cc: rbradley@geo.umass.edu, mhughes@ltrr.arizona.edu, t.osborn@uea.ac.uk, wigley@ucar.edu, phil Jones , keith Briffa date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 14:30:59 -0700 from: Tom Wigley subject: Re: Fwd: Your concerns with 2004GL021750 McIntyre to: "Michael E. Mann" Mike, This is truly awful. GRL has gone downhill rapidly in recent years. I think the decline began before Saiers. I have had some unhelpful dealings with him recently with regard to a paper Sarah and I have on glaciers -- it was well received by the referees, and so is in the publication pipeline. However, I got the impression that Saiers was trying to keep it from being published. Proving bad behavior here is very difficult. If you think that Saiers is in the greenhouse skeptics camp, then, if we can find documentary evidence of this, we could go through official AGU channels to get him ousted. Even this would be difficult. How different is the GRL paper from the Nature paper? Did the authors counter any of the criticisms? My experience with Douglass is that the identical (bar format changes) paper to one previously rejected was submitted to GRL. Tom. =============== Michael E. Mann wrote: Dear All, Just a heads up. Apparently, the contrarians now have an "in" with GRL. This guy Saiers has a prior connection w/ the University of Virginia Dept. of Environmental Sciences that causes me some unease. I think we now know how the various Douglass et al papers w/ Michaels and Singer, the Soon et al paper, and now this one have gotten published in GRL, Mike Subject: Your concerns with 2004GL021750 McIntyre Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 14:42:12 -0600 X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Your concerns with 2004GL021750 McIntyre Thread-Index: AcT/MITTfwM54m4OS32mJvW4BluE+A== From: "Mackwell, Stephen" [1] To: [2] Cc: [3], [4] X-OriginalArrivalTime: 20 Jan 2005 20:42:12.0740 (UTC) FILETIME=[84F55440:01C4FF30] X-UVA-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at fork7.mail.virginia.edu X-MIME-Autoconverted: from base64 to 8bit by multiproxy.evsc.Virginia.EDU id j0KKgLO11138 Dear Prof. Mann In your recent email to Chris Reason, you laid out your concerns that I presume were the reason for your phone call to me last week. I have reviewed the manuscript by McIntyre, as well as the reviews. The editor in this case was Prof. James Saiers. He did note initially that the manuscript did challenge published work, and so felt the need for an extensive and thorough review. For that reason, he requested reviews from 3 knowledgable scientists. All three reviews recommended publication. While I do agree that this manuscript does challenge (somewhat aggresively) some of your past work, I do not feel that it takes a particularly harsh tone. On the other hand, I can understand your reaction. As this manuscript was not written as a Comment, but rather as a full-up scientific manuscript, you would not in general be asked to look it over. And I am satisfied by the credentials of the reviewers. Thus, I do not feel that we have sufficient reason to interfere in the timely publication of this work. However, you are perfectly in your rights to write a Comment, in which you challenge the authors' arguments and assertions. Should you elect to do this, your Comment would be provided to them and they would be offered the chance to write a Reply. Both Comment and Reply would then be reviewed and published together (if they survived the review process). Comments are limited to the equivalent of 2 journal pages. Regards Steve Mackwell Editor in Chief, GRL ______________________________________________________________ Professor Michael E. Mann Department of Environmental Sciences, Clark Hall University of Virginia Charlottesville, VA 22903 _______________________________________________________________________ e-mail: [5]mann@virginia.edu Phone: (434) 924-7770 FAX: (434) 982-2137 [6]http://www.evsc.virginia.edu/faculty/people/mann.shtml