Tuesday
Apr202010
by 
Bishop Hill
Bishop Hill Media notice Keenan
Apr 20, 2010 Climate: MWP Climate: other FOI Doug Keenan in the comments notes various media stories about his finally managing to extract information from Queens University Belfast.
Reader Comments (47)
Now in The Guardian:
Climate sceptic wins landmark data victory ‘for price of a stamp’
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/apr/20/climate-sceptic-wins-data-victory
“Baillie says his data won’t help either way in [the MWP] argument. Last year he and his Belfast colleague Ana Garcia-Suarez, published a study showing that Irish oaks record summer rainfall well, but not temperature. “Keenan is the only person in the world claiming that our oak-ring patterns are temperature records,” Baillie told the Guardian.”
What? I thought tree rings were supposed to be infallible thermometers!
The story is also now in The Times:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article7102743.ece
See also today's Times.
"Climate sceptics force Queen’s University to hand over data."
The plural is incorrect, I think.
"I thought tree rings were supposed to be infallible thermometers"
Only certain sorts of tree rings, on a specific peninsula, and only from a few particular trees.
Also only before 1970...
I ran a "rough and ready" analysis looking at the Central England Temperature Record (CET) and looking at the correlation with Tree Ring Widths downloaded from (http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/treering.html) from Sheffield (not quite in the CET triangle but will within the "1,200km homeogous correlated effect (?!) etc". The Tree ring data was from 1759 to 2003 and the correlation to the CET was a staggering -0.08351. Therefore I can only conclude that either I have made a mistake or that these Tree Ring Widths at least have no discernable temperature signal?
Now if these Trees have no temperature signal then presumable other do not have one also - not an unreasonable hypothesis?
Therefore if only some Trees have a Temperature Signal how do we determine which these are?
If you simply look for trees whose widths happen to match your available temp data, then if you look at enough you will surely find some that match?
The bit I struggle with is when people call this science? I have another name - reading tea leafs! If you look at enough cups of tea you will fiind any pattern you like in the tea leafs!
But hell the "debate is over" so I am obviously some sort of nutter!
;-)
I understand from my reading of Climate Audit and other blogs that Briffa and other dendrochronologists target trees near the upper tree line in an attempt to identify trees where temperature is the limiting factor on growth. However they can only identify such trees after they have found evidence of a hockey stick in their rings which is a classic example of circular logic.
I cannot believe the kind of comments I can see under the Guardian article.
I certainly CAN believe the comments over at the Guardian ..the game is up ..and boy DO THEY NOT LIKE IT ! : )
Good on ya Doug ...
Guardian article comments. Have the CACCers arrived yet?
Probably the most important contribution of Al Gore to society was the extension of the "Right to Know" act to environmental data when he was vice-president.
It seems that now it is not correct if other citizens try to make those environmental data available to the public.
One reason may be that Al Gore's were times before the "hide the decline" data.
Another reason may be that 'some animals are more equal than others'.
Of course if one can produce a Hockey stick from trees which do not have a temperature record....well the game is well and truely up....
Guardian article comments. Yep, the CACCers have arrived.
"Denialist petrochemicals lobbies"
I was very glad that The Guardian published about this. There are a couple inaccuracies in the story though.
The biggest inaccuracy is the claim that “[Keenan] admits he has no expertise in tree-ring analysis”. Although I have no experience with physical samples, I do have expertise in analyzing tree-ring data, which is what is relevant here. For example, in 2002, I published a critique of some of the work done by a world-leading dendrochronologist; the criticism concerned both the methods used and the results asserted. The criticism was initially strongly denied, and then later accepted as valid by the researcher's own lab (e.g. Griggs & Manning [Radiocarbon, 2009]). I also have substantial experience with the statistical analysis of time series, which is what tree-ring analysis is based on.
Also, I am not a City banker. I did used to work for City banks, but I left in 1995. While there, I worked as both a research mathematician and a bond/derivatives trader. This is relevant, because financial data are also time series.
Additionally, I agree that researchers who gather data should get exclusive access to the data—but only for a limited time. Baillie gathered the data decades ago (and he is now emeritus); yet he still refuses to allow access.
Baillie has analyzed the data very little, because he lacks the skill to do so.
I left a couple comments at The Guardian, but other commenters do not seem to be noticing them.
And a link to the realclimate data sources page. (Funny, but I can't see any Irish dendro there.)
The warmists would have every aspect of our lives monitored and taxed based on a theory of carbon causing climate change, but think that their data can be kept secret. http://www.climatejournal.org/
Douglas,
Well done on getting the data. Like you I am not a dendrochronologist. I am a geophysicist with a training in geosciences (including oceanography and soil science). However, like you one of my professional strengths is in the analysis of time series data. I also make proxy comparisons and work with spatially (and/or temporally) correlated data series. My work also includes stochastic processes and prediction under uncertainty. This is why I can read Mann 1998 and then MM2003 papers, understand what McIntyre and McKitrick are saying and realise they are correct. It is also why I can understand the first test that MM did was to put random noise through the Mann PC code...and got a hockey stick in 99% of the cases.
If you worked as a research mathematician in the City then based on what I know about the calibre of people who get to work in those kind of jobs I have every confidence in your ability to apply rigorous analysis to the tree-ring data sets. Good luck and I look forward to reading your future publications.
More AgitProp from Fred Pearce.
City banker = doubleplus ungood
Also note that the FoI act doesn't mention the motives or plans of the requestor. That's how Freedom works.
OT!:
http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/climategate-figure-threatens-lawsuit-over,1256901.shtml
Douglas, I wouldn't worry too much about the lack of comments from Guardian Comment Is Free'ers: most of them can't get much beyond reliable addition, and think that statistics is the last refuge of scoundrels, odd really since at CRU it seems to have been. To most Guardian writers, and readers, data tells whatever story they think it ought too, and virtually all Guardian journalists are innumerate.
"reading tea leafs"
An interesting proxy for temperature, as it is well known that people drink more tea when the weather is hot. Just add up all the tea in China, and compare with previous years...
ZT - excellent! Michael Mann has just turned the spotlight on himself.
The Belfast dendrochronology was not constructed for the purpose of ascertaining a climate record. It was constructed solely as a dating methodology - which is Baillie's input. He claims that it is not possible to ascertain climate from the Belfast tree ring chronology. It does however record a series of very narrow tree rings on several occasions in the past which do have climatic repercussions. He interprets these few episodes as phases of extremely cold weather - but even these events are not accepted by many archaeologists and climate scientists in general ignore small period episodes (that may last five, ten or the longest, in the 12th century BC, some 18 years). While I hope Keenan is able to extract some climatic information from the Belfast chronology he has to bear in mind that many of the oaks used in it were growing in bogs in very wet conditions - which is why Baillie was adamant they were of no value (and he probably didn't want to put aside his retirement to return to the university to dig the information out). Never the less, here is hoping Keenan finds what he is looking for
JP - got to keep that largesse flowing...
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703657604575005412584751830.html
Patagon
There was no "before" time. Acid Rain in the 1980s was the warm-up for climate change. The US govts interim report (NAPAP) found the claims were overblown. (similar efforts in Europe) The head of the project, Dr. Kulp, was forced to step down and the new director James Mahoney assured a US Congress subcommittee that he "would not subscribe...at this time" to a view acid rain was not overtly damaging. Despite his assurances the final report found what the interim report concluded. EPA initially withheld the report, nobody from Congress showed interest in reading it and the legislation passed (proving its never about the science). EPA then smeared the reputation of its lead scientist Dr Krug and blacklisted him. The only difference between acid rain and climate change is the internet. One NAPAP scientist correctly predicted following the acid rain travesty-- there will be no NAPAP for global warming.
congrats doug -
O/T but serious stuff. the psychologising of CAGW scepticism:
The Tavistock & Portman, NHS Foundation Trust: Heads in the Sand: What’s mad about climate change? (CPD19b)
Friday 30 April 2010, 3.00 – 5.30pm Fee 60 Pounds
Sally Weintrobe will examine the unconscious motivations behind people’s responses to climate change. She will explore some of the underlying reasons for the current level of denial of climate change and will suggest ways forward towards greater engagement.
The overwhelming consensus of scientific opinion is that the warming the Earth has observed over the last 50 years has been due to an increase in greenhouse gases directly caused by human activities. Predictions for the likely effects of this warming vary from the disastrous to the apocalyptic.
People’s reactions to potentially hazardous problems are often acute and even exaggerated. Predicted pandemics such as swine flu cause panic and induce rapid changes in people’s behaviour. Yet faced with overwhelming evidence of a likely global catastrophe the vast majority of populations have their heads in the sand. Why is this?
Is it ambivalence and apathy? Or are people paralyzed by feelings of anxiety and helplessness? What are the biggest barriers to individual’s taking action? We must look at the reasons people are not acting in order to understand how to get people to act.
Sally Weintrobe works as a psychoanalyst. She is a Fellow of the Institute of Psychoanalysis and Chair of its Scientific Committee. She has written on the topics of greed, entitlement and grievance and her latest paper is on climate change denial.
http://www.tavi-port.org/Climatechange
Bristol UWE: Inside Out: Psychoanalytic Perspectives on our Environmental Crisis
(Note: This conference is intended primarily for counsellors, psychotherapists, and others with a grounding in psychoanalysis)
A Conference by the Centre for Psycho-Social Studies, UWE
Saturday, 17 April 2010 9.30 to 16.30 at UWE, Frenchay Campus, Bristol
Sally Weitrobe (Institute of Psychoanalysis) – Human Engagement with Climate Change Denial
CPSS will be mounting a follow-up to the public conference FACING CLIMATE CHANGE in October 2010.
https://store.uwe.ac.uk/catalogue/products.asp?compid=1&deptid=13&catID=510&hasClicked=1
'The overwhelming consensus of scientific opinion is that the warming the Earth has observed over the last 50 years has been due to an increase in greenhouse gases directly caused by human activities'
Is this sentence 'branded' into peoples brains or something? Why can nobody ever phrase it differently, it's just parroted over and over again. I could scream!
re -
'I left a couple comments at The Guardian, but other commenter do not seem to be noticing them.'
they seem to to be engrossed in there own discourse/arguments & therefore miss pertinent comments such as yours (short & sweet).
keep digging Douglas, your work is appreciated by many silent observers like me.
Pat - I think Sally and her colleagues should add this thread at the AirVent to their reading list:
http://noconsensus.wordpress.com/2010/04/19/radiative-physics-yes-co2-does-create-warming/
and that they should dedicate a workshop session to Dan Hughes' comment #49 and report back their findings via the comments section.
pat:
You will not believe the depths plumbed by the psychology establishment in acquiescing to the climate change agenda. It is actually a long, long story.
Are you aware of the American Psychology Association's official positon on climate change? Yes - they have an official position
http://www.apa.org/science/about/publications/climate-change-booklet.pdf
ps. Bishop
this guy 'Arbuthnott' at The Guardian seems a sensible/credible AGW blogger for once.
a piece by him on your blog might be interesting,
just a thought!!
cheers
dougie
Well done for sticking it out Doug.
OT: "The Tavistock & Portman, NHS Foundation Trust: Heads in the Sand:"
Does this mean NHS budget is paying for this? I'll have to see if my local trust is wasting similar funds!
ZT
"Mann received $541,184 in economic stimulus funds"
I wish someone would stimulate me to the tune of half a million dollars. For that money, I'd tell the truth!
O/T, but those of a literary persuasion might be interested in this. I think 'blood pressure stimulant for mainstream climate scientists' might be a reasonable description.
Dr. Roy is always interesting.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1594033730?ie=UTF8&tag=theofficiw0c2-20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=9325&creativeASIN=1594033730
Sally Weintrobe is holding a conference to instruct counsellers and psychotherapists on engaging with denialists. Are they expecting a rush of clients?
"Doctor, doctor, I 'm not anxious about global warming."
"Thank heavens we've caught it in time. I had someone in yesterday who wasn't depressed."
SM has a comment regarding this:
http://climateaudit.org/2010/04/21/mann-of-oak/
Dreadnought:
http://www.tavi-port.org/Climatechange
No concessions for deniers!
YFNWG:
The Guardian censored comments that indicated that Baillie and Wilson were being hypocritical over this.
Perhaps Baillie and Wilson need the help of Sally Weintrobe to deal with their issues.
I found this interesting on psychoanalysis.
Peter Medawar, a Nobel Prize winning immunologist, said in 1975 that psychoanalysis is the "most stupendous intellectual confidence trick of the twentieth century".
E. Fuller Torrey, writing in Witchdoctors and Psychiatrists (1986), stated that psychoanalytic theories have no more scientific basis than the theories of traditional native healers, "witchdoctors" or modern "cult" alternatives.
and I especially like this one;
Karl Popper argued that Freud's theory of the unconscious was not falsifiable and therefore not scientific.
It seems that you have believe in AGW and psychoanalysis before you can have faith. Hallelujah!
"Sally Weintrobe works as a psychoanalyst. She was trained in the Soviet Union where she helped dissidents to compose their confessions and write farewell letters to their families."
April 20, 2010 | Mingmong said:
'The overwhelming consensus of scientific opinion is that the warming the Earth has observed over the last 50 years has been due to an increase in greenhouse gases directly caused by human activities'
Is this sentence 'branded' into peoples brains or something? Why can nobody ever phrase it differently, it's just parroted over and over again. I could scream!
See here for a possible explanation.....
http://bishophill.squarespace.com/blog/2010/4/19/skeptic-alerts.html
"Campaign for Climate Change (CACC)
Skeptic Alerts
Are you fed up with sceptics and pseudo-scientists dominating blogs and news articles with their denialist propaganda?
Well, fight back!
We are trying to create an online army of online volunteers to try and tip the balance back in the favour of scientific fact, not scientific fiction... You will receive one e-mail alert per day containing links to various climate change news articles."
Douglas
In case you haven't noticed there are some very very worried people over at CiF.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/apr/20/climate-sceptic-wins-data-victory
Some have spent their entire day denouncing you in as many different ways as they can think of. I'm sure that the knowledge that they are so frightened of you will give you renewed heart to expose the truth...wherever it should be. Keep up the good work.
Stirling English, kind thanks—I had seen some of your comments there.
It is really startling to see some of the comments from people who are opposed to releasing the data. If those people truly believe in AGW, then why are they so agitated about releasing?
When they started accusing me of doing this in order gain publicity so that I could earn money via speaking fees, I accepted that there was no chance of reasoning with them.
Bizarre isn't it? If Douglas produces a seminal work (as he may well do) based on Baillie's data, then won't that reflect well on him, too? The warmist attitude seems to be that they don't want any more research thank you, in case it reveals something they don't want to see!
I have long passed reading what the all day CiFers write. It is the same half dozen or dozen names on some sort of rota system day in day out I’m sure they must be paid per post. I certainly have no idea how they find the time to post so profusely and there is absolutely no way anyone will alter their opinions.
So good luck to you Douglas whatever results you end up with.
Never mind Baillie's data, he should be giving his physical samples back. It sounds to me as if they were taken without the owner's consent:
"Here in Ireland we once drove round Ireland jumping over walls and coring stands of ten trees wherever we could find them. That was in 1979, when we were young and irresponsible; there just never seems to have been a day free since then, because, of course, it isn’t a day you are talking about. It is the ‘getting permission’......"
There is an editorial in the Wall Street Journal about the Belfast data: “Free the Data, Save the Science”.
Lovely quote from Michael Baillie in the WSJ editorial, saying that he does not want to give the data to Keenan because Keenan is a "non-aligned non-academic" !
Well, the writer lacks economic ability - the labour required to get justice is much, not too mention that envelopes don't come free nor the paper to write on.
Good job to the enquirer!