From	Jim Salinger	Date	Wed, 29 Jul 2009 06:22:53 +1200
To	Kevin Trenberth
CC	Phil Jones, Michael E. Mann, Jim Renwick, Brett Mullan, Gavin Schmidt, James Annan, Grant Foster
Subject	Re: ENSO blamed over warming - paper in JGR
Good morning all from tomorrowland (Wednesday!) Gosh, you have all been very busy overnight here. Thank you, and Mike & I will start wordsmithing our section. We now have (in IPCC terms) a nice bunch of LA's and CAs for this commentary! 'Talk' to you later! Jim Quoting Kevin Trenberth : > Phil > see also this: > Trenberth, K. E., and L. Smith, 2009: Variations in the three > dimensional structure of the atmospheric circulation with different > flavors of El Niño. /J. Climate/, *12*, No. 11, 2978-2991, doi: > 10.1175/2008JCLI2691.1. [PDF] > > It has tables with relationships with Nino 3.4 and SOI and you can > see the differences in lead lag e.g. Table 1. SOI leads Nino 3.4 by > 1 or 2 months typically but as in the 2002 paper, the leads and > lags vary with Nino index, see also > Trenberth, K. E., and D. P. Stepaniak, 2001: Indices of El Niño > evolution. /J. Climate./, *14*, 1697-1701. [Paper(.pdf) > ] > ^* > > > Kevin > > Phil Jones wrote: >> >> Kevin, Mike et al, >> Figure 3 in what Kevin just sent is the sort of thing we need to show. >> On the lags, I think the reason the lag with what Tom did was different is >> that you used Nino3.4 SST and Tom used SOI. I know people think >> they are the same thing, but I think SOI lags a little behind 3.4 SST. >> It would be a useful bit of new science to look at the links between SOI >> and 3.4 SST, but it shouldn't be part of a comment on what's wrong with the >> awful paper For that you're going to have to use the Bureau Of Meteorology >> version of the SOI. These are on this web site >> http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/current/soihtm1.shtml >> I did check a few years ago and these numbers look pretty much the same >> as the CRU ones (allowing for the BoM multiplier of 10). >> When you calculate the SOI you normalize the Darwin >> and Tahiti series. BoM change the base period with each new year, so >> don't expect to get exactly the same results as McLean. >> You have to smooth the SOI series in some way as it is noisy. >> Their running mean >> is a lousy filter. I'd recommend using the one we did in Ch 3 of >> IPCC. It is on >> p336. The second filter will work fine, with all the months in >> sequence. It will >> approximate a 10-12 month filter and won't do anything to the phase. Maybe >> doing this with SOI and Nino3.4 will show a slight lag between the >> two - 3 months >> maybe! >> >> Cheers >> Phil >> >> >> At 15:57 28/07/2009, Kevin Trenberth wrote: >>> The leads and lags are analyzed in detail in this paper >>> Trenberth, K. E., J. M. Caron, D. P. Stepaniak, and S. Worley >>> 2002: The evolution of ENSO and global atmospheric surface >>> temperatures >>> /J. Geophys. Res./, *107*, D8, 10.1029/2000JD000298. >>> and we were not able to reproduce Tom Wigley's result (we tried). >>> It may depend in indices used. In this paper we also document the >>> extent to which ENSO contributes to warming overall. >>> Kevin >>> >>> Phil Jones wrote: >>>> Mike, >>>> See below for instructions. >>>> >>>> Also, just because IPCC (2007, Ch 3) didn't point out the 6/7-month lag >>>> between the SOI and global temperatures doesn't mean it hasn't been >>>> known for years. IPCC is an assessment and not a review of everything >>>> done. If they had even read Wigley (2001) they would have seen this >>>> lag pointed out. I wasn't the first to do this in 1989 either. I don't >>>> think Walker was either. I think the first was Hildebrandsson in the >>>> 1890s. Why does it always go back to a Swede! >>>> >>>> file is at ftp.cru.uea.ac.uk >>>> >>>> login anonymously with emails as pw >>>> >>>> then go to people/philjones >>>> >>>> and you should find santeretal2001.pdf >>>> >>>> Cheers >>>> Phil >>>> >>>> >>>> At 14:08 28/07/2009, Michael Mann wrote: >>>>> thanks Phil, >>>>> >>>>> this is very helpful and reaffirms what we've identified as some >>>>> of the main points that need to be covered in a formal response. >>>>> I've taken the liberty of copying in a couple other colleagues >>>>> who have been looking into this. Grant Foster was the first >>>>> author on a response to a similarly bad paper by Schwartz that >>>>> was published some time ago, and has been doing a number of >>>>> analyses aimed at demonstrating the key problems in McClean et al. >>>>> >>>>> I've suggested that Grant sent out a draft of the response when >>>>> it is ready to the broader group of people who have been >>>>> included in these exchanges for feedback and potential >>>>> co-authorship, >>>>> >>>>> mike >>>>> >>>>> p.s. Santer et al paper still didn't come through in your >>>>> followup message. Can you post in on ftp where it can be >>>>> downloaded? >>>>> On Jul 28, 2009, at 5:15 AM, Phil Jones wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Jim et al, >>>>>> Having now read the paper in a moment of peace and quiet, >>>>>> there are a few things >>>>>> to bear in mind. The authors of the original will have a right >>>>>> of reply, so need to >>>>>> ensure that they don't have anything to come back on. From >>>>>> doing the attached a >>>>>> year or so ago, there is a word limit and also it is important >>>>>> to concentrate only >>>>>> on a few key points. As we all know there is so much wrong with >>>>>> the paper, it >>>>>> won't be difficult to come up with a few, but it does need to >>>>>> be just two or three. >>>>>> >>>>>> The three aspects I would emphasize are >>>>>> >>>>>> 1. The first difference type filtering. Para 14 implies that >>>>>> they smooth the series >>>>>> with a 12 month running mean, then subtract the value in Jan >>>>>> 1980 from that in >>>>>> Jan 1979, then Feb 1980 from Feb 1979 and so on. As we know >>>>>> this removes >>>>>> any long-term trend. >>>>>> >>>>>> The running mean also probably distorts the phase, so this is >>>>>> possibly why >>>>>> they get different lags from others. Using running means also >>>>>> enhances the >>>>>> explained variance. Perhaps we should repeat the exercise >>>>>> without the smoothing. >>>>>> >>>>>> 2. Figure 4 and Figure 1 show the unsmoothed GTTA series. These >>>>>> clearly have a >>>>>> trend. Perhaps show the residual after extracting the ENSO part. >>>>>> >>>>>> 3. They do the same first difference on the smoothed SOI. The >>>>>> SOI doesn't explain >>>>>> the climate jump in the 1976/77 period. Their arguments in para >>>>>> 30 are all wrong. >>>>>> >>>>>> A few minor points >>>>>> >>>>>> - there are some negative R*R values just after equation 3. >>>>>> - I'm sure Tom Wigley wouldn't have proposed El Nino events >>>>>> occurring after volcanoes! >>>>>> Attached this paper as well. From a quick read it doesn't >>>>>> say what is purported - in fact >>>>>> it seems to show clearly how the analysis should have been done. >>>>>> - there is a paper by Ben Santer (more recent) where he >>>>>> applies the same type >>>>>> of extraction procedure to models. I'll send this separately as >>>>>> it is large. In case it >>>>>> is too large here is the reference. >>>>>> >>>>>> Santer, B.D., Wigley, T.M.L., Doutriaux, C., Boyle, J.S., >>>>>> Hansen, J.E., Jones, P.D., Meehl, G.A., Roeckner, E., Sengupta, >>>>>> S. and Taylor K.E., 2001: Accounting for the effects of >>>>>> volcanoes and ENSO in comparisons of modeled and observed >>>>>> temperature trends. Journal of Geophysical Research 106, >>>>>> 28033­28059. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Finally I've attached a paper I wrote in 1990, where I did >>>>>> something similar to >>>>>> what they did. I looked at residuals from a Gaussian filter, and I added >>>>>> the smoothed data back afterwards. I was working at the annual timescale >>>>>> and I did have many more years. >>>>>> >>>>>> Cheers >>>>>> Phil >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> At 00:19 25/07/2009, Michael Mann wrote: >>>>>>> Hi Jim, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Grant Foster ('Tamino') did a nice job in a previous response >>>>>>> (attached) we wrote to a similarly bad article by Schwartz which got a >>>>>>> lot of play in contrarian circles. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> since he's already done some of the initial work in debunking this, I >>>>>>> sent him an email asking hi if we was interested in spearheading a >>>>>>> similar effort w/ this one. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> let me get back to folks after I've heard back from him, and we can >>>>>>> discuss possible strategy for moving this forward, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> mike >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Jul 24, 2009, at 6:11 PM, Jim Salinger wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Kia orana All from the Tropical South Pacific >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Yes, Phil, a bit like 'A midsummer night's dream!'. and Gavin >>>>>>>> Tamino's bang up job is great, And good that you go up with stuff on >>>>>>>> Real Climate, Mike. As Kevin is preoccupied, for the scientific >>>>>>>> record we need a rebuttal somewhere pulled together. Who wants to >>>>>>>> join in on the multiauthored effort?? I am happy to coordinate it. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Return to 'winter' this evening after enjoying a balmy south east >>>>>>>> trades and sunny dry 24 C in the Cook Islands. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Jim >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Quoting Michael Mann : >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> folks, we're going to go up w/ something brief on RealClimate >>>>>>>>> later today, mostly just linking to other useful deconstructions >>>>>>>>> of the paper already up on other sites, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> mike >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Jul 23, 2009, at 11:01 PM, Jim Salinger wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I am tied up next week, but could frame something up the >>>>>>>>>> following week which , I hope would be multi-authored. It would >>>>>>>>>> be quite good to have a rebuttal from the same Department at Uni >>>>>>>>>> of Auckland (which Glenn McGregor of IJC is director of)! >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I haven't had tne oportunity to download the text here in the >>>>>>>>>> Cook Islands, so this would give me the opportunity to do that. >>>>>>>>>> Who else wants to join in?? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Jim >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Quoting Kevin Trenberth >>>>>>>>>> : >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I am on vacation today and don't have the time. I have been on >>>>>>>>>>> travel the >>>>>>>>>>> past 4 weeks (including AR5 IPCC scoping mtg); the NCAR summer >>>>>>>>>>> Colloquium >>>>>>>>>>> is coming up in a week and then I am off to Oz and NZ for 3 weeks >>>>>>>>>>> (GEWEX/iLeaps, CEOP) and I have an oceanobs'09 plenary paper to do. >>>>>>>>>>> Kevin >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> a formal comment to JGR seems like a worthwhile undertaking here. >>>>>>>>>>>> contrarians will continue to cite the paper regardless of >>>>>>>>>>>> whether or >>>>>>>>>>>> not its been rebutted, but for the purpose of future scientific >>>>>>>>>>>> assessments, its important that this be formally rebutted in >>>>>>>>>>>> the peer- >>>>>>>>>>>> reviewed literature. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> mike >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 23, 2009, at 9:05 PM, Jim Salinger wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi All >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for the pro-activeness. Is there an opportunity to write a >>>>>>>>>>>>> letter to JGR pointing out the junk science in this??....if it is >>>>>>>>>>>>> not rebutted, then all sceptics will use this to justify their >>>>>>>>>>>>> position. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Jim >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Quoting Michael Mann >>>>>>>>>>>>> : >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2nd email >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> ________ >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks Kevin, hadn't even noticed that in my terse initial >>>>>>>>>>>>>> skim of >>>>>>>>>>>>>> it. yes--that makes things even worse than my initial >>>>>>>>>>>>>> impression. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> this is a truly horrible paper. one wonders who the editor was, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> and what he/she was thinking (or drinking), >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> m >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 23, 2009, at 3:51 PM, Kevin Trenberth wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I just looked briefly at the paper. Their relationships use >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> derivatives >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of the series. Well derivatives are equivalent to a high pass >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> filter, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that is to say it filters out all the low frequency >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> variability and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> trends. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If one takes y= A sin wt >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and does a differentiation one gets >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dy = Aw cos wt. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So the amplitude goes from A to Aw where w is the frequency >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> = 2*pi/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> L where >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> L is the period. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So the response to this procedure is to reduce periods of 10 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> years by a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> factor of 5 compared with periods of 2 years, or 20 and 50 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> years get >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reduced by factors of 10 an 25 relative to two year periods. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> i.e. Their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> procedure is designed to only analyse the interannual >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> variability >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> trends. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kevin >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hi Seth, you always seem to catch me at airports. only got a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> few >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> minutes. took a cursory look at the paper, and it has all the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> worry >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> signs of extremely bad science and scholarship. JGR is a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> legitimate >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> journal, but some extremely bad papers have slipped through >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cracks >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in recent years, and this is another one of them. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> first of all, the authors use two deeply flawed datasets that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> understate the warming trends: the Christy and Spencer MSU >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> data and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> uncorrected radiosonde temperature estimates. There were a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> series >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> three key papers published in Science a few years ago, by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mears >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> et al, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Santer et al, and Sherwood et al. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> see Gavin's excellent RealClimate article on this: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2005/08/et- tu- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lt/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> these papers collectively showed that both datasets were >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> deeply >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> flawed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and understate actual tropospheric temperature trends. I >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> find it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> absolutely remarkable that this paper could get through a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> serious >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> review w/out referencing any 3 of these critical >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> papers-- papers >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whose >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> findings render that conclusions of the current article >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> completely >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> invalid! >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Christy and Spencer MSU satellite-derived tropospheric >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> temperature >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> estimates contained two errors--a sign error and an algebraic >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> error-- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that had the net effect of artificially removing the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> warming trend. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Christy and Spencer continue to produce revised versions of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the MSU >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dataset, but they always seem to show less warming than >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> every other >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> independent assessment, and their estimates are largely >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> disregarded by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> serious assessments such as that done by the NAS and the IPCC. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So these guys have taken biased estimates of tropospheric >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> temperatures >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that have artificially too little warming trend, and then >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shown, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> quite >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> unremarkably, that El Nino dominates much of what is left (the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> interannual variability). >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the paper has absolutely no implications that I can see at all >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> role of natural variability on the observed warming trend >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of recent >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> decades. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> other far more careful analyses (a paper by David Thompson >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of CSU, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Phil Jones, and others published in Nature more than year >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ago) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> used >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> proper, widely-accepted surface temperature data to estimate >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> influence of natural factors (El Nino and volcanos) on the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> surface >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> temperature record. their analysis was so careful and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> clever that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> detected a post-world war II error in sea surface temperature >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> measurements (that yields artificial cooling during the mid >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1940s) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that had never before been discovered in the global surface >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> temperature record. needless to say, they removed that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> error too. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the correct record, removing influences of ENSO, volcanoes, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> even >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this newly detected error, reveal that a robust warming of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> global mean >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> surface temperature over the past century of a little less >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than 1C >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> which has nothing to do w/ volcanic influences or ENSO >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> influences. the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dominant source of the overall warming, as concluded in every >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> legitimate major scientific assessment, is anthropogenic >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> influences >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (human greenhouse gas concentrations w/ some offsetting >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cooling >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> due to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sulphate aerosols). >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this later paper provides absolutely nothing to cast that in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> doubt. it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> uses a flawed set of surface temperature measurements for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> which the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> trend has been artificially suppressed, to show that whats >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> left >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> over >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (interannual variability) is due to natural influences. duh! >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> its a joke! and the aptly named Mark "Morano" has fallen for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it! >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> m >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 23, 2009, at 11:54 AM, Borenstein, Seth wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kevin, Gavin, Mike, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's Seth again. Attached is a paper in JGR today that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Marc Morano >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is hyping wildly. It's in a legit journal. Whatchya think? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Seth >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Seth Borenstein >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Associated Press Science Writer >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sborenstein@ap.org >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Associated Press, 1100 13th St. NW, Suite 700, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Washington, DC >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 20005-4076 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 202-641-9454 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The information contained in this communication is intended >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> use >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of the designated recipients named above. If the reader of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> communication is not the intended recipient, you are hereby >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> notified >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that you have received this communication in error, and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that any >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> review, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dissemination, distribution or copying of this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> communication is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> strictly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> please >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> notify The Associated Press immediately by telephone at >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1-212-621-1898 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and delete this e-mail. Thank you. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [IP_US_DISC] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> msk dccc60c6d2c3a6438f0cf467d9a4938 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 23, 2009, at 7:57 PM, Jim Salinger wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Precisely. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mike Mann: You better rush something up on RealClimate. Jim, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Brett, myself and maybe others will have to deal with the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> local >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fallout this will cause...oh dear...... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bye the way June was the warmest month on record for the oceans >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> according tro NOAA >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jim >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Quoting Kevin Trenberth >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> : >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Exactly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> They use 2 datasets that are deficient in the first place and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> then they >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> use derivatives: differentiation is a high pass filter, and so >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they show >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> what we have long known that ENSO accounts for a lot of high >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> frequency >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> variability. It should not have been published >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kevin >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> kia orana from Rarotonga >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> How the h... did this get accepted!! >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jim >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dominion today {24/7/09] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nature blamed over warming - describing recently published >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> paper >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> JGR by Chris de Freitas, Bob Carter and J McLean, and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> including >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> comment by J Salinger "little new" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> McLean J. D., C. R. de Freitas, R. M. Carter (2009), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Influence >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Southern Oscillation on tropospheric temperature, J. Geophys. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Res., >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 114, D14104, doi:10.1029/2008JD011637. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> paper at >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2009/2008JD011637.shtml >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Associate Professor Jim Salinger >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> School of Geography and Environmental Science >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> University of Auckland >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Private Bag 92 019 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Auckland, New Zealand >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tel: + 64 9 373 7599 ext 88473 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Program. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ___________________ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kevin Trenberth >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Climate Analysis Section, NCAR >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PO Box 3000 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Boulder CO 80307 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ph 303 497 1318 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/cas/trenbert.html >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Program. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Michael E. Mann >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> website: http://www.meteo.psu.edu/~mann/Mann/index.html >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Dire Predictions" book site: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.essc.psu.edu/essc_web/news/DirePredictions/index.html >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>>>>>> This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>> Michael E. Mann >>>>>>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> website: http://www.meteo.psu.edu/~mann/Mann/index.html >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> "Dire Predictions" book site: >>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.essc.psu.edu/essc_web/news/DirePredictions/index.html >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> ___________________ >>>>>>>>>>> Kevin Trenberth >>>>>>>>>>> Climate Analysis Section, NCAR >>>>>>>>>>> PO Box 3000 >>>>>>>>>>> Boulder CO 80307 >>>>>>>>>>> ph 303 497 1318 >>>>>>>>>>> http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/cas/trenbert.html >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>>> This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> Michael E. Mann >>>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> website: http://www.meteo.psu.edu/~mann/Mann/index.html >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> "Dire Predictions" book site: >>>>>>>>> http://www.essc.psu.edu/essc_web/news/DirePredictions/index.html >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>> This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Michael E. Mann >>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> website: http://www.meteo.psu.edu/~mann/Mann/index.html >>>>>>> >>>>>>> "Dire Predictions" book site: >>>>>>> http://www.essc.psu.edu/essc_web/news/DirePredictions/index.html >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi Jim, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Grant Foster ('Tamino') did a nice job in a previous response >>>>>>> (attached) we wrote to a similarly bad article by Schwartz >>>>>>> which got a lot of play in contrarian circles. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> since he's already done some of the initial work in debunking >>>>>>> this, I sent him an email asking hi if we was interested in >>>>>>> spearheading a similar effort w/ this one. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> let me get back to folks after I've heard back from him, and >>>>>>> we can discuss possible strategy for moving this forward, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> mike >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Jul 24, 2009, at 6:11 PM, Jim Salinger wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Kia orana All from the Tropical South Pacific >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Yes, Phil, a bit like 'A midsummer night's dream!'. and Gavin >>>>>>>> Tamino's bang up job is great, And good that you go up with >>>>>>>> stuff on Real Climate, Mike. As Kevin is preoccupied, for the >>>>>>>> scientific record we need a rebuttal somewhere pulled >>>>>>>> together. Who wants to join in on the multiauthored effort?? >>>>>>>> I am happy to coordinate it. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Return to 'winter' this evening after enjoying a balmy south >>>>>>>> east trades and sunny dry 24 C in the Cook Islands. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Jim >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Quoting Michael Mann : >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> folks, we're going to go up w/ something brief on >>>>>>>>> RealClimate later today, mostly just linking to other >>>>>>>>> useful deconstructions of the paper already up on other >>>>>>>>> sites, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> mike >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Jul 23, 2009, at 11:01 PM, Jim Salinger wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I am tied up next week, but could frame something up the >>>>>>>>>> following week which , I hope would be multi-authored. It >>>>>>>>>> would be quite good to have a rebuttal from the same >>>>>>>>>> Department at Uni of Auckland (which Glenn McGregor of IJC >>>>>>>>>> is director of)! >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I haven't had tne oportunity to download the text here in >>>>>>>>>> the Cook Islands, so this would give me the opportunity to >>>>>>>>>> do that. Who else wants to join in?? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Jim >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Quoting Kevin Trenberth >>>>>>>>>> : >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I am on vacation today and don't have the time. I have >>>>>>>>>>> been on travel the >>>>>>>>>>> past 4 weeks (including AR5 IPCC scoping mtg); the NCAR >>>>>>>>>>> summer Colloquium >>>>>>>>>>> is coming up in a week and then I am off to Oz and NZ for 3 weeks >>>>>>>>>>> (GEWEX/iLeaps, CEOP) and I have an oceanobs'09 plenary paper to do. >>>>>>>>>>> Kevin >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> a formal comment to JGR seems like a worthwhile undertaking here. >>>>>>>>>>>> contrarians will continue to cite the paper regardless of >>>>>>>>>>>> whether or >>>>>>>>>>>> not its been rebutted, but for the purpose of future scientific >>>>>>>>>>>> assessments, its important that this be formally rebutted >>>>>>>>>>>> in the peer- >>>>>>>>>>>> reviewed literature. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> mike >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 23, 2009, at 9:05 PM, Jim Salinger wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi All >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for the pro-activeness. Is there an opportunity to write a >>>>>>>>>>>>> letter to JGR pointing out the junk science in this??....if it is >>>>>>>>>>>>> not rebutted, then all sceptics will use this to justify their >>>>>>>>>>>>> position. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Jim >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Quoting Michael Mann >>>>>>>>>>>>> : >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2nd email >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> ________ >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks Kevin, hadn't even noticed that in my terse >>>>>>>>>>>>>> initial skim of >>>>>>>>>>>>>> it. yes--that makes things even worse than my initial >>>>>>>>>>>>>> impression. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> this is a truly horrible paper. one wonders who the editor was, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> and what he/she was thinking (or drinking), >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> m >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 23, 2009, at 3:51 PM, Kevin Trenberth wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I just looked briefly at the paper. Their relationships use >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> derivatives >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of the series. Well derivatives are equivalent to a high pass >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> filter, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that is to say it filters out all the low frequency >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> variability and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> trends. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If one takes y= A sin wt >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and does a differentiation one gets >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dy = Aw cos wt. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So the amplitude goes from A to Aw where w is the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> frequency = 2*pi/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> L where >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> L is the period. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So the response to this procedure is to reduce periods of 10 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> years by a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> factor of 5 compared with periods of 2 years, or 20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and 50 years get >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reduced by factors of 10 an 25 relative to two year periods. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> i.e. Their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> procedure is designed to only analyse the interannual >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> variability >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> trends. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kevin >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hi Seth, you always seem to catch me at airports. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> only got a few >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> minutes. took a cursory look at the paper, and it has all the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> worry >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> signs of extremely bad science and scholarship. JGR >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is a legitimate >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> journal, but some extremely bad papers have slipped >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> through the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cracks >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in recent years, and this is another one of them. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> first of all, the authors use two deeply flawed datasets that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> understate the warming trends: the Christy and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Spencer MSU data and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> uncorrected radiosonde temperature estimates. There >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> were a series >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> three key papers published in Science a few years >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ago, by Mears >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> et al, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Santer et al, and Sherwood et al. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> see Gavin's excellent RealClimate article on this: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2005/08/et-tu-lt/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> these papers collectively showed that both datasets >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> were deeply >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> flawed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and understate actual tropospheric temperature >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> trends. I find it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> absolutely remarkable that this paper could get >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> through a serious >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> review w/out referencing any 3 of these critical >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> papers-- papers >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whose >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> findings render that conclusions of the current >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> article completely >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> invalid! >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Christy and Spencer MSU satellite-derived tropospheric >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> temperature >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> estimates contained two errors--a sign error and an algebraic >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> error-- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that had the net effect of artificially removing the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> warming trend. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Christy and Spencer continue to produce revised >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> versions of the MSU >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dataset, but they always seem to show less warming >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than every other >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> independent assessment, and their estimates are largely >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> disregarded by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> serious assessments such as that done by the NAS and the IPCC. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So these guys have taken biased estimates of tropospheric >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> temperatures >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that have artificially too little warming trend, and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> then shown, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> quite >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> unremarkably, that El Nino dominates much of what is left (the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> interannual variability). >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the paper has absolutely no implications that I can see at all >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> role of natural variability on the observed warming >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> trend of recent >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> decades. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> other far more careful analyses (a paper by David >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thompson of CSU, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Phil Jones, and others published in Nature more than >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> year ago) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> used >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> proper, widely-accepted surface temperature data to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> estimate the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> influence of natural factors (El Nino and volcanos) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on the surface >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> temperature record. their analysis was so careful and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> clever that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> detected a post-world war II error in sea surface temperature >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> measurements (that yields artificial cooling during >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the mid 1940s) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that had never before been discovered in the global surface >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> temperature record. needless to say, they removed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that error too. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the correct record, removing influences of ENSO, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> volcanoes, and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> even >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this newly detected error, reveal that a robust warming of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> global mean >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> surface temperature over the past century of a little >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> less than 1C >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> which has nothing to do w/ volcanic influences or ENSO >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> influences. the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dominant source of the overall warming, as concluded in every >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> legitimate major scientific assessment, is anthropogenic >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> influences >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (human greenhouse gas concentrations w/ some >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> offsetting cooling >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> due to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sulphate aerosols). >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this later paper provides absolutely nothing to cast that in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> doubt. it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> uses a flawed set of surface temperature measurements >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for which the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> trend has been artificially suppressed, to show that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whats left >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> over >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (interannual variability) is due to natural influences. duh! >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> its a joke! and the aptly named Mark "Morano" has >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fallen for it! >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> m >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 23, 2009, at 11:54 AM, Borenstein, Seth wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kevin, Gavin, Mike, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's Seth again. Attached is a paper in JGR today >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that Marc Morano >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is hyping wildly. It's in a legit journal. Whatchya think? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Seth >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Seth Borenstein >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Associated Press Science Writer >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sborenstein@ap.org >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Associated Press, 1100 13th St. NW, Suite 700, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Washington, DC >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 20005-4076 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 202-641-9454 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The information contained in this communication is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> intended for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> use >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of the designated recipients named above. If the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reader of this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> communication is not the intended recipient, you are hereby >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> notified >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that you have received this communication in error, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and that any >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> review, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dissemination, distribution or copying of this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> communication is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> strictly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> please >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> notify The Associated Press immediately by telephone at >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1-212-621-1898 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and delete this e-mail. Thank you. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [IP_US_DISC] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> msk dccc60c6d2c3a6438f0cf467d9a4938 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 23, 2009, at 7:57 PM, Jim Salinger wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Precisely. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mike Mann: You better rush something up on RealClimate. Jim, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Brett, myself and maybe others will have to deal with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the local >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fallout this will cause...oh dear...... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bye the way June was the warmest month on record for the oceans >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> according tro NOAA >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jim >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Quoting Kevin Trenberth >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> : >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Exactly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> They use 2 datasets that are deficient in the first place and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> then they >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> use derivatives: differentiation is a high pass filter, and so >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they show >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> what we have long known that ENSO accounts for a lot of high >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> frequency >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> variability. It should not have been published >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kevin >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> kia orana from Rarotonga >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> How the h... did this get accepted!! >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jim >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dominion today {24/7/09] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nature blamed over warming - describing recently >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> published paper >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> JGR by Chris de Freitas, Bob Carter and J McLean, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and including >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> comment by J Salinger "little new" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> McLean J. D., C. R. de Freitas, R. M. Carter (2009), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Influence >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Southern Oscillation on tropospheric temperature, J. Geophys. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Res., >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 114, D14104, doi:10.1029/2008JD011637. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> paper at >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2009/2008JD011637.shtml >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Associate Professor Jim Salinger >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> School of Geography and Environmental Science >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> University of Auckland >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Private Bag 92 019 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Auckland, New Zealand >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tel: + 64 9 373 7599 ext 88473 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This message was sent using IMP, the Internet >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Messaging Program. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ___________________ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kevin Trenberth >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Climate Analysis Section, NCAR >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PO Box 3000 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Boulder CO 80307 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ph 303 497 1318 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/cas/trenbert.html >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This message was sent using IMP, the Internet >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Messaging Program. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Michael E. Mann >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> website: http://www.meteo.psu.edu/~mann/Mann/index.html >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Dire Predictions" book site: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.essc.psu.edu/essc_web/news/DirePredictions/index.html >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>>>>>> This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>> Michael E. Mann >>>>>>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> website: http://www.meteo.psu.edu/~mann/Mann/index.html >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> "Dire Predictions" book site: >>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.essc.psu.edu/essc_web/news/DirePredictions/index.html >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> ___________________ >>>>>>>>>>> Kevin Trenberth >>>>>>>>>>> Climate Analysis Section, NCAR >>>>>>>>>>> PO Box 3000 >>>>>>>>>>> Boulder CO 80307 >>>>>>>>>>> ph 303 497 1318 >>>>>>>>>>> http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/cas/trenbert.html >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>>> This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> Michael E. Mann >>>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> website: http://www.meteo.psu.edu/~mann/Mann/index.html >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> "Dire Predictions" book site: >>>>>>>>> http://www.essc.psu.edu/essc_web/news/DirePredictions/index.html >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>> This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Michael E. Mann >>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> website: http://www.meteo.psu.edu/~mann/Mann/index.html >>>>>>> >>>>>>> "Dire Predictions" book site: >>>>>>> http://www.essc.psu.edu/essc_web/news/DirePredictions/index.html >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> 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 >>>>> 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 >>>>> >>>>> website: http://www.meteo.psu.edu/~mann/Mann/index.html >>>>> >>>>> "Dire Predictions" book site: >>>>> http://www.essc.psu.edu/essc_web/news/DirePredictions/index.html >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> thanks Phil, >>>>> >>>>> this is very helpful and reaffirms what we've identified as some >>>>> of the main points that need to be covered in a formal response. >>>>> I've taken the liberty of copying in a couple other colleagues >>>>> who have been looking into this. Grant Foster was the first >>>>> author on a response to a similarly bad paper by Schwartz that >>>>> was published some time ago, and has been doing a number of >>>>> analyses aimed at demonstrating the key problems in McClean et al. >>>>> >>>>> I've suggested that Grant sent out a draft of the response when >>>>> it is ready to the broader group of people who have been >>>>> included in these exchanges for feedback and potential >>>>> co-authorship, >>>>> >>>>> mike >>>>> >>>>> p.s. Santer et al paper still didn't come through in your >>>>> followup message. Can you post in on ftp where it can be >>>>> downloaded? >>>>> On Jul 28, 2009, at 5:15 AM, Phil Jones wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Jim et al, >>>>>> Having now read the paper in a moment of peace and quiet, >>>>>> there are a few things >>>>>> to bear in mind. The authors of the original will have a right >>>>>> of reply, so need to >>>>>> ensure that they don't have anything to come back on. From >>>>>> doing the attached a >>>>>> year or so ago, there is a word limit and also it is important >>>>>> to concentrate only >>>>>> on a few key points. As we all know there is so much wrong with >>>>>> the paper, it >>>>>> won't be difficult to come up with a few, but it does need to >>>>>> be just two or three. >>>>>> >>>>>> The three aspects I would emphasize are >>>>>> >>>>>> 1. The first difference type filtering. Para 14 implies that >>>>>> they smooth the series >>>>>> with a 12 month running mean, then subtract the value in Jan >>>>>> 1980 from that in >>>>>> Jan 1979, then Feb 1980 from Feb 1979 and so on. As we know >>>>>> this removes >>>>>> any long-term trend. >>>>>> >>>>>> The running mean also probably distorts the phase, so this is >>>>>> possibly why >>>>>> they get different lags from others. Using running means also >>>>>> enhances the >>>>>> explained variance. Perhaps we should repeat the exercise >>>>>> without the smoothing. >>>>>> >>>>>> 2. Figure 4 and Figure 1 show the unsmoothed GTTA series. These >>>>>> clearly have a >>>>>> trend. Perhaps show the residual after extracting the ENSO part. >>>>>> >>>>>> 3. They do the same first difference on the smoothed SOI. The >>>>>> SOI doesn't explain >>>>>> the climate jump in the 1976/77 period. Their arguments in para >>>>>> 30 are all wrong. >>>>>> >>>>>> A few minor points >>>>>> >>>>>> - there are some negative R*R values just after equation 3. >>>>>> - I'm sure Tom Wigley wouldn't have proposed El Nino events >>>>>> occurring after volcanoes! >>>>>> Attached this paper as well. From a quick read it doesn't >>>>>> say what is purported - in fact >>>>>> it seems to show clearly how the analysis should have been done. >>>>>> - there is a paper by Ben Santer (more recent) where he >>>>>> applies the same type >>>>>> of extraction procedure to models. I'll send this separately as >>>>>> it is large. In case it >>>>>> is too large here is the reference. >>>>>> >>>>>> Santer, B.D., *Wigley*, *T.M.L.*, Doutriaux, C., Boyle, J.S., >>>>>> Hansen, J.E., Jones, P.D., Meehl, G.A., Roeckner, E., Sengupta, >>>>>> S. and Taylor K.E., 2001: Accounting for the effects of >>>>>> volcanoes and ENSO in comparisons of modeled and observed >>>>>> temperature trends. /Journal of Geophysical Research/ *106*, >>>>>> 28033--28059. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Finally I've attached a paper I wrote in 1990, where I did >>>>>> something similar to >>>>>> what they did. I looked at residuals from a Gaussian filter, and I added >>>>>> the smoothed data back afterwards. I was working at the annual timescale >>>>>> and I did have many more years. >>>>>> >>>>>> Cheers >>>>>> Phil >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> At 00:19 25/07/2009, Michael Mann wrote: >>>>>>> Hi Jim, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Grant Foster ('Tamino') did a nice job in a previous response >>>>>>> (attached) we wrote to a similarly bad article by Schwartz >>>>>>> which got a lot of play in contrarian circles. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> since he's already done some of the initial work in debunking >>>>>>> this, I sent him an email asking hi if we was interested in >>>>>>> spearheading a similar effort w/ this one. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> let me get back to folks after I've heard back from him, and >>>>>>> we can discuss possible strategy for moving this forward, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> mike >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Jul 24, 2009, at 6:11 PM, Jim Salinger wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Kia orana All from the Tropical South Pacific >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Yes, Phil, a bit like 'A midsummer night's dream!'. and Gavin >>>>>>>> Tamino's bang up job is great, And good that you go up with >>>>>>>> stuff on Real Climate, Mike. As Kevin is preoccupied, for the >>>>>>>> scientific record we need a rebuttal somewhere pulled >>>>>>>> together. Who wants to join in on the multiauthored effort?? >>>>>>>> I am happy to coordinate it. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Return to 'winter' this evening after enjoying a balmy south >>>>>>>> east trades and sunny dry 24 C in the Cook Islands. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Jim >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Quoting Michael Mann >: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> folks, we're going to go up w/ something brief on >>>>>>>>> RealClimate later today, mostly just linking to other >>>>>>>>> useful deconstructions of the paper already up on other >>>>>>>>> sites, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> mike >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Jul 23, 2009, at 11:01 PM, Jim Salinger wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I am tied up next week, but could frame something up the >>>>>>>>>> following week which , I hope would be multi-authored. It >>>>>>>>>> would be quite good to have a rebuttal from the same >>>>>>>>>> Department at Uni of Auckland (which Glenn McGregor of IJC >>>>>>>>>> is director of)! >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I haven't had tne oportunity to download the text here in >>>>>>>>>> the Cook Islands, so this would give me the opportunity to >>>>>>>>>> do that. Who else wants to join in?? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Jim >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Quoting Kevin Trenberth >>>>>>>>>> >: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I am on vacation today and don't have the time. I have >>>>>>>>>>> been on travel the >>>>>>>>>>> past 4 weeks (including AR5 IPCC scoping mtg); the NCAR >>>>>>>>>>> summer Colloquium >>>>>>>>>>> is coming up in a week and then I am off to Oz and NZ for 3 weeks >>>>>>>>>>> (GEWEX/iLeaps, CEOP) and I have an oceanobs'09 plenary paper to do. >>>>>>>>>>> Kevin >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> a formal comment to JGR seems like a worthwhile undertaking here. >>>>>>>>>>>> contrarians will continue to cite the paper regardless of >>>>>>>>>>>> whether or >>>>>>>>>>>> not its been rebutted, but for the purpose of future scientific >>>>>>>>>>>> assessments, its important that this be formally rebutted >>>>>>>>>>>> in the peer- >>>>>>>>>>>> reviewed literature. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> mike >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 23, 2009, at 9:05 PM, Jim Salinger wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi All >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for the pro-activeness. Is there an opportunity to write a >>>>>>>>>>>>> letter to JGR pointing out the junk science in this??....if it is >>>>>>>>>>>>> not rebutted, then all sceptics will use this to justify their >>>>>>>>>>>>> position. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Jim >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Quoting Michael Mann >>>>>>>>>>>>> >: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2nd email >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> ________ >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks Kevin, hadn't even noticed that in my terse >>>>>>>>>>>>>> initial skim of >>>>>>>>>>>>>> it. yes--that makes things even worse than my initial >>>>>>>>>>>>>> impression. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> this is a truly horrible paper. one wonders who the editor was, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> and what he/she was thinking (or drinking), >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> m >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 23, 2009, at 3:51 PM, Kevin Trenberth wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I just looked briefly at the paper. Their relationships use >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> derivatives >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of the series. Well derivatives are equivalent to a high pass >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> filter, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that is to say it filters out all the low frequency >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> variability and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> trends. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If one takes y= A sin wt >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and does a differentiation one gets >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dy = Aw cos wt. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So the amplitude goes from A to Aw where w is the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> frequency = 2*pi/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> L where >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> L is the period. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So the response to this procedure is to reduce periods of 10 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> years by a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> factor of 5 compared with periods of 2 years, or 20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and 50 years get >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reduced by factors of 10 an 25 relative to two year periods. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> i.e. Their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> procedure is designed to only analyse the interannual >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> variability >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> trends. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kevin >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hi Seth, you always seem to catch me at airports. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> only got a few >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> minutes. took a cursory look at the paper, and it has all the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> worry >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> signs of extremely bad science and scholarship. JGR >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is a legitimate >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> journal, but some extremely bad papers have slipped >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> through the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cracks >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in recent years, and this is another one of them. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> first of all, the authors use two deeply flawed datasets that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> understate the warming trends: the Christy and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Spencer MSU data and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> uncorrected radiosonde temperature estimates. There >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> were a series >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> three key papers published in Science a few years >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ago, by Mears >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> et al, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Santer et al, and Sherwood et al. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> see Gavin's excellent RealClimate article on this: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2005/08/et-tu- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lt/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> these papers collectively showed that both datasets >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> were deeply >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> flawed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and understate actual tropospheric temperature >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> trends. I find it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> absolutely remarkable that this paper could get >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> through a serious >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> review w/out referencing any 3 of these critical >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> papers-- papers >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whose >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> findings render that conclusions of the current >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> article completely >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> invalid! >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Christy and Spencer MSU satellite-derived tropospheric >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> temperature >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> estimates contained two errors--a sign error and an algebraic >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> error-- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that had the net effect of artificially removing the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> warming trend. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Christy and Spencer continue to produce revised >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> versions of the MSU >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dataset, but they always seem to show less warming >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than every other >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> independent assessment, and their estimates are largely >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> disregarded by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> serious assessments such as that done by the NAS and the IPCC. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So these guys have taken biased estimates of tropospheric >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> temperatures >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that have artificially too little warming trend, and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> then shown, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> quite >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> unremarkably, that El Nino dominates much of what is left (the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> interannual variability). >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the paper has absolutely no implications that I can see at all >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> role of natural variability on the observed warming >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> trend of recent >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> decades. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> other far more careful analyses (a paper by David >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thompson of CSU, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Phil Jones, and others published in Nature more than >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> year ago) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> used >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> proper, widely-accepted surface temperature data to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> estimate the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> influence of natural factors (El Nino and volcanos) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on the surface >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> temperature record. their analysis was so careful and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> clever that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> detected a post-world war II error in sea surface temperature >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> measurements (that yields artificial cooling during >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the mid 1940s) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that had never before been discovered in the global surface >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> temperature record. needless to say, they removed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that error too. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the correct record, removing influences of ENSO, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> volcanoes, and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> even >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this newly detected error, reveal that a robust warming of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> global mean >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> surface temperature over the past century of a little >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> less than 1C >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> which has nothing to do w/ volcanic influences or ENSO >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> influences. the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dominant source of the overall warming, as concluded in every >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> legitimate major scientific assessment, is anthropogenic >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> influences >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (human greenhouse gas concentrations w/ some >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> offsetting cooling >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> due to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sulphate aerosols). >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this later paper provides absolutely nothing to cast that in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> doubt. it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> uses a flawed set of surface temperature measurements >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for which the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> trend has been artificially suppressed, to show that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whats left >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> over >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (interannual variability) is due to natural influences. duh! >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> its a joke! and the aptly named Mark "Morano" has >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fallen for it! >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> m >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 23, 2009, at 11:54 AM, Borenstein, Seth wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kevin, Gavin, Mike, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's Seth again. Attached is a paper in JGR today >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that Marc Morano >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is hyping wildly. It's in a legit journal. Whatchya think? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Seth >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Seth Borenstein >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Associated Press Science Writer >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sborenstein@ap.org >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Associated Press, 1100 13th St. NW, Suite 700, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Washington, DC >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 20005-4076 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 202-641-9454 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The information contained in this communication is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> intended for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> use >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of the designated recipients named above. If the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reader of this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> communication is not the intended recipient, you are hereby >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> notified >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that you have received this communication in error, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and that any >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> review, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dissemination, distribution or copying of this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> communication is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> strictly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> please >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> notify The Associated Press immediately by telephone at >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1-212-621-1898 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and delete this e-mail. Thank you. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [IP_US_DISC] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> msk dccc60c6d2c3a6438f0cf467d9a4938 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 23, 2009, at 7:57 PM, Jim Salinger wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Precisely. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mike Mann: You better rush something up on RealClimate. Jim, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Brett, myself and maybe others will have to deal with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the local >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fallout this will cause...oh dear...... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bye the way June was the warmest month on record for the oceans >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> according tro NOAA >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jim >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Quoting Kevin Trenberth >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Exactly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> They use 2 datasets that are deficient in the first place and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> then they >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> use derivatives: differentiation is a high pass filter, and so >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they show >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> what we have long known that ENSO accounts for a lot of high >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> frequency >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> variability. It should not have been published >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kevin >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> kia orana from Rarotonga >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> How the h... did this get accepted!! >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jim >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dominion today {24/7/09] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nature blamed over warming - describing recently >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> published paper >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> JGR by Chris de Freitas, Bob Carter and J McLean, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and including >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> comment by J Salinger "little new" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> McLean J. D., C. R. de Freitas, R. M. Carter (2009), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Influence >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Southern Oscillation on tropospheric temperature, J. Geophys. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Res., >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 114, D14104, doi:10.1029/2008JD011637. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> paper at >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2009/2008JD011637.shtml >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Associate Professor Jim Salinger >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> School of Geography and Environmental Science >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> University of Auckland >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Private Bag 92 019 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Auckland, New Zealand >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tel: + 64 9 373 7599 ext 88473 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This message was sent using IMP, the Internet >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Messaging Program. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ___________________ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kevin Trenberth >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Climate Analysis Section, NCAR >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PO Box 3000 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Boulder CO 80307 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ph 303 497 1318 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/cas/trenbert.html >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This message was sent using IMP, the Internet >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Messaging Program. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Michael E. Mann >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> website: http://www.meteo.psu.edu/~mann/Mann/index.html >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Dire Predictions" book site: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.essc.psu.edu/essc_web/news/DirePredictions/index.html >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>>>>>> This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>> Michael E. Mann >>>>>>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> website: http://www.meteo.psu.edu/~mann/Mann/index.html >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> "Dire Predictions" book site: >>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.essc.psu.edu/essc_web/news/DirePredictions/index.html >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> ___________________ >>>>>>>>>>> Kevin Trenberth >>>>>>>>>>> Climate Analysis Section, NCAR >>>>>>>>>>> PO Box 3000 >>>>>>>>>>> Boulder CO 80307 >>>>>>>>>>> ph 303 497 1318 >>>>>>>>>>> http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/cas/trenbert.html >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>>> This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> Michael E. Mann >>>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> website: http://www.meteo.psu.edu/~mann/Mann/index.html >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> "Dire Predictions" book site: >>>>>>>>> http://www.essc.psu.edu/essc_web/news/DirePredictions/index.html >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>> This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Michael E. Mann >>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> website: http://www.meteo.psu.edu/~mann/Mann/index.html >>>>>>> >>>>>>> "Dire Predictions" book site: >>>>>>> http://www.essc.psu.edu/essc_web/news/DirePredictions/index.html >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi Jim, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Grant Foster ('Tamino') did a nice job in a previous response >>>>>>> (attached) we wrote to a similarly bad article by Schwartz >>>>>>> which got a lot of play in contrarian circles. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> since he's already done some of the initial work in debunking >>>>>>> this, I sent him an email asking hi if we was interested in >>>>>>> spearheading a similar effort w/ this one. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> let me get back to folks after I've heard back from him, and >>>>>>> we can discuss possible strategy for moving this forward, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> mike >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Jul 24, 2009, at 6:11 PM, Jim Salinger wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Kia orana All from the Tropical South Pacific >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Yes, Phil, a bit like 'A midsummer night's dream!'. and Gavin >>>>>>>> Tamino's bang up job is great, And good that you go up with >>>>>>>> stuff on Real Climate, Mike. As Kevin is preoccupied, for the >>>>>>>> scientific record we need a rebuttal somewhere pulled >>>>>>>> together. Who wants to join in on the multiauthored effort?? >>>>>>>> I am happy to coordinate it. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Return to 'winter' this evening after enjoying a balmy south >>>>>>>> east trades and sunny dry 24 C in the Cook Islands. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Jim >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Quoting Michael Mann >: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> folks, we're going to go up w/ something brief on >>>>>>>>> RealClimate later today, mostly just linking to other >>>>>>>>> useful deconstructions of the paper already up on other >>>>>>>>> sites, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> mike >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Jul 23, 2009, at 11:01 PM, Jim Salinger wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I am tied up next week, but could frame something up the >>>>>>>>>> following week which , I hope would be multi-authored. It >>>>>>>>>> would be quite good to have a rebuttal from the same >>>>>>>>>> Department at Uni of Auckland (which Glenn McGregor of IJC >>>>>>>>>> is director of)! >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I haven't had tne oportunity to download the text here in >>>>>>>>>> the Cook Islands, so this would give me the opportunity to >>>>>>>>>> do that. Who else wants to join in?? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Jim >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Quoting Kevin Trenberth >>>>>>>>>> >: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I am on vacation today and don't have the time. I have >>>>>>>>>>> been on travel the >>>>>>>>>>> past 4 weeks (including AR5 IPCC scoping mtg); the NCAR >>>>>>>>>>> summer Colloquium >>>>>>>>>>> is coming up in a week and then I am off to Oz and NZ for 3 weeks >>>>>>>>>>> (GEWEX/iLeaps, CEOP) and I have an oceanobs'09 plenary paper to do. >>>>>>>>>>> Kevin >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> a formal comment to JGR seems like a worthwhile undertaking here. >>>>>>>>>>>> contrarians will continue to cite the paper regardless of >>>>>>>>>>>> whether or >>>>>>>>>>>> not its been rebutted, but for the purpose of future scientific >>>>>>>>>>>> assessments, its important that this be formally rebutted >>>>>>>>>>>> in the peer- >>>>>>>>>>>> reviewed literature. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> mike >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 23, 2009, at 9:05 PM, Jim Salinger wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi All >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for the pro-activeness. Is there an opportunity to write a >>>>>>>>>>>>> letter to JGR pointing out the junk science in this??....if it is >>>>>>>>>>>>> not rebutted, then all sceptics will use this to justify their >>>>>>>>>>>>> position. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Jim >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Quoting Michael Mann >>>>>>>>>>>>> >: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2nd email >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> ________ >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks Kevin, hadn't even noticed that in my terse >>>>>>>>>>>>>> initial skim of >>>>>>>>>>>>>> it. yes--that makes things even worse than my initial >>>>>>>>>>>>>> impression. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> this is a truly horrible paper. one wonders who the editor was, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> and what he/she was thinking (or drinking), >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> m >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 23, 2009, at 3:51 PM, Kevin Trenberth wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I just looked briefly at the paper. Their relationships use >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> derivatives >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of the series. Well derivatives are equivalent to a high pass >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> filter, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that is to say it filters out all the low frequency >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> variability and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> trends. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If one takes y= A sin wt >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and does a differentiation one gets >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dy = Aw cos wt. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So the amplitude goes from A to Aw where w is the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> frequency = 2*pi/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> L where >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> L is the period. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So the response to this procedure is to reduce periods of 10 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> years by a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> factor of 5 compared with periods of 2 years, or 20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and 50 years get >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reduced by factors of 10 an 25 relative to two year periods. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> i.e. Their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> procedure is designed to only analyse the interannual >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> variability >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> trends. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kevin >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hi Seth, you always seem to catch me at airports. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> only got a few >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> minutes. took a cursory look at the paper, and it has all the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> worry >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> signs of extremely bad science and scholarship. JGR >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is a legitimate >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> journal, but some extremely bad papers have slipped >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> through the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cracks >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in recent years, and this is another one of them. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> first of all, the authors use two deeply flawed datasets that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> understate the warming trends: the Christy and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Spencer MSU data and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> uncorrected radiosonde temperature estimates. There >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> were a series >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> three key papers published in Science a few years >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ago, by Mears >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> et al, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Santer et al, and Sherwood et al. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> see Gavin's excellent RealClimate article on this: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2005/08/et-tu-lt/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> these papers collectively showed that both datasets >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> were deeply >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> flawed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and understate actual tropospheric temperature >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> trends. I find it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> absolutely remarkable that this paper could get >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> through a serious >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> review w/out referencing any 3 of these critical >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> papers--papers >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whose >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> findings render that conclusions of the current >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> article completely >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> invalid! >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Christy and Spencer MSU satellite-derived tropospheric >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> temperature >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> estimates contained two errors--a sign error and an algebraic >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> error-- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that had the net effect of artificially removing the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> warming trend. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Christy and Spencer continue to produce revised >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> versions of the MSU >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dataset, but they always seem to show less warming >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than every other >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> independent assessment, and their estimates are largely >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> disregarded by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> serious assessments such as that done by the NAS and the IPCC. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So these guys have taken biased estimates of tropospheric >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> temperatures >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that have artificially too little warming trend, and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> then shown, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> quite >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> unremarkably, that El Nino dominates much of what is left (the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> interannual variability). >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the paper has absolutely no implications that I can see at all >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> role of natural variability on the observed warming >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> trend of recent >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> decades. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> other far more careful analyses (a paper by David >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thompson of CSU, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Phil Jones, and others published in Nature more than >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> year ago) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> used >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> proper, widely-accepted surface temperature data to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> estimate the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> influence of natural factors (El Nino and volcanos) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on the surface >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> temperature record. their analysis was so careful and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> clever that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> detected a post-world war II error in sea surface temperature >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> measurements (that yields artificial cooling during >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the mid 1940s) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that had never before been discovered in the global surface >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> temperature record. needless to say, they removed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that error too. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the correct record, removing influences of ENSO, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> volcanoes, and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> even >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this newly detected error, reveal that a robust warming of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> global mean >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> surface temperature over the past century of a little >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> less than 1C >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> which has nothing to do w/ volcanic influences or ENSO >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> influences. the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dominant source of the overall warming, as concluded in every >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> legitimate major scientific assessment, is anthropogenic >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> influences >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (human greenhouse gas concentrations w/ some >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> offsetting cooling >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> due to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sulphate aerosols). >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this later paper provides absolutely nothing to cast that in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> doubt. it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> uses a flawed set of surface temperature measurements >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for which the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> trend has been artificially suppressed, to show that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whats left >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> over >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (interannual variability) is due to natural influences. duh! >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> its a joke! and the aptly named Mark "Morano" has >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fallen for it! >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> m >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 23, 2009, at 11:54 AM, Borenstein, Seth wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kevin, Gavin, Mike, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's Seth again. Attached is a paper in JGR today >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that Marc Morano >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is hyping wildly. It's in a legit journal. Whatchya think? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Seth >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Seth Borenstein >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Associated Press Science Writer >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sborenstein@ap.org >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Associated Press, 1100 13th St. NW, Suite 700, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Washington, DC >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 20005-4076 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 202-641-9454 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The information contained in this communication is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> intended for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> use >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of the designated recipients named above. If the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reader of this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> communication is not the intended recipient, you are hereby >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> notified >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that you have received this communication in error, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and that any >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> review, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dissemination, distribution or copying of this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> communication is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> strictly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> please >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> notify The Associated Press immediately by telephone at >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1-212-621-1898 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and delete this e-mail. Thank you. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [IP_US_DISC] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> msk dccc60c6d2c3a6438f0cf467d9a4938 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 23, 2009, at 7:57 PM, Jim Salinger wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Precisely. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mike Mann: You better rush something up on RealClimate. Jim, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Brett, myself and maybe others will have to deal with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the local >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fallout this will cause...oh dear...... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bye the way June was the warmest month on record for the oceans >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> according tro NOAA >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jim >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Quoting Kevin Trenberth >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Exactly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> They use 2 datasets that are deficient in the first place and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> then they >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> use derivatives: differentiation is a high pass filter, and so >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they show >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> what we have long known that ENSO accounts for a lot of high >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> frequency >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> variability. It should not have been published >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kevin >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> kia orana from Rarotonga >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> How the h... did this get accepted!! >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jim >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dominion today {24/7/09] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nature blamed over warming - describing recently >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> published paper >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> JGR by Chris de Freitas, Bob Carter and J McLean, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and including >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> comment by J Salinger "little new" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> McLean J. D., C. R. de Freitas, R. M. Carter (2009), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Influence >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Southern Oscillation on tropospheric temperature, J. Geophys. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Res., >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 114, D14104, doi:10.1029/2008JD011637. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> paper at >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2009/2008JD011637.shtml >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Associate Professor Jim Salinger >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> School of Geography and Environmental Science >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> University of Auckland >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Private Bag 92 019 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Auckland, New Zealand >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tel: + 64 9 373 7599 ext 88473 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This message was sent using IMP, the Internet >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Messaging Program. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ___________________ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kevin Trenberth >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Climate Analysis Section, NCAR >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PO Box 3000 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Boulder CO 80307 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ph 303 497 1318 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/cas/trenbert.html >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This message was sent using IMP, the Internet >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Messaging Program. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Michael E. Mann >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> website: http://www.meteo.psu.edu/~mann/Mann/index.html >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Dire Predictions" book site: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.essc.psu.edu/essc_web/news/DirePredictions/index.html >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>>>>>> This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>> Michael E. Mann >>>>>>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> website: http://www.meteo.psu.edu/~mann/Mann/index.html >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> "Dire Predictions" book site: >>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.essc.psu.edu/essc_web/news/DirePredictions/index.html >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> ___________________ >>>>>>>>>>> Kevin Trenberth >>>>>>>>>>> Climate Analysis Section, NCAR >>>>>>>>>>> PO Box 3000 >>>>>>>>>>> Boulder CO 80307 >>>>>>>>>>> ph 303 497 1318 >>>>>>>>>>> http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/cas/trenbert.html >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>>> This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> Michael E. Mann >>>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> website: http://www.meteo.psu.edu/~mann/Mann/index.html >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> "Dire Predictions" book site: >>>>>>>>> http://www.essc.psu.edu/essc_web/news/DirePredictions/index.html >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>> This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Michael E. Mann >>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> website: http://www.meteo.psu.edu/~mann/Mann/index.html >>>>>>> >>>>>>> "Dire Predictions" book site: >>>>>>> http://www.essc.psu.edu/essc_web/news/DirePredictions/index.html >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> 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 >>>>> 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 >>>>> >>>>> website: http://www.meteo.psu.edu/~mann/Mann/index.html >>>>> >>>>> "Dire Predictions" book site: >>>>> http://www.essc.psu.edu/essc_web/news/DirePredictions/index.html >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> 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 >>>> >>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> **************** >>> Kevin E. >>> Trenberth e-mail: trenbert@ucar.edu >>> >>> Climate Analysis >>> Section, www.cgd.ucar.edu/cas/trenbert.html >>> >>> NCAR >>> P. O. Box >>> 3000, (303) 497 1318 >>> Boulder, CO >>> 80307 (303) 497 1333 (fax) >>> >>> Street address: 1850 Table Mesa Drive, Boulder, CO 80305 >>> >> >> 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 >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > -- > **************** > Kevin E. Trenberth e-mail: trenbert@ucar.edu > Climate Analysis Section, www.cgd.ucar.edu/cas/trenbert.html > NCAR > P. O. Box 3000, (303) 497 1318 > Boulder, CO 80307 (303) 497 1333 (fax) > > Street address: 1850 Table Mesa Drive, Boulder, CO 80305 > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.