|
29 Sep 09 – “A scientific scandal is casting a shadow over a
number of recent peer-reviewed climate papers,” says this article by
Andrew Orlowski.
It’s also casting a shadow on IPCC assessments.
“At least eight papers purporting to reconstruct the historical
temperature record times may need to be revisited,” says Orlowski, “with
significant implications for contemporary climate studies, the basis of
the IPCC's assessments. A number of these involve senior climatologists
at the British climate research centre CRU at the University East
Anglia.”
Paleoclimataologists use tree rings as a
temperature proxy – a science called dendrochronology - to create a
"reconstruction" of historical temperature anomalies.
“Since 2000, a large number of peer-reviewed climate papers have
incorporated data from trees at the Yamal Peninsula in Siberia
…curiously superseding a newer and larger data set from nearby. The
older Yamal trees indicated pronounced and dramatic uptick in
temperatures.”
Even though the papers had been peer reviewed, the editors of the
Royal Society's Philosophical Transactions B insisted on seeing the
data.
Hooray for those brave editors.
The Yamal data set uses just 12 trees from a larger set to produce its
dramatic upward trend, says Orlowski. “Yet many more were cored, and a
larger data set (of 34) from the vicinity shows no dramatic recent
warming, and warmer temperatures in the middle ages.”
“The implication is clear,” says Orlowski , “the dozen were
cherry-picked.”
See entire article, entitled “Treemometers: A new scientific scandal”
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/09/29/yamal_scandal/
Thanks to Andrew Johnson for this link
Applause please:
According to
Neville Kettle, we should
credit Steve McIntyre at
www.Climateaudit.org for his efforts in bringing these discrepancies
to our attention.
I agree. Steve McIntyre deserves kudos for all of his
work in holding
scientists accountable for their misleading climate
publications. |