« More thoughts on the MGM v. Grokster decision | Main | Live 8 News - Bloggers Credentials Open »

Hocky Stick Graph Creators Iced

Steve Verdon over at OTB gives us good news. It appears that Mann et. al. have drawn the attention of the Committee on Energy and Commerce.

They have a few questions to ask.

1) Your curriculum vitae, including, but not limited to, a list of all studies relating to climate change research for which you were an author or co-author and the source of funding for those studies.

2) List all financial support you have received related to your research, including, but not limited to, all private, state, and federal assistance, grants, contracts (including subgrantsor subcontracts), or other financial awards or honoraria.

3) Regarding all such work involving federal grants or funding support under which you were a recipient of funding or principal investigator, provide all agreements relating to those underlying grants or funding, including, but not limited to, any provisions, adjustments, or exceptions made in the agreements relating to the dissemination and sharing of research results.

4) Provide the location of all data archives relating to each published study for which you were an author or co-author and indicate: (a) whether this information contains all the specific data you used and calculations your performed, including such supporting documentation as computer source code, validation information, and other ancillary information, necessary for full evaluation and application of the data, particularly for another party to replicate your research results; (b) when this information was available to researchers; (c) where and when you first identified the location of this information; (d) what modifications, if any, you have made to this information since publication of the respective study; and (e) if necessary information is not fully available, provide a detailed narrative description of the steps somebody must take to acquire the necessary information to replicate your study results or assess the quality of the proxy data you used.

5) According to The Wall Street Journal, you have declined to release the exact computer code you used to generate your results. (a) Is this correct? (b) What policy on sharing research and methods do you follow? (c) What is the source of that policy? (d) Provide this exact computer code used to generate your results.

6) Regarding study data and related information that is not publicly archived, what requests have you or your co-authors received for data relating to the climate change studies, what was your response, and why?

I'm guessing the creators of the global warming hockey stick are --shall we say-- pucked.


TrackBack

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Hocky Stick Graph Creators Iced:

» Swanky Conservative linked with Climate Change researchers get high-sticked

» Another Rovian Conspiracy - St Wendeler linked with On Global Warming and the HockeyStick

» Synthstuff - music, photography and more... linked with Squeaking wheel? Meet Grease!

Comments (21)

Global warming and cooling ... (Below threshold)
ryan:

Global warming and cooling has been ongoing for millions of years...starting long before humans, SUV's, and Chevrons.

The question isnt whether global warming and cooling occurs, but whether human activities actually have any effect on that naturally occuring process.

We should all pay close attention to what is being told to us, as Paul is pointing out, instead of just assuming it is correct.

Anyone with a modicum of hi... (Below threshold)
jd watson:

Anyone with a modicum of historic knowledge knew the "hockey stick" graph was a fraud -- it failed to show both the Medieval Climate Optimum and the Little Ice Age, both of which are significant, well documented climatic intervals. But then the IPCC thinks we're all a herd of dumb, flatulent cows.

Pucked indeeed.... (Below threshold)
10ksnooker:

Pucked indeeed.

Pucked indeed... (Below threshold)
bill:

Pucked indeed

Ok, I'm having a think abou... (Below threshold)
Wanderlust:

Ok, I'm having a think about the "dumb, flatulent cows" comment...hmmm.

* flatulence emits copious amounts of CH4

* CH4 traps up to 25 times more heat from sunlight per cubic metre than CO2

* We need LOTS of heat to prove out those hockey puck graphs

Therefore:

If Mann & Co. were SMART, they'd be paying all of us to...FART.

Lots of FARTs.

I mean, LOTS.

/go global warming!

I've yet to see a global wa... (Below threshold)
bullwinkle:

I've yet to see a global warming study that includes the corresponding cooling effect from any rise in sea level. I'd still like to see just one that includes even a rough estimate of how many square miles of land would be covered with a one foot rise in sea level. Ever time I've asked a so-called expert they have refused to answer my questions about this. I'm really trying to believe their fables, I hate cold weather.

By the time this non event ... (Below threshold)
M Evans:

By the time this non event occurs all of us will be dust anyway so "why worry".

I'ld like to see if the "al... (Below threshold)
Neggy:

I'ld like to see if the "algorithm" includes the "electromagnetic" affect of charged solar particles entering the atmosphere. Anybody with a background in physics or engineering knows that you can create electric current by moving a wire through a magnetic field. This is the principal of the generator and, if I remember correctly (I may have this wrong) was one of Maxwell's equations (Faraday's Law???). Don't remember anymore....old age. Anyway, the point is (the princiapl is still correct) - solar activity has been unprecented in the last many years, and alhough we are supposed to be at a solar minimum, we have continued to have numerous highly energetic events, as attested by watching this site the last 6 years:
http://sec.noaa.gov/today.html
(Look at the archive data)

If I did my math correctly, many of these c,m, and x class events deliver 100s+ of Megawatts/second based purely on the amount of charged particles arriving at the edge of the earths atmosphere. Given these events can last hours and sometimes days - this is an enormous amount of power (MWHours). What does it do to our weather?

But what I really want to know is, has anybody bothered to figure out how many addtional megawatts of electrical current are generated in the earths atmosphere as the particles stream through the earths magnetic field (like the wire through the magnetic field)? And what effect does all this electrical power being delivered have not only on atmospherics, but any kind of geo-magnetic activity (e.g. volcanoes. maybe earthquakes). I have seen with my own eyes, as well as references to other bodies of evidence of a correlation between solar storm activity and earth volcanic and tectonic activity. Why would we expect any less effect on the atmosphere. So much of this is inter-related.

Neggy, we can't be looking ... (Below threshold)

Neggy, we can't be looking at actual science here. This is GLOBAL WARMING we are talking about. Real science and evidence is not allowed.

oh yeah, I forgot...duhh...... (Below threshold)
Neggy:

oh yeah, I forgot...duhh...stupid me..I guess I should forget all the "dumb" questions and trust everything to the noble, altruistic scientists, who as we all know, are actually more enlightened and exalted then the rest of us mere mortals, not subject to such base "unevolved" characteristics such as bias, partiality, hidden motive, jealousy, socialism...silly me

So your argument seems to b... (Below threshold)
NeilS:

So your argument seems to be that we should trust the politicians about global warming but not the scientists. I think that you guys should check in to the history of Lysenkoism in Soviet Russia. Lysenko told Stalin what he wanted to hear and it crippled soviet science for many years. Greenhouse warming is real and has been recognized for over a hundred years. There are many possible solutions to the problem--most of which liberals would abhor, e.g. going nuclear--but pretending the problem doesn't exist is stupid.
Check out the website RealClimate for a more detailed rebuttal of that nutty WSJ editorial.

NeilS,So asking fo... (Below threshold)

NeilS,

So asking folks who're pushing for radical solutions to submit to peer review on their theories is Lysenkoism? Here's a hint for you, Cha-cha: Popular Wisdom != Proven Fact. After all, it was once Popular Wisdom that Algier Hiss was an innocent victim of government paranoia. Turns out that once we had access to the KGB's archives that he realy was a traitor. Likewise it's Popular Wisdom that the opposition to Columbus was due to a belief that the Earth was flat. In fact, every educated person in the west (all five of them at the time) knew it was round. Columbus was claiming (incorrectly) that it was smaller than people thought. Turns out there was just a honking big landmass in the way that no one but the Irish & Scandinavians knew about.

Greenhouse warming is re... (Below threshold)
OC Chuck:

Greenhouse warming is real and has been recognized for over a hundred years. - NeilS

I thought we were having global cooling about 25 years ago.

Cybrludite,Michael... (Below threshold)
NeilS:

Cybrludite,

Michael Mann et al's article was subject to peer review. The methods and data have been checked by many others. It proposed no solutions, radical or otherwise, to global warming, only a analysis of the data. The letter above is from the chair of a House Committee. It is hardly peer review. (Do you see any argument of hte facts or analyses?) It is only meant to intimidate. 'Killing' the messenger won't change the facts.

I find it interesting that ... (Below threshold)
Solapatido:

I find it interesting that so many climate scientists frequent this blog, as if they have any clue what they are talking about. Somehow, for *real* climate scientists to deal in their profession they need years and years of study, yet the armchair geniuses here *know* that global warming is BS based on what? Some completely doofus talking points that they don't even understand. I think you guys should stick to saying stupid things about evolution, it is more amusing. WHAT ABOUT THE SPACE RAYS?? THEY NEED TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE SPACE RAYS!! I have a cracker jack Ph.D.!

How many minutes for HighSt... (Below threshold)

How many minutes for HighSticking?

Is this the same "global wa... (Below threshold)

Is this the same "global warming" that Al Gore screamed about on the coldest day in over 50 years recently ?

NeilS,Peer review?... (Below threshold)
DCE:

NeilS,

Peer review? By whom? The Three Stooges? Or by like minded climatologists?

From what I understand when a Montecarlo analysis was done using Mann's algorithm, the results were identical. (For those of you not familar with Montecarlo analysis, random data is entered into a model. If the results show the effects of the random data, then the model might be correct. But if the results show trends, non-randomness, and like data output, then the model is flawed.

In Mann's case, the model showed results identical to his when random data was used, showing that the model's algorith was 'cooked' to give the results that Mann and his team were looking for. Plus he admits that he massaged the data, something that puts his results into question.

DCENo, not the thr... (Below threshold)
NeilS:

DCE

No, not the three stooges. Probably quite capable scientists and statisticians who would be more than happy to deep six a faulty analysis by a competitor. I recommend you check out the rebuttal and links at http://www.realclimate.org/. They have a much more detailed analysis of the problem.

NeilS

Very interesting NeilS.... (Below threshold)
Al:

Very interesting NeilS.

One question:
Was there a global 'Medieval Warm Period'?

Where is it on Mann's chart?
More info on Mann's bent stick

For more specifics regardin... (Below threshold)
JerryB:

For more specifics regarding the points at issue, see www.climateaudit.org .




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy