn't she know better? It is disturbing that she hasn't set them straight on this. By the way, as you may or may not have heard, its been discovered that there is a major error in Von Storch et al '04 that they now appear to be trying to hide (they have some obscure article in an Italian journal where they attempt to justify the error). There are several comments that have been or are soon to be submitted to Science about this. As it turns out, they introduces a spurious step in their supposed implementation of the MBH98 procedure in which they detrended the series first, gives completely wrong results.. Caspar Ammann and Gene Wahl and David Ritson of Stanford have both independently discovered this, because they noticed that amplitude of the calibrated signal in VS04 scales with the signal-to-noise ratio--this was the first clue that there was a major problem. There may be calls upon Science for them to retract their paper. The results are completely wrong, aside from the problems w/ the GKSS simulation. You can expect to hear more about this soon... I'll remind Scott about the proxies. He and Zhang are in the process of screening the proxy series for temperature signals, etc. Once they've done that, should be more useful. I expect we'll be able to get you some stuff by late August. I did hear about the 3 papers coming out in Science. Apparently Donald Kennedy is doing an editorial that will discuss this in the context of the whole Barton business. That should be interesting...There will be articles by both Gavin and Steve Sherwood on "RealClimate" in coordination with the publication of the papers in Science Express. This should help turn the debate around. talk to you later, mike Phil Jones wrote: Mike, He's been working with Myles Allen. Tim went to the first meeting of this Dutch funded project near Oxford last week. Tim said they were doing some odd things, like correlating all the proxy series they had with CET (yes CET)! Even the few SH proxies they have. The others who went to the meeting were Zorita and Moberg. Zorita was still showing the GKSS run with Moberg series, even though its forcing is too large, it doesn't have aerosols in the 20th century and has spin up problems for the first 200 years. Meeting wasn't that productive according to Tim. There was a belief amongst those there that all trees you used have lost low-freq, but this isn't true as you know. Also, it was a good job Keith wasn't there (he didn't go as his father died the weekend before and he's not been in CRU since) as Martin assumed that RCS was developed by Esper (who also wasn't there). Tim put them right on this one, but RCS isn't applicable for normal tree sites, nor useful for bristlecones. Tim said Esper was wrong is his use of RCS, but they wouldn't accept that as Esper wasn't there to defend himself! Basically only Tim knew anything about proxy data especially trees. Tim got the impression that they wanted to find that MBH is wrong. Given the previous comment, as you weren't there they are using double standards. So, in conclusion, act carefully. Don't jump in, but some carefully thought through comments should be productive. Suggest they read the RevG article. Martin isn't associated with the contrarians, but he's not in possession of the all the facts. He isn't aware of Casper's work, nor your latest study which you sent the other day, nor Rutherford et al. There still seems to be a belief in these lower responding proxies. This is something we want to work on more here, as the only way it seems to show that these lower-freq proxies aren't that great is to use higher-freq proxies. When you're back or sometime, can you remind Scott to send your latest set of proxies. I'll have some time in the autumn to work on them as the AR4 should be in by Aug 12. Science should be publishing 3 papers on the MSU issue by the end of Aug or early Sept. This is Mears/Wentz, Santer et al. and Sherwood et al. Latter shows that sondes are only truly reliable when flown at night. Daytime ones have all manner of problems with heating, just like air temps on board ships - hence the NMAT series. I'll forward another email for interest. Cheers Phil At 03:40 04/08/2005, you wrote: Hi Phil, Thanks, yes I'm in China now. As you might imagine, ,things have been very busy, but calming down a bit. Looks like Barton may be backing down... Martin Juckes has an invited talk in my session. I invited him, because he was working w/ Stott et al, and so I assume he was legit, and not associated with the contrarians. But if he's associated w/ the Dutch group, he may actually be a problem. Do you have additional information about him and what he has been up to? Thanks, mike Phil Jones wrote: Mike, Good to hear it is out ! Hope the changeover is going OK and life is getting back to normal. If you're not gone to China yet - you'll meet someone called Martin Dukes (?). He's giving a talk at your session. He knows about maths etc but not much about paleo ! Might need some education, but is probably OK. Not met him, but Tim has. Doing some worked funded by the Dutch govt on the hockey stick. Cheers Phil At 04:05 03/08/2005, you wrote: Dear Colleagues, FYI, two papers attached: First (reprint), Rutherford et al, is now out in latest issue of Journal of Climate. This paper, aside from addressing other more scientifically-worthwhile issues, also happens to discredit most of the McIntyre and McKitrick claims. Second (preprint), Mann et al, is formally in press (i.e., has gone off to the AMS production staff) in Journal of Climate. This paper strongly challenges the conclusions of von Storch et al (2004), and raises some methodological issues w/ the approach used by Moberg et al (2005). Feel free to pass along to others. Thanks Mike -- Michael E. Mann Associate Professor Director, Earth System Science Center (ESSC) Department of Meteorology Phone: (814) 863-4075 503 Walker Building FAX: (814) 865-3663 The Pennsylvania State University email: mann@psu.edu University Park, PA 16802-5013 [1]http://www.evsc.virginia.edu/faculty/people/mann.shtml Prof. Phil Jones Climatic Research Unit Telephone +44 (0) 1603 592090 School of Environmental Sciences Fax +44 (0) 1603 507784 University of East Anglia Norwich Email p.jones@uea.ac.uk NR4 7TJ UK ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- Michael E. Mann Associate Professor Director, Earth System Science Center (ESSC) Department of Meteorology Phone: (814) 863-4075 503 Walker Building FAX: (814) 865-3663 The Pennsylvania State University email: mann@psu.edu University Park, PA 16802-5013 [2]http://www.evsc.virginia.edu/faculty/people/mann.shtml Prof. Phil Jones Climatic Research Unit Telephone +44 (0) 1603 592090 School of Environmental Sciences Fax +44 (0) 1603 507784 University of East Anglia Norwich Email p.jones@uea.ac.uk NR4 7TJ UK ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- Michael E. Mann Associate Professor Director, Earth System Science Center (ESSC) Department of Meteorology Phone: (814) 863-4075 503 Walker Building FAX: (814) 865-3663 The Pennsylvania State University email: mann@psu.edu University Park, PA 16802-5013 [3]http://www.evsc.virginia.edu/faculty/people/mann.shtml Prof. Phil Jones Climatic Research Unit Telephone +44 (0) 1603 592090 School of Environmental Sciences Fax +44 (0) 1603 507784 University of East Anglia Norwich Email p.jones@uea.ac.uk NR4 7TJ UK ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- References 1. http://www.evsc.virginia.edu/faculty/people/mann.shtml 2. http://www.evsc.virginia.edu/faculty/people/mann.shtml 3. http://www.evsc.virginia.edu/faculty/people/mann.shtml