[tsmith130]

Bad day to do that. Steve McIntyre at climateaudit just debunked the AGW believers data. It appears they cherry picked the data that was used. Shock, I know! For those scientifically inclined (which is not me!)

(http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=7168)

It's slow to load because the link is making it's way onto a lot of blogs/sites.

[r-q-tek86]

ping to link

[4woodenboats]

#41

Steve McIntyre:

September 27th, 2009 at 7:27 pm

Re: per (#59),

per, I've read the paper very carefully and I don't see any reason why the Schweingruber data should not be incorporated into the Yamal data set. It is squarely within the geographic specification of the Hantemirov and Shiyatov study and is the correct species. The Yamal data set is far smaller than the other data sets as well in the modern portion. In addition to the AVam-Taymir merger, also note the Tornetrask-Finland merger in the third Briffa et al 2008 data set.

Also keep in mind the implausibly small size of the current portion of the Yamal archive. It would be one thing if they had only sampled 10 trees and this is what they got. But they selected 10 trees out of a larger population. Because the selection yields such different results from a nearby population sample, there is a compelling prima facie argument that they've made biased picks. This is rebuttable. I would welcome hearing the argument on the other side. I've notified one dendro of the issue and requested him to assist in the interpretation of the new data (but am not very hopeful that he will speak up.)

(oopsie)

[PA Engineer]

Thanks for the link. Very good read.

[red irish]

I was going to share that but most people are NOT going to understand it.