tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28837843.post2162509225454444860..comments2024-03-19T07:10:27.303-07:00Comments on Quark Soup by David Appell: Is Marcott et al a "Gross Misrepresentation?"David Appellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03318269033139447591noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28837843.post-88684103036770419852013-04-05T14:25:33.687-07:002013-04-05T14:25:33.687-07:00I've been fascinated by this one. Simply put,...I've been fascinated by this one. Simply put, but the language is far from easy to parse:<br /><br />It appears they want to use the past, in the paper they wish to discredit, as evidence to discredit the present.<br /><br />Go figure. I appointed myself to imitate Saint Sebastian (all those arrows) at DotEarth, but do not recommend anyone go see the attack machine at work over their, ably assisted by Prof. Revkin's choice to support McIntyre and Pielke and take McI's worse that Tamino plagiarized, as well as his "unbiased" noninterference with comments.Susan Andersonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16935228911713362040noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28837843.post-56515186297152330652013-04-04T05:50:59.758-07:002013-04-04T05:50:59.758-07:00Thanks Dave for this...It should be noted that the...Thanks Dave for this...It should be noted that the errors have yet to be corrected even though all the offenders have been notified. Each gives the impression the authors were specifically trying to hide information from people, when in fact, it is the offenders who are hiding information to give their readers the ability to evaluate the situation. <br /><br />At this point, I cannot come to any conclusion other than the offenders, are in fact, purposefully hiding this information. I don't know about Lomborg, but McIntyre doesn't surprise me. Pielke, you'd think would care about this, but does not seem to. I'll also point out that one of the links that Pielke included to Tom Yulsman's post, has a correction specifically emailed from Marcott, before the FAQ, that told Tom "it would be incorrect to say the rate is greater than anything else seen in the past 11,000 years. When looking at our reconstruction of temperature it appears this way. [But] it is, in fact, just a resolution issue related to this dataset."<br /><br />This is yahoo cached page from March 13th. It would seem dubious and deeply opportunistic to use this paper to show Marcott was attempting to misrepresent his research in the manner portrayed, upticks, resolution, and all.<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28837843.post-37258423648651509002013-04-01T20:37:06.345-07:002013-04-01T20:37:06.345-07:00Have to agree with William Connolley that Pielke J...Have to agree with William Connolley that Pielke Jr has jumped off the edge. Don't know what he was imbibing at the time. It looks as if he's still intoxicated with being on the same bandwagon as the rabble at WUWT.<br /><br />His response to you, David, doesn't make any more sense than his original rant. It's pretty obvious that the earth is now getting as hot as ever it did during the Holocene - thanks to the work of Marcott et al and others (compared with current global surface temperature data). I see nothing in the NSF press release, interviews or the paper itself that says otherwise or any conflicts with the Marcott et al paper.<br /><br />Roger will turn into a Curry or worse if he doesn't watch himself, and forever ruin whatever professional reputation he might currently enjoy. He's not got my respect. From this and gross errors in other blog articles of his I've learnt not to take what he says seriously - at least not without checking for logic and veracity.<br /><br />I wouldn't take any notice of his off the cuff bloviations except to chide him appropriately (if you're a mate who has his best interest at heart). (His academic work can stand or fall on its own merits.)Souhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08818999735123752034noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28837843.post-75978206017556690742013-04-01T12:21:13.779-07:002013-04-01T12:21:13.779-07:00Yeah, I think RP's gone a bit off the rails on...Yeah, I think RP's gone a bit off the rails on this one. http://scienceblogs.com/stoat/2013/04/01/rp-jr-is-a-tosser/William M. Connolleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05836299130680534926noreply@blogger.com