Friday
Sep102010
by 
Bishop Hill
Bishop Hill Some points from El Reg
Sep 10, 2010 Climate: Oxburgh A couple of important points about the Oxburgh hearing have been pointed out to me.
Firstly, towards the end of Orlowski's Register piece, we are told that Professor Acton has agreed to return to talk to the Science and Technology Select Committee again. No date is given, however.
Secondly, in the comments on my earlier thread about his piece, Orlowski notes that Google News has not indexed his article, something which he says is very unusual.
It's all becoming quite interesting.
Reader Comments (21)
I posted on CA that I expect Oxburgh will make a statement about his 'misleading' comment and that Acton will 'thank him for his clarification'. We shall see. The only variation from that will be if Oxburgh is trying to distance himself from this mess. After all he didn't want to be involved in the first place.
CA has a nice post on the panel members. I wondered about that from Oxburgh's statements. I would still like to know about the scpetic.
I like to use alltheweb.com and there the article comes up first using the search words
'is this science or literature Orlowski the register'
www.alltheweb.com
I don't normally get involved in these but I will this time. The original comment has quite a few recommendations (57 at the time of this tap). I suggest anyone with an interest complains about the fact that Mr Ward seems to have had the article ahead of time to respond so quickly. I have and labelled it trolling - which seems suitable to me.
It's there now, along with the Guarian piece.
A search for the word "Oxburgh" on Google news NZ reveals 2 Delingpole articles (number 1 and number 5) and the Register piece at number 2.
Andrew, this is more exciting than watching The Da Vinci Code, tyres screeching away as I read. Gad, where does that place Bob Ward?
Nice to see the good professor AGREEING to make a return appearance before the select committee.
Fair dinkum, he would be damned if he didn't. Wonder if he's prepared to be the sole sacrificial lamb?
If I were in Mr Ward or Lord Ox's sandals, I'd be getting my defence organised pdq.
Thank goodness, for these stout fellows, that the Graundian had volunteered to lead the "forlorn hope" into the breach.
Don't worry Ox, old boy, Bob's ability to digest voluminous informational input and transform it rapidly into considered rhetoric is awesome. All you've got to do is a two minute cough. He'll do the rest!
Anyway the professor may just play the good guy, for the sake of the party, and take the heat.
Best of British, Boys. History will judge you honestly, if not entirely honest!
Seems a communist plot - get North on it
So, both back in front of the Committee again! No excuse for Acton this tome, he has had his feet under the table for some time now though Oxborough's excuse for Acton must not be used again unless he has had a couple of bottles of Veno for his cough.
Kelly appears to now be up to speed on the emails so maybe we can get some real searching questions asked. Shame that the highly strung CRU scientist has not been called back as well!
Another thought, Orlowski mentions Prof, Kelly and his dissection of AGW. I note the good prof is the "Prince Phillip Professor of Technology". It must lead to some interesting chats between Charlie and Phill!
Spam at 7:28 am
Also spam "discount handbags" on Climategate report, The Russell review, and Glaring inaccuracies.
Is it just me or has something happened over at the Guardian? Ward no longer seems to be the first post!
Ignore that, I just hit the link to Wards post
OT but thought just occurs to me.
In light of the Hockey team's statistical incompetence and the recent de-bunking of Mann by McShane and Wyner, does anyone else think there might be a furious behind the scenes scrabble to get some big-hitting statisticians to come out and defend Mann et al's methodology?
No sign of anyone coming out yet.
Hmmmm...
Acton will return to talk about the science issues just as soon as he finishes shoveling the snow off of the sidewalk at his weekend place in hell.
"does anyone else think there might be a furious behind the scenes scrabble to get some big-hitting statisticians to come out and defend Mann et al's methodology?"
A mathematical impossibility.
Bishop - The link to the PDF copy of Prof Michael Kelly's assessment doesn't work. It gives a "Page Not Found" on your website.
http://bishophill.squarespace.com/storage/kelly%20paper.pdf
Dave
http://www.bishop-hill.net/storage/kelly%20paper.pdf
I wonder what Acton's excuse will be? So far we've sampled: 'I've lost my homework', 'cough, cough', 'we wuz being harassed by nasty bullies', 'It is all a conspiracy by big oil', etc. It looks as though there is contemplation of 'but I'm new' (already debunked by Steve McIntyre).
Perhaps Acton's explanation will contain a theological strain (a la Houghton) (hard to argue with), or involve being misled by some shadowy anonymous academic figure. Most likely it will be a composite of all of the above. Of course, what he should do is close the CRU and resign.
Graham Stringer - On Briffa's / CRU's work.
“That just isn’t science. It’s literature. If somebody can’t reproduce their own results, and nobody else can, then what is that work doing in the scientific journals?”
————————–
Some comments and analysis of the above at Harmless Sky blog.
Lord Oxburgh caught in the headlights
http://ccgi.newbery1.plus.com/blog/?p=327#comments