cc: k.briffa@uea.ac.uk, Phil Jones , date: Mon, 3 Nov 2003 10:54:39 -0500 (EST) from: Alan Robock subject: Re: McIntyre and McKitrick response to: "Michael E. Mann" Dear Mike, OK. But it seems to me that if the climlist message, which would be from a third party (me), contains a link directly to your reply, more people would read it. Alan Professor Alan Robock Editor, JGR - Atmospheres Director, Center for Environmental Prediction Department of Environmental Sciences Phone: +1-732-932-9478 Rutgers University Fax: +1-732-932-8644 14 College Farm Road E-mail: robock@envsci.rutgers.edu New Brunswick, NJ 08901-8551 USA http://envsci.rutgers.edu/~robock On Mon, 3 Nov 2003, Michael E. Mann wrote: > Dear Alan, > > I strongly support going w/ the CRU version, because this is also the version that has gone out to other mailing lists, my email went to a smaller number of > colleagues. Also, a 3rd party posted the link to M&M. I see know reason why it would not be appropriate therefore that a 3rd party also post the link to the > response. This seems more symmetric in nature to me. > > Thanks all for the help, > > mike > > At 10:44 AM 11/3/2003 -0500, Alan Robock wrote: > Dear Mike, > > Please let us know what you want to do. > > Alan > > Professor Alan Robock >   Editor, JGR - Atmospheres >   Director, Center for Environmental Prediction > Department of Environmental Sciences              Phone: +1-732-932-9478 > Rutgers University                                  Fax: +1-732-932-8644 > 14 College Farm Road                   E-mail: robock@envsci.rutgers.edu > New Brunswick, NJ 08901-8551  USA      http://envsci.rutgers.edu/~robock > > > On Mon, 3 Nov 2003, CLIMLIST wrote: > > > Drs. Robock, Osborn, Briffa, and Jones, > > > > As you are aware, in the interest of fairness, I have agreed to post a > > cordial response to the posting of Dr. Bartlett last week, and then I > > will declare the issue closed for discussion on CLIMLIST. > > > > This morning, I have two messages that are requested to be distributed > > -- one from Dr. Robock and the other from Drs. Osborn, Briffa, and > > Jones.  I really only want to post one of these.  Both messages > > contained references to the same website, and I appreciate the use of > > the website as I had requested.  I'm more inclined to post Dr. Robock's > > message, because it contains Dr. Mann's words.  While I respect the > > cordiality and professionalism exhibited by the message of Drs. Osborn, > > Briffa, and Jones, would you all be in agreement if I posted the message > > from Dr. Robock instead? > > > > Below are the two messages for your information. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > Dear Bob, > > > > Here is the response from Mike Mann.  It provides a link to a web page > > by Osborn, Briffa, and Jones: > > > > http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/~timo/paleo/ > > > > which provides a link to the response by Mann, Bradley and Hughes: > > > > http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/~timo/paleo/EandEPaperProblem.pdf > > > > Please post it to CLIMLIST. > > > > Alan > > > > Professor Alan Robock > >    Editor, JGR - Atmospheres > >    Director, Center for Environmental Prediction > > Department of Environmental Sciences              Phone: +1-732-932-9478 > > Rutgers University                                  Fax: +1-732-932-8644 > > 14 College Farm Road                   E-mail: robock@envsci.rutgers.edu > > New Brunswick, NJ 08901-8551  USA      http://envsci.rutgers.edu/~robock > > > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > > Date: Sat, 01 Nov 2003 13:50:38 -0500 > > From: Michael E. Mann > > Subject: E&E paper responses > > > > Dear Colleagues, > > > > Tim Osborn, Keith Briffa, and Phil Jones of the University of East > > Anglia have posted a commentary on the recent paper by McIntyre and > > McKitrick (Energy and Environment, 14, 751-771, 2003) which claimed to > > provide an "audit" of the analysis of Mann, Bradley and Hughes (Nature, > > 392, 779-787, 1998; hereafter MBH98), with a link to our response to the > > paper here: > > > > http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/~timo/paleo/ > > > > I imagine that the additional information  provided will place a very > > different perspective on the matter. > > > > Please feel free to forward this information to anyone who you feel > > might benefit from it. > > > > Best regards, > > > > Mike Mann > > > > ______________________________________________________________ > >                      Professor Michael E. Mann > >             Department of Environmental Sciences, Clark Hall > >                        University of Virginia > >                       Charlottesville, VA 22903 > > _______________________________________________________________________ > > e-mail: mann@virginia.edu   Phone: (434) 924-7770   FAX: (434) 982-2137 > >           http://www.evsc.virginia.edu/faculty/people/mann.shtml > > > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > > f055 wrote: > > > Dear Dr. Rohli, > > > > > > here follows a short response to the posting that was highlighting the > > > McIntyre and McKitrick paper, posted (I think) by Prof. Bartlett.  I hope it > > > is in > > > a suitable format and style for CLIMLIST and can be posted as it stands.  > > > If not, please advise me how to change it so that it is suitable. > > > > > > -------------------------------- > > > > > > This is a response to the posting related to the McIntyre and McKitrick > > > (Energy and Environment, 14, 751-771, 2003) study of the Northern > > > Hemisphere temperature reconstruction previously published by Mann, > > > Bradley and Hughes (Nature, 392, 779-787, 1998; hereafter MBH98). > > > > > > We suggest that those interested in the claim made by McIntyre and > > > McKitrick (MM) should also read the initial response from Mann and his > > > colleagues. > > > > > > We have posted their initial response on our website for those interested > > > in this issue: > > > > > > http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/~timo/paleo/ > > > > > > According to this initial response, it looks likely that there are serious > > > questions regarding the manner in which MM have attempted to > > > implement the Mann et al. method, and specific problems with the > > > selection of predictors. > > > > > > Amazingly, the journal "Energy and Environment" that published the MM > > > work, made no attempt to provide Mann et al. with the opportunity to review > > > the MM paper or establish the details of the MM work. > > > > > > Objective readers, with a desire to get to the "truth" of this issue, would do > > > well not to jump to premature conclusions and, unlike Energy and > > > Environment, at least allow these respected, experienced, and invariably > > > careful researchers the courtesy of a considered response, after they > > > have had time to study the so-called audit in detail. > > > > > > Tim Osborn > > > Keith Briffa > > > Phil Jones > > > > > > ------------------------------- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Robert V. Rohli > > Southern Regional Climate Center, Dept of Geography and Anthropology > > Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA  70803-4105  U.S.A. > > +1-225-578-6137 (phone) * +1-225-578-2912 (fax) * climlist@srcc.lsu.edu > > > > ______________________________________________________________ >                     Professor Michael E. Mann >            Department of Environmental Sciences, Clark Hall >                       University of Virginia >                      Charlottesville, VA 22903 > _______________________________________________________________________ > e-mail: mann@virginia.edu   Phone: (434) 924-7770   FAX: (434) 982-2137 >          http://www.evsc.virginia.edu/faculty/people/mann.shtml >