Temporarily Offline

We’re moving. That means that for nearly a week we’ll be without internet access. That of course means I’ll be unable to moderate comments — so if yours waits in moderation for a long time, I hope you’ll understand. I might be able to get a moment here or there during the “blackout” — but I can’t guarantee it.


In the meantime, I can recommend this post about the failure of McLean, de Freitas, and Carter to make an acceptable reply to the comment on their paper, and this followup as well. The newest strategy seems to be: if your reply isn’t acceptable for publication, accuse the journal of censorship.

I also recommend this book. You might even want two: one to keep, one to give.


21 responses to “Temporarily Offline

  1. good luck with the move!

    incidentally, your second link (“this followup as well”) goes straight to the homepage. the post you’re referring to is http://julesandjames.blogspot.com/2010/03/mcleans-whine-part-2.html

    in other news: “help! help! i’m being repressed! did you see the censorship inherent in the system?”

  2. This Grant Foster guy – is he really VS?

    jk. :)

    Moving sucks. I hope not too much for you, Tamino. Good luck. I guess the hand is all better now?

    I will buy the book for sure. Next to read is Six Degrees by Lynas.

  3. According to Ms. Rabett moving is the time to fill a dumpster with Eli’s various collections. Good luck

  4. Hope the move goes well.

    Any chance the book will be released as an ebook? (My bookshelves filled up years ago!)

    • 1) Buy more bookshelves.
      2) Give away duplicate, out-of-date or not-so-great books to charity.
      3) Some bookshelves can fit books in 2 deep.
      4) Piles of books make great tables!
      5) Buy another house…?
      6) Endow a library :-D

  5. Good luck on the move! And thanks for the tip about the book. I’ve just ordered a copy.

  6. Horatio Algeranon

    Tamino,

    Did you dedicate it to your good friend Anthony, by any chance?

    Horatio is working on a book of love sonnets…

  7. Just ordered the book, but only after Eli pointed out who the author is. I’m hoping there’s lots of wavelets in there.

  8. My grandmother said, “Three moves were as BAD as a fire!” My mother looked at my dad’s office and said, “Three moves were as good as a fire!”

  9. Dear Tamino, this is totally OT but I thought you might find it amusing:
    http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/stories/s2858332.htm

    Regards, Stephan

    • Stephan, that was an excellent article. I see Skeptical Science, Rabett Run, Deltoid and James’s Blog have picked it up already. Posted it on my Facebook page (a little lower profile, for sure) as well.

    • Thanks for that link.

      The central point, about the inappropriateness of linear detrending in attribution of trends, had of course been well-make here. (Though the illustrative example in link gets points for vividness, IMO!)

      What I hadn’t heard was the disjunction between what was claimed in the paper versus what was claimed in the press release. To me, it strongly suggests a clear deceptive strategy: make a defensible claim for peer-review, spin it beyond all recognition for the general press.

      Wish I could say I was shocked.

    • The comments to your article are not so amusing, however. Perhaps I should stop reading those sections, they make me depressed.

      Oh, and Kevin: the article itself actually also made the claim their data analysis left little influence of anthropogenic influence on the variation of the temperature. I hope(!), however, that the original three reviewers (and don’t we want to know who those were?!) read this as referring to the variations *around the trend*.

  10. David B. Benson

    Learned a new phrase over on Rabett Run:

    Motl’s Syndrome.

    • Given he’s rather full of himself the more exacting would be Motl’s Lubos Syndrome.

  11. what does that mean?

    • David B. Benson

      Acting with regared to climatology (and maybe also statistics) the way L. Motl acts.

  12. Tamino,

    In his defence here ..

    http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/stories/s2861936.htm

    ..against Lewandowsky’s comments here…

    http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/stories/s2858332.htm

    …McLean makes this statement:

    “We did indeed use a derivative technique, in fact a modified Fourier transform, to establish that variations in the Southern Oscillation Index (SOI), a measure of the El Nino-Southern Oscillation system, occurred seven months prior to corresponding changes in the average global temperature in the lower troposphere. ”

    I’m not famliar with Fourier Transforms.

    In your opinion, is taking a 12-month moving average and subtracting the 12-month moving average from 12-months earlier a “modified Fourier transform”?

    [Response: Answer: no.

    And the claim that they used their filter “to establish that variations … occurred seven months prior” is patently false. The filter isn’t at all necessary to establish the 7-month lag. In the paper they claim to have used the filter to reduce the noise. They’re just backtracking because it’s been proved that their result depended on a filter which removes the variation they don’t like. Namely: global warming.

    And that is why their reply to the comment was rejected: because they made claims in their reply that are just plain false.]

  13. “Response: Answer: no.”

    I thought not.

  14. I applaud McLean’s frank and honest contributions to the discussion (http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/stories/s2861936.htm), which confirmed my judgment that the peer reviewed literature has spoken loudly and clearly (http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/stories/s2858332.htm).