Tuesday
Jul172012
by 
Bishop Hill
Bishop Hill Homogenisation is the root of all evil
Jul 17, 2012 Climate: Statistics Climate: Surface Well, something like that anyway. Anthony Watts is reporting a presentation by Demetris Koutsoyiannis, which finds that many of the homegenisation adjustments applied to surface temperature data are ill-founded.
Homogenization practices used until today are mainly statistical, not well justified by experiments and are rarely supported by metadata. It can be argued that they often lead to false results: natural features of hydroclimatic time series are regarded [as] errors and are adjusted.
Reader Comments (56)
Regarding my allegation of fraud against Phil Jones and Wei-chyung Wang, a good source is a letter that I wrote to the UK House of Commons Science and Technology Committee, on 1 December 2010:
http://www.informath.org/apprise/a5610/b101201.htm
Thank you Mr Keenan - I was going to link your letter.
Douglas
Either you haven't bothered to do any homework or you are conveniently ignoring the Li & Li study which independently verifies both Jones' papers. This is a dead horse you are flogging.
That said, let's pretend for a moment that you are actually correct, are you suggesting that that one paper negates the findings of all the other scientists who contributed to the IPCC report that the Earth is warming? A finding that is backed up now by satellite data and other multiple lines of evidence?
I feel this is probably a personal campaign designed to smear the reputation of not just one or two scientists but all publishing scientists in the field, simply because you are firmly rooted in the denier camp.
@uknowispeaksense
The paper of Li & Li relies on the same data as the papers of Jones et al.
In the article at
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/feb/01/dispute-weather-fraud
see the paragraph beginning “Keenan accepts that his allegations do not on their own change the global picture”.
Various offtopic posts removed. I'm allowing discussion of the Keenan stuff though since I think this is close enough to the topic to pass muster.
Dear Bishop Hill
I can understand you removing the final comment I made in response to Jack Cowper and I can see you removed his initial snide comment to me as well, but it would also appear that you have removed my last response to Mr Keenan also. As you are "allowing discussion of the Keenan stuff though since I think this is close enough to the topic to pass muster" I can only hope this was an honest mistake? I certainly hope it had nothing to do with my catching Mr Keenan in an apparent contradiction? Regards, Mike.