| EnviroLink Forum http://www.envirolink.org/forum/ |
|
| Gergis et. al 2012: The Latest Broken Hockey Stick http://www.envirolink.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=18778 |
Page 1 of 5 |
| Author: | Snowy123 [ Sun Jun 10, 2012 8:08 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Gergis et. al 2012: The Latest Broken Hockey Stick |
I have been following the Gergis et. al 2012 paper as soon as some shared the latest hockey stick: Gergis et. al 2012. Only recently, did and when he asked for the data that Joelle Gergis used in her paper, he got this snarky response: Mr McIntyre We have already archived all the records needed to replicate the analysis presented in our Journal of Climate paper with NOAA’s World Data Center for Palaeoclimatology: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/recons.html While the vast majority of the records contained in the full Australasian network are already lodged with NOAA, some records are not yet publically available. Some groups are still publishing their work, others have only released their data for use in a particular study and so on. The compilation of this database represents years of our research effort based on the development of our professional networks. We risk damaging our work relationships by releasing other people’s records against their wishes. Clearly this is something that we are not prepared to do. We have, however, provided an extensive contact list of all data contributors in the supplementary section of our recent study ‘Southern Hemisphere high-resolution palaeoclimate records of the last 2000 years’ published in The Holocene (Table S3): http://hol.sagepub.com/content/early/20 ... 3611427335 This list allows any researcher who wants to access non publically available records to follow the appropriate protocol of contacting the original authors to obtain the necessary permission to use the record, take the time needed to process the data into a format suitable for data analysis etc, just as we have done. This is commonly referred to as ‘research’. We will not be entertaining any further correspondence on the matter. Regards Joelle – Dr Joelle Gergis Climate Research Fellow Only a few days later,, because one of the authors conceded that there were significant flaws and errors in their paper. One of the authors, David Karoly, wrote, I am contacting you on behalf of all the authors of the Gergis et al (2012) study ‘Evidence of unusual late 20th century warming from an Australasian temperature reconstruction spanning the last millennium’ An issue has been identified in the processing of the data used in the study, which may affect the results. While the paper states that “both proxy climate and instrumental data were linearly detrended over the 1921–1990 period”, we discovered on Tuesday 5 June that the records used in the final analysis were not detrended for proxy selection, making this statement incorrect. Although this is an unfortunate data processing issue, it is likely to have implications for the results reported in the study. The journal has been contacted and the publication of the study has been put on hold. This is a normal part of science. The testing of scientific studies through independent analysis of data and methods strengthens the conclusions. In this study, an issue has been identified and the results are being re-checked. We would be grateful if you would post the notice below on your ClimateAudit web site. We would like to thank you and the participants at the ClimateAudit blog for your scrutiny of our study, which also identified this data processing issue. Thanks, David Karoly Print publication of scientific study put on hold An issue has been identified in the processing of the data used in the study, “Evidence of unusual late 20th century warming from an Australasian temperature reconstruction spanning the last millennium” by Joelle Gergis, Raphael Neukom, Stephen Phipps, Ailie Gallant and David Karoly, accepted for publication in the Journal of Climate. We are currently reviewing the data and results. It was later revealed that the Gergis et. al paper suffered from the same flaw that the Mann et. al and other hockey stick papers had- some of the proxy series were flipped upside down to generate the hockey stick that Gergis et. al desperately wanted. The . This is unfortunately going to damage the integrity of climate science once again. |
|
| Author: | Iowanic [ Sun Jun 10, 2012 9:02 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Gergis et. al 2012: The Latest Broken Hockey Stick |
Let me see if I got this right, Snow.... A sciencetific study made a mistake.... They discovered it.....(As good scientists do) They publically admitted it. They even suggested what the likely mistakes might produce in the results; out for all to see. It doesn't look like much fraud to me. Looks like big-league science being sure they act like big-league scientists. Works for me... |
|
| Author: | renewable guy [ Sun Jun 10, 2012 9:59 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Gergis et. al 2012: The Latest Broken Hockey Stick |
Does Steve McKitrick have a bias here? HMMMM. The 97% accept Mann's work but the less than 3% doesn't. Of which I would imgine that McKitrick is not one of the even 3%. |
|
| Author: | Wayne Stollings [ Sun Jun 10, 2012 11:11 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Gergis et. al 2012: The Latest Broken Hockey Stick |
All reconstructions resemble the hockey stick because of the sharp increase in the measured temperature data set. |
|
| Author: | renewable guy [ Mon Jun 11, 2012 12:21 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Gergis et. al 2012: The Latest Broken Hockey Stick |
Since I don't see the way you do, tell me how this was snarky and how this is a broken hockey stick? |
|
| Author: | Snowy123 [ Tue Jun 12, 2012 5:55 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Gergis et. al 2012: The Latest Broken Hockey Stick |
| Author: | Snowy123 [ Tue Jun 12, 2012 5:58 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Gergis et. al 2012: The Latest Broken Hockey Stick |
| Author: | Wayne Stollings [ Tue Jun 12, 2012 10:28 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Gergis et. al 2012: The Latest Broken Hockey Stick |
| Author: | Wayne Stollings [ Tue Jun 12, 2012 10:29 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Gergis et. al 2012: The Latest Broken Hockey Stick |
| Author: | Snowy123 [ Wed Jun 13, 2012 3:44 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Gergis et. al 2012: The Latest Broken Hockey Stick |
| Author: | Wayne Stollings [ Wed Jun 13, 2012 4:06 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Gergis et. al 2012: The Latest Broken Hockey Stick |
| Author: | Wayne Stollings [ Wed Jun 13, 2012 4:23 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Gergis et. al 2012: The Latest Broken Hockey Stick |
Two adaptations from two separate studies from the same cave in South Africa. Notice the MWP header is not consistent in the period implied. Also note the vast difference in the temperature and time period between the two. I thought the MWP was supposedly a long period of warming during a specifi time frame, not a period of peaks and valleys that moves with each graphed adaptation or interpretation.  
|
|
| Author: | Bored Wombat [ Sun Oct 14, 2012 10:32 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Gergis et. al 2012: The Latest Broken Hockey Stick |
| Author: | warmair [ Mon Oct 15, 2012 6:08 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Gergis et. al 2012: The Latest Broken Hockey Stick |
| Author: | Snowy123 [ Wed Oct 17, 2012 7:21 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Gergis et. al 2012: The Latest Broken Hockey Stick |
| Page 1 of 5 | All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|