- Bishop Hill blog

John Graham-Cumming emails to point me to his latest blog post, in which he outlines a small bug in the code used by the Muir Russell panel in their (kinda, sorta) replication of the CRU temperature series. This was spotted by someone called David Jones, who I think is something to do with Nick Barnes' Clear Climate Code project. The problem appears to be that the Russell version of the code doesn't weight cells by area.

The impact doesn't seem to be enormous.

The warming trend shape doesn't change, but the temperature anomaly does alter. In recent years the unweighed average is greater than the weighted. For example, grabbing 1998 to 2008 at random the differences ranges between 0.02C and 0.07C with an average of 0.06C. So the upshot of the ICCER bug is that it makes things seem slightly warming.

The story of McIntyre's correspondence with the university is remarkable for its similarity to the emails between Palmer and Eschenbach, with the university simply pointing the Canadian to the same pair of data repositories. Knowing what had happened to Eschenbach, McIntyre responded by filing a complaint with \nature\, the journal in which Jones had published the paper back in 1990, and shorly afterwards Jones relented and released the list. [data?]