date: Tue, 18 Jul 2000 16:41:12 +0100 from: Phil Jones subject: Re: Global Surface Record Must Be Wrong to: k.briffa@uea.ac.uk,t.osborn@uea.ac.uk >X-Sender: mann@holocene.evsc.virginia.edu >Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2000 10:29:15 -0400 >To: cfk@lanl.gov >From: "Michael E. Mann" >Subject: Re: Global Surface Record Must Be Wrong >Cc: rbradley@geo.umass.edu, p.jones@uea.ac.uk > >Chick, > >This guys email is intentional deceipt. Our method, as you know, doesn't >include any "splicing of two different datasets"-this is a myth perptuated >by Singer and his band of hired guns, who haven't bothered to read our >papers or the captions of the figures they like to mis-represent... > >Phil Jones, Ray Bradley, and Malcolm Hughes dispelled much of the mythology >expressed below years ago. > >This is intentional misrepresentation. For his sake, I hope does not go >public w/ such comments! > >mike > >>Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2000 08:38:35 +0100 (BST) >>X-Envelope-From: richard@courtney01.cix.co.uk >>X-Sender: courtney01@mail.compulink.co.uk >>To: Chick Keller >>From: COURTNEY >>Subject: Re: Global Surface Record Must Be Wrong >>X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by >holocene.evsc.virginia.edu id DAA27832 >> >>Dear Chick: >> >>Your past performance demonstrates that your recent piece to Peter Dietze is >>unworthy of you. Smears and inuendoes are not adequate substitutes for >>evidence and reasoned argument. You say; >>"As to Michael Mann's "hocky stick" paleo-temperature graph, I realize why >>many attack it for it puts the nail in the coffen of the argument that >>recent natural variability is as large as what has been observed in the 20th >>century." >> >>No ! People attack the 'hockey stick' because it is uses an improper >>procedure to assess inadequate data as a method to provide a desired result. >>I have defended Mann et al. from accusations of scientific "fraud" because I >>am willing to accept that this was done in naive stupidity, but I am not >>willing to accept that is good science. As you say, "people like Mann, >>Briffa, Jones, etc." have conducted "careful work", but doing the wrong >>thing carefully does not make it right. >> >>The 'hockey stick' is obtained by splicing two different data sets. Similar >>data to the earlier data set exists for up to near the present and could >>have been spliced on, but this would not show the 'hockey stick' and was not >>done. >> >>Also, it is not true to say, as you have; >>"But, it's going to take more than rhetoric about Europe's Little Ice Age >>and Medieval Warming to get around the careful work of people like Mann, >>Briffa, Jones, etc." >>Nobody in their right mind is going to place more trust in the proxy data of >>"Mann, Briffa, Jones, etc." than in the careful - and taxed - tabulations in >>the Doomesday Book. The Medieval Warm Period is documented from places >>distributed around the globe, and it is not adequate to assert that it was >>"not global" because it did not happen everywhere at exactly the same time: >>the claimed present day global warming is not happening everywhere at the >>exactly the same time. Indeed, you say; >>"recent temperature anomalies show that, while the tropics is cooler than >>usual due to La Niņa, the rest of the world is pretty much still as warm as >>in 1998." >> >>It is historical revisionism to assert that the Little Ice Age and Medieval >>Warming did not happen or were not globally significant. It will take much, >>much more than analyses of sparse and debatable proxy data to achieve such a >>dramatic overturning of all the historical and archaelogical evidence for >>the Little Ice Age and the Medieval Warm Period. Those who wish to make >>such assertions should explain why all the historical and archaelogical >>evidence is wrong or - failing that - they should expect to be ridiculed. >> >>All the best >> >>Richard >> >>>Dear Peter, >>> >>>In a recent message to Tom Wigley you wrote: >>> >>>>"Nowadays, what is measured is mostly quite correct. This holds for the >>>>counts of frogs, butterflies and for the MSU measurements as well as for >>>>the ground station readings. What is seriously flawed, are the biased >>>>*interpretations*. So the surface record may be not wrong at all and >>>>part of the warming is indeed anthropogenic. Wrong is only the paradigm >>>>that ground warming is mostly caused by CO2 - and that this warming has >>>>to show up in the lower troposphere as well. It is striking how the >>>>ground warming grid pattern coincides with winter heating (Vincent Gray) >>>>- if the warming was caused by CO2 it should rather be evenly >>>>distributed over the globe, MSU-detected and only being modified by >>>>meteorological conditions. Note that this energy caused warming only >>>>depends on our energy demand and does hardly increase with CO2 >>>>concentration. So this warming should neither be allocated to the CO2 >>>>increment nor be misused with future CO2 projections." >>> >>>I have been looking at NCDC plots of global temperature anomalis divided >>>into three regions- tropics (20N--20S) and the rest of the >>>globe--(20N--90N) and (20S--90S). When looked at that way, recent >>>temperature anomalies show that, while the tropics is cooler than usual due >>>to La Niņa, the rest of the world is pretty much still as warm as in 1998. >>>This is particularly true of northern subtropics and southern subtropical >>>oceans. The most recent data in fact show the following: for the period >>>March-May 2000, the northern subtropics are the warmest march-may ever, and >>>the southern subtropics are essentially as warm as in 1998. Note that this >>>is not in the winter for either hemisphere. Thus, it would seem to be >>>important not to make too much of the winter-only observations. >>> >>>As to Michael Mann's "hocky stick" paleo-temperature graph, I realize why >>>many attack it for it puts the nail in the coffen of the argument that >>>recent natural variability is as large as what has been observed in the >>>20th century. Gene Parker in the most recent Physics Today just pushed >>>that point of view citing 20 year-old work as his only support. But, it's >>>going to take more than rhetoric about Europe's Little Ice Age and Medieval >>>Warming to get around the careful work of people like Mann, Briffa, Jones, >>>etc. And more recently , Tom Crowley's article in last week's Science!!! >>>Their work includes those acknowledged regional events (LIA and MWP) and >>>still shows the 20th cent. to be anomalous. (I might add here that it also >>>calls into question suggestions that solar variability has an additional >>>indirect forcing amplification since that should have come out of the data. >>>Instead most published studies show a significant solar influence but a >>>moderate one.) And so the only way around recent thousand year paleo >>>studies is for more comprehensive hemispheric and global studies that fill >>>in acknowledged gaps and in addition show that climate variability is >>>larger than recent studies show. >>> >>> Perhaps a more fruitful approach would be to ask what the magnitude >>>of regional variations has been in the past 150 years. If there are no >>>regions whose temperature variations were very far from the global average, >>>then one could legitimately ask how clear anomalies such as the little ice >>>age could have been sustained in the face of the larger hemispheric >>>climate. As one example I might cite the eastern United States and perhaps >>>a large region to the north east since 1940. It clearly has not >>>participated in the global trend, so much so that urban heat island fans >>>cite it as an example of how good records (the US) don't show as much >>>warming as bad records (the rest of the world). >>> >>>Regards, >>>Charles. "Chick" F. Keller, >>>Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics/University of California >>>Mail Stop MS C-305 >>>Los Alamos National Laboratory >>>Los Alamos, New Mexico, 87545 >>>cfk@lanl.gov >>>Phone: (505) 667-0920 >>>FAX: (505) 665-3107 >>>http://www.igpp.lanl.gov/climate.html >>> >>>Every thoughtful man who hopes for the creation of a contemporary culture >>>knows that this hinges on one central problem: to find a coherent relation >>>between science and the humanities. --Jacob Bronowski >>> >>> >> >> >> >_______________________________________________________________________ > Professor Michael E. Mann > Department of Environmental Sciences, Clark Hall > University of Virginia > Charlottesville, VA 22903 >_______________________________________________________________________ >e-mail: mann@virginia.edu Phone: (804) 924-7770 FAX: (804) 982-2137 > http://www.evsc.virginia.edu/faculty/people/mann.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 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------