The fallout from Climategate continues. Today, Jeff Id has found this gem:
From: Ben Santer
Subject: Re: Good news! Plus less good news
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2009 11:13:21 -0800
Yeah, I had already seen the stuff from McIntyre. Tom Peterson sent it
to me. McIntyre has absolutely no understanding of climate science. He
doesn’t realize that, as the length of record increases and trend
confidence intervals decrease, even trivially small differences between
an individual observed trend and the multi-model average trend are
judged to be highly significant. These model-versus-observed trend
differences are, however, of no practical significance whatsoever – they
are well within the structural uncertainties of the observed MSU trends.
It would be great if Francis and Myles got McIntyre’s paper for review.
Also, I see that McIntyre has put email correspondence with me in the
Supporting Information of his paper. What a jerk!
I will write to Keith again. The Symposium wouldn’t be the same without
him. I think Tom would be quite disappointed.
Have fun in Switzerland!
With best regards,
This deals with the Douglass et al 2007, Santer et the entire community 2008, and a submission by McIntyre and McKitrick to IJC which is meant to rebut Santer et al. You can find that submission here. Please understand what Santer is saying here. He’s saying, it makes sense to analyze only part of the data because it makes it easier to retain hypotheses like the models. So there is no point in trying to get more observations so we can better judge models. So stop observing you morons!