Section 1 responses

ISSUES ARISING ON Para 1.1 OF THE TERMS OF REFERENCE

1. The allegation of ignoring potential problems in deducing palaeotemperatures from tree ring data that might undermine the validity of the so-called “hockey-stick” curve. In the late 20th century, the correlation between the tree ring record and instrumental record of temperature change diverges from that for the earlier period. The cause of this divergence does not appear to be understood. If the method used to deduce temperatures from tree ring proxy metrics for the earlier tree ring record is applied to the late 20th century tree ring series, then declining temperatures would be deduced for the late 20th century. It is alleged that if the cause of divergence between the tree ring and instrumental temperature record is unknown, it may have existed in earlier periods.  Therefore if tree rings had similarly failed to reflect the warming of the early Middle Ages, they may significantly under- estimate the warming during the Medieval Warm Period, thus falsely enhancing the contrast between the recent warming and that earlier period.  (It is this contrast that has led to statements that the late 20th century warming is unprecedented during at least the last 1000 years.)

Issues associated with Section 1  can get highly technical. Comments regarding general techniques, divergence, the hockey stick can be commented on here but check the specific questions first. Also, each section follows the format shown:  A general issue, 1. , has specific questions, Section 1.1,  Section 1.2,  Section 1.3,  Section 1.4,  Section 1.5,  Section 1.6, Section 1.7, Section 1.8, Section 1.9.,  for example. Note that the last specific question entry in each section, Section 1.10,  Supplemental Questions in this case,  is a place to create questions that were not specifically asked but perhaps should be.

3 Responses to “Section 1 responses”

  1. Jimchip Says:

    Hockey Stick Studies
    http://climateaudit.org/multiproxy-pdfs/

    Proxy data
    http://climateaudit.org/proxy-data/

    Station Data
    http://climateaudit.org/station-data/

    Econometrics: Grant Farnsworth, Econometrics in R, Econometrics has been far more attentive to autocorrelation issues than paleoclimate, but the data issues have a lot in common.
    http://cran.r-project.org/doc/contrib/Farnsworth-EconometricsInR.pdf

  2. Jimchip Says:

    http://climateaudit.org/2009/09/03/kaufmann-and-upside-down-mann/

    Kaufman and Upside-Down Mann

    Kaufman et al (2009), published at 2 pm today, is a multiproxy study involving the following regular Team authors: Bradley, Briffa (the AR4 millennial reconstruction lead author), Overpeck, Caspar Ammann, David Schneider (of Steig et al 2009), Bradley as well as Otto-Bleisner (Ammann’s supervisor and conflicted NAS Panel member) and “JOPL-SI authors” who are various contributors of sediment series.

    One of the few proxy data contributors not listed as a coauthor is Mia Tiljander, whose data was used upside down in Mann et al 2008. Amusingly, the Kaufman Team perpetuates Mann’s upside down use of the Tiljander proxy, though they at least truncate the huge blade (resuling from modern sediments from bridge-building and farming.)

    The graph below shows the original data from Tiljander (oriented so that warm is up.)

  3. Jimchip Says:

    Ultimate Tree Ring website for background:
    http://web.utk.edu/~grissino/

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: