date: Fri, 1 May 2009 12:54:35 +0100 (BST) from: Philip Jones subject: Re: FW: Climate science and data availability / Wang (fwd) to: p.jones@uea.ac.uk ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2009 20:07:29 -0400 From: Thomas R. Karl To: Wei-Chyung Wang Cc: 'Phil Jones' Subject: Re: FW: Climate science and data availability / Wang W-C, Phil Seems like Keenan only needs to discuss his concerns with Ms Zeng if he doubts the veracity of the statements. Tom Wei-Chyung Wang said the following on 4/28/2009 3:45 PM: > FYI, do you see anything new? > > wcw > ************************************* > Dr. Wei-Chyung Wang > Professor of Applied Sciences > Atmospheric Sciences Research Center > State University of New York > 251 Fuller Road > Albany, New York 12203 > Tel: 518-437-8708 > Fax: 518-372-8325 > E-mail: wang@climate.cestm.albany.edu > http://asrc.albany.edu/people/faculty/wang/wang.html > ************************************** > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Wei-Chyung Wang [mailto:wang@climate.cestm.albany.edu] > Sent: Tuesday, April 28, 2009 3:32 PM > To: 'Lynn Videka' > Cc: JReilly@uamail.albany.edu; ABonilla@uamail.albany.edu; 'Wei-Chyung Wang' > Subject: FW: Climate science and data availability / Wang > > Hi, Lynn, > > Although I do not see anything new (see below) given what they have already > smeared, but SUNYA perhaps can and should respond. Please let me know. > > wcw > ************************************* > Dr. Wei-Chyung Wang > Professor of Applied Sciences > Atmospheric Sciences Research Center > State University of New York > 251 Fuller Road > Albany, New York 12203 > Tel: 518-437-8708 > Fax: 518-372-8325 > E-mail: wang@climate.cestm.albany.edu > http://asrc.albany.edu/people/faculty/wang/wang.html > ************************************** > > -----Original Message----- > From: Aubrey Blumsohn [mailto:aubreyprivate@btinternet.com] > Sent: Tuesday, April 28, 2009 2:52 PM > To: wang@climate.cestm.albany.edu > Cc: mailarchive1492@googlemail.com > Subject: Climate science and data availability / Wang > > Dear Professor Wang > > I am planning to publish the following about the > accusations of fraud, and > University handling of such accusations that > concern yourself or your institution. > > The text below is simply a bare-bones summary > conveyed to you for fact checking. It will be worded > differently and will reflect on other similar > incidents (in medicine as opposed to climate > science). > > I would very much appreciate it if you would let > me know which if any facts presented are > incorrect, how any such fact is incorrect, and (if > you wish) provide documentation to support any > correction or addition you believe to be pertinent. > > The piece will be published this weekend (2/3 > March 2009) and I would appreciate any corrections > before then. The relevant text follows below my > signature. > > Kind regards > > Dr Aubrey Blumsohn > > ========= > > The allegations concern two publications > > - Jones P.D., Groisman P.Y., Coughlan M., Plummer N., Wang W.-C., Karl T.R. > (1990), ?Assessment of urbanization effects in time series of surface air > temperature over land?, Nature, 347: 169?172. > > - Wang W.-C., Zeng Z., Karl T.R. (1990), ?Urban heat islands in China?, > Geophysical Research Letters, 17: 2377?2380. > > The publications concern temperature at a variety of measuring stations > over three decades (1954-1983). > > Measuring stations are denoted by name or number. A potential confounder in > such research is that measuring stations may be moved to different > locations at different points in time. It is important that readers of > these publications understand the methodology, and the presence and > potential importance of any confounders. > > The publications make the following statements: > > (Statement A) "The stations were selected on the basis of station history: > we chose those with few, if any, changes in instrumentation, location or > observation times." [Jones et al.] > > (Statement B) "They were chosen based on station histories: selected > stations have relatively few, if any, changes in instrumentation, location, > or observation times?." [Wang et al.] > > The publications refer to a report produced jointly by the U.S. Department > of Energy (DOE) and the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) which details > station moves, and suggest that stations with few if any moves or changes > were selected on the basis of that report. > > 84 stations were selected > > However it appears that > > a) Information about only 35 of the stations chosen are available in the > DOE/CAS report > > b) Of those 39 stations at least half the stations had substantial moves > (e.g 25 km). One station had five different locations during 1954?1983 as > far as 41 km apart. > > It therefore appears that the Statements A and Statement B are false, and > that readers would have been misled both in terms of the status of the > stations, but also in terms of the manner in which they had been selected > (or not selected). > > Keenan communicated with the author of one of the publications (Jones) to > ask about the source of location information pertaining to the other 49 > stations. He was informed that his co-author Wang had selected those > stations in urban and rural China based on his "extensive knowledge of > those networks". > > On 11 April 2007 Keenan E-mailed Wang, asking "How did you ensure the > quality of the data??. Wang, avoided answering for several weeks, but on 30 > April 2007 he replied: > > The discussion with Ms. Zeng last week in Beijing have re-affirmed that she > used the hard copies of station histories to make sure that the selected > stations for the study of urban warming in China have relatively few, if > any, changes in instrumentation, location, or observation times over the > study period (1954-1983) > > Keenan points out that the ?hard copies? to which Wang refers were not > found by the authors of the DOE/CAS report, who had endeavored to be > comprehensive. Furthermore, the DOE/CAS report was authored in part by > Zeng, one of the co-authors on wang et al. He also notes that any form of > comprehensive data covering these stations during the Cultural Revolution > would be implausible. > > Keenan then made application under the Freedom of Information Act (UK) to > the University of East Anglia, at which Jones in a Professor. He asked for > a detailed listing of the measuring stations used in the publication. > > In August 2007 he submitted a report to Wang's University, href="http://www.albany.edu/">University at Albany, alleging fraud. > Wang could at that stage have made the "hard copy" details of the stations > selected available to the scientific community. However, he failed to do > so. > > In May 2008, the University at Albany wrote to Keenen that they had > conducted an investigation and asked him to comment on it. However they > refused to show him the report of the investigation or any of the evidence > to allow any comment. In August 2008 the University sent Keenan a final > "determination" stating that they did not find that Wang had fabricated > data, but again refused to provide any investigation report. To date, it > sems that Wang has still not made the station records available to the > scientific community. If he provided such records to the University then > the University has apparently concealed them. > > Conclusions: > > a) It seems apparent that the methodology for station selection as > described in these two publications is false and misleading. > > b) It may be the case that hard copy records do exist relating to stations > selected by Wang that were not selected according to the published > methodology. However the failure or refusal to supply those records is > highly inappropriate. Such refusal does not lend credance to Wang's > assertion that fraud did not take place. It would also be necessary to see > records of stations that were not selected, in order to confirm that > selection was indeed only "on the basis of station history" > > c) The University at Albany is in a difficult position. > > ci) If the University at Albany did receive such records as part of the > supposed misconduct investigation, then they could easily resolve the > problem by making them available to the scientific community and to readers > of these publications. > > cii) If the University at Albany does not have such records then it would > seem that they may be complicit in fraud and coverup of fraud. > > ciii) If the University at Albany does have such records, but such records > are not in accordance with the stated methodology of the publications, then > the University would likewise be complicit. > > d) The essence of honest science is openness and transparency. The > inclination of the University to support the integrity of a star member of > their academic staff, while refusing to supply the evidence for such an > assertion seems highly inappropriate. > > > -- *Thomas R. Karl, L.H.D.* Director, NOAA's National Climatic Data Center Lead, NOAA Climate Services Veach-Baley Federal Building 151 Patton Avenue Asheville, NC 28801-5001 Tel: (828) 271-4476 Fax: (828) 271-4246 Thomas.R.Karl@noaa.gov