Tuesday, November 29, 2011

0208.txt

date: Wed, 29 Jul 2009 11:57:34 -0400
from: Michael Mann <mannatXYZxyzeo.psu.edu>
subject: Re: ENSO blamed over warming - paper in JGR
to: Phil Jones <p.jonesatXYZxyz.ac.uk>

HI Phil,

re Grant, great--I agree he'll need to reduce the number of figures and focus on the key
points. Jim has already drafted something on ENSO/temp relationships and I made a few
comments, once we have a revised version of that can send on to you for further
comment/addition/revision etc.

thanks for the update re CA--caught a hint of this latest fuss in a comment that came in at
RC (which we deleted from the queue). Sounds like they're moving from person to person,
first harassed Ben earlier this year, now you, who knows who is next. I've been trying to
no avail to get some journalist to look into their funding, industry connections, etc. they
need to be exposed--badly!

by the way, are you going to the paleo meeting being hosted by Gabi and crew in Edinburgh
next summer (July 12-13 I believe)? If not, perhaps I can schedule a short visit at CRU to
see you, Keith, and the gang either before or after, once I know schedule...

mike

On Jul 29, 2009, at 11:44 AM, Phil Jones wrote:

Mike,
I replied quickly to Grant to say I'm in. All of CRU is away tomorrow - so
we're due for deluge at Keith's house, where we hope to have a barbecue.
I've printed if off and will get back to Grant tomorrow or first thing Friday.
Looks to have too many diagrams, but we can pick and choose. I recall
comments have a limit on diagrams.
A bit on history of ENSO would be good to sneak in. The paper I sent
earlier has many of the refs but only one of Walker's.
Have had a difficult few days this week - with 50 FOIs from an orchestrated
climate audit campaign. We have a path through it now. It is just
a pure time wasting effort.
Cheers
Phil
At 16:35 29/07/2009, you wrote:

thanks Grant, the paper is starting to shape up well now. Jim and I (well, mostly Jim,
w/ some input from me) are iterating on a blurb about past studies on ENSO/temperature
relationships and should have something for you soon on that,
As James has pointed out, its important to stick to the key points and not get
sidetracked with nonsense. I would avoid any commentary on their ignorant ramblings
about the Hadley Cell, etc. We want to cut straight to the deep flaws in their analysis
which are, in order of importance in my view,
1. indefensible use of a differencing filter, which has the effect of selectively
damping low-frequency variability and renders any conclusions about factors underlying
long-term trends completely spurious.
2. ignoring the fact that the influence of ENSO on global temperature has been known for
decades, and much better quantified in past studies than in the current deeply flawed
analysis.
3. the selective use of a flawed temperature data and curious splicing in of
inappropriate recent data (UAH TMT) to further suppress trends. A bit of overkill given
that they already eliminated the trends anyway. Guess they wanted to play it extra
cautious just in case some bit of warming trend tried to sneak in.
The other stuff is just a distraction.
mike
On Jul 29, 2009, at 10:51 AM, Grant Foster wrote:

Gentlemen,
Attached is a zip file with LaTeX and pdf for a first draft. I've included everybody's
name (in alphabetical order after mine), but of course it should only include in
submission those who give explicit consent.
There are a few other issues. One is that MFC have recently removed the pdf version of
their paper from the "New Zealand Climate Coalition" website. They've replaced it with
this:
[1]http://nzclimatescience.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=502&Itemid=1
which refers to a graph showing only part of figure 7, and suggests that there's not
trend in GTTA so "nothing to worry about." Yet the plotted GTTA is from UAH TMT (*not*
TLT) so of course it shows no trend, and the MT channel is contaminated by stratospheric
cooling.
In figure 7 of the paper itself they compare the 50-year record of SOI and GTTA, but
their graph of GTTA is made of RATPAC-A data until 1980 grafted onto UAH TMT data
afterward -- hence the lack of an obvious trend. I think this too should be mentioned,
especially as the entire RATPAC-A record shows a very pronounced trend.
One last thing: there's a lot of stuff in the paper about Hadley cells and heat
transport and so forth. I suspect this is really a bunch of gobbledygook -- but I don't
know. But I'll bet you guys do. Comments?
Sincerely,
Grant
___________________________________________________________________________________

Windows Live Hotmail�: Celebrate the moment with your favorite sports pics. [2]Check it
out. <comment.zip>

--
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: [3]mannatXYZxyz.edu
University Park, PA 16802-5013
website: [4]http://www.meteo.psu.edu/~mann/Mann/index.html
"Dire Predictions" book site:
[5]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 [6]p.jonesatXYZxyz.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: [7]mannatXYZxyz.edu
University Park, PA 16802-5013
website: [8]http://www.meteo.psu.edu/~mann/Mann/index.html
"Dire Predictions" book site:
[9]http://www.essc.psu.edu/essc_web/news/DirePredictions/index.html

No comments:

Post a Comment