Update, and a good post by the Rabett

I’ve almost completed the first draft of the paper about the analysis of GHCN data. I intend to send it to Professor Rabett for his opinion before submitting it; I hope he’s willing to offer his valuable advice.

I’d also like to direct readers to a worthwhile post by the Rabett; he’s becoming my favorite climate-science blogger.

14 responses to “Update, and a good post by the Rabett

  1. I enjoy both blogs.Its the type of attitude you share. As long as you continue to be right keep the attitudes.

  2. Kevin Johnstone

    I agree with Ani, I greatly enjoy both blogs.

    It goes with saying that a number of people will be looking to nitpick this paper so the wider the consultation, opinion gathering & proofreading you make before submission the better.

    Good luck with this.

  3. What journal did you set on?

    I appreciate his nutty sense of humor, but Eli is a bit too much for me. THIS IS MY FAVORITE CLIMATE BLOG. Sorry for the caps… sounded a bit like Climate Progress.

  4. I enjoy both Tamino and Eli’s blogs and look forward to the new posts and insights, as well as the comments.

    I pointed out in the other thread that Tamino’s work is now on ClimateProgress. The word is getting around :)

  5. Tamino send the paper my way. I will be prompt and I do peer review a lot of papers, including for the Journal of Climate.

  6. Anthony Watts tells why he won’t respond to Tamino, in comments at my blog, here:
    http://timpanogos.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/warming-and-science-denialists-stuck-with-political-egg-on-their-predictions/#comment-96746

    You may find it of interest.

  7. “He doesn’t show his work” – Oh, the hypocrisy!

    Frauds like Watts make me angry not because they are doing damage, but because they have already done immeasurable damage to public understanding and the perception of science. In a way, it is a pity he isn’t a real scientist, because as it is he is beyond censure, firing him would mean nothing, and he is held to no standard. He also seems to be remarkably thick-skinned. A result, one assumes, of being routinely wrong about just about everything.

    When will the mainstream news get hold of Wattergate?

  8. carrot eater

    Ask Watts how Zeke, Ron Broberg and clear climate were all able to confirm Tamino’s conclusions, if Tamino not publishing his code yet is such a stumbling block in understanding what he did.

  9. carrot eater,

    C’mon over and ask him yourself. The more the better chance we have to be careful with language at get at the truth, I think.

  10. Ed Darrell mentions another topic on which Watts and others can be expected to correct themselves, when, er, they, um ….
    http://timpanogos.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/warming-and-science-denialists-stuck-with-political-egg-on-their-predictions/

  11. Oops, ignore that, Ed already posted it himself. Sorry

  12. Well, Watts adds to his reputation of being a loutish idiot over at Ed’s, that’s for sure.

    For any lurker wondering if it was worth peeking into :)

    Keep at ’em, Tamino.

  13. carrot eater

    Tamino,
    Is there any chance you could give your global GHCN results in numerical form? Since you came out with your results, there’s been several analogous attempts, and it’s neat to overlay them all to show how well they match each other.

    It really underscores how reproducible the processing is, even if you make your own little changes in the algorithm, and even if you don’t have somebody else’s code to copy.

    Basically, it’d be nice to add your result to this plot:

    Especially since you were the first one. Or we can wait, if you want it all tidied up and published first.