WWW.BOOK.DISLIB.INFO
FREE ELECTRONIC LIBRARY - Books, dissertations, abstract
 
<< HOME
CONTACTS



Pages:     | 1 |   ...   | 22 | 23 || 25 | 26 |   ...   | 33 |

«Edited and Annotated by John Costella The Lavoisier Group March 2010 About the Author John Costella was born in East Melbourne in 1966. After being ...»

-- [ Page 24 ] --

Osborn is frustrated that Ammann is handling his first request honestly, promising to check his emails for anything that may be confidential. Osborn here makes explicit to Ammann that this is not what he wants, but rather a blanket statement that he can use as a loophole to hide behind.

June 2, 2008: email 1212435868 Mike Mann writes to Phil Jones, reporting his progress in nominating Jones for the

award that Jones himself selected:

Hi Phil, This is coming along nicely. I’ve got five very strong supporting letter writers lined up to support your American Geophysical Union Fellowship nomination (confidentially: Ben Santer, Tom Karl, Jean Jouzel, and Lonnie Thompson have all agreed; I’m waiting to hear back from one more individual; the maximum is six letters, including mine as nominator).

Meanwhile, if you can pass along the following information that is needed for the nomination package, that would be very helpful. Thanks in advance!

June 4, 2008: email 1212587222 Steve McIntyre writes to the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East

Anglia:

Dear Sir, Can you please send me a copy of the Farmer and co-workers 1989 paper, cited in Folland and Parker’s paper of 1995, which, in turn, is cited in the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report. Thanks, Steve McIntyre Phil Jones forwards the request to Mike Mann, and Gavin Schmidt of the Goddard

Institute for Space Studies:

This email came to the CRU last night.

(quotes above email) The CRU has just the one copy of this paper! We’ve just got a new scanner for a project, so someone here is going to try this out—and scan the roughly 150 pages. I’m doing this as this is one of the project reports that I wished I’d written up.

Jones’s admission is astounding: we learn that, as of June 2008, the CRU had no comprehensive electronic archive of its own reports; and he himself takes the blame for failing to write up a number of required project reports.

Mike Mann replies:

It seems to me that the CRU should charge him a fee for the service.

He shouldn’t be under the assumption that he has the right to demand that reports be scanned in for him on a whim. The CRU should require reasonable monetary compensation for the labor, effort (and postage!).

Mann’s stance is astonishing: McIntyre should pay for the labour of scanning in a report that should have been electronically archived decades earlier?

He continues:

If this were a colleague acting in good faith, I’d say do it at no cost. But of, course, he’s not. He’s not interested in the truth here; he’s just looking for another way to try to undermine confidence in our science.

So the real issue is not the labour involved, but the fact that this is yet another loophole to hide behind.

I guess you’re going to get your money’s worth out of your scanner.

That Mann is unsurprised that the CRU is only now catching up with twenty-year-old technology is revealing.

June 8, 2008: email 1212924720

Mike Mann writes to Phil Jones on the issue most dear to his heart:

Hi Phil, I’m continuing to work on your nomination package to be awarded a Fellowship of the American Geophysical Union (here in my hotel room in Trieste—the weather isn’t any good!). If it’s possible for a case to be too strong, we may have that here! Lonnie is also confirmed as supporting letter writer, along with Kevin, Ben, Tom K, and Jean J. (Four of the five are already American Geophysical Union Fellows, which I’m told is important! Surprisingly, Ben is not yet, nor am I. But David Thompson is (quite young for one of these). I’m guessing that Mike Wallace and Susan Solomon might have had something to do with that (wink).

Jones should take the hint: Mann will be wanting the favour to be paid back!

Anyway, I wanted to check with you on two things:

1. One thing that people sometimes like to know is the maximum value of “N”, where “N” is the number of papers an individual authored or co-authored that have more than N citations. A level of N = 40 (i.e., an individual has published at least 40 papers that have each been cited at least 40 times) is supposedly an important threshold for admission in the United States National Academy of Sciences. I’m guessing your N is significantly greater than that, and it would be nice to cite that if possible.

Would you mind figuring out that number and sending it to me—I think it would be useful in really sealing the case.

Mann is not wrong: such dubious measures of “worth” really are used for such purposes. Of course, in the corrupted field of climate science, such citations are not just of dubious value, but completely meaningless, as Mann and his colleagues had complete control over what was published (and hence cited) and what was not, and repeatedly cited each other’s papers.

2. Would you mind considering a minor revision of your two-page bibliography? In my nomination letter, I’m trying to underscore the diverse areas where you’ve made major contributions … For example, your early Nature papers with Wigley… in 1980 and 1981 seem to be among the earliest efforts to try to do this (though I don’t have copies of the papers, so can’t read them!), and that seems very much worth highlighting to me.





Mann wants to highlight “contributions” of Jones that he himself has never read!

Or is that an incorrect interpretation of his words?

Also, if you happen to have copies of the two early Wigley papers, or even just the text for the Abstracts, it would be great to have a little more detail about those papers so I can appropriately work them into the narrative of my letter.

No, it’s not: he has no idea what is in the papers he wants to cite.

June 11, 2008: email 1213201481

Phil Jones replies to Mike Mann, on Mann’s nomination of Jones:

On point 1 (what Mann called “N”), this is what people call the H index.

I’ve tried working this out, and there is software for it on the Web of Science website.

The problem is my surname. I get a number of 62 if I just use the software, but I have too many papers. I then waded through and deleted those in journals I’d never heard of and got 52. I think this got rid of some biologist from the 1970s and 1980s, so go with 52.

I don’t have soft copies of the early papers. I won’t be able to do anything for a few days either. When do you want this in, by the way?

Again, Jones reveals that there is no electronic archiving system at the Climatic

Research Unit. Mike Mann:

OK—thanks, I’ll just go with the H = 62. That is an impressive number and almost certainly higher than the vast majority of American Geophysical Union Fellows.

Mann ignores Jones’s own disclaimer that the figure of 62 is wrong, and decides to use it regardless.

In a later email:

I’ll … send you a copy of my nominating letter for comment and suggestions when I am done.

Also—can you provide one or two sentences about the 1980 and 1981 Nature articles with Wigley so that I might be able to work this briefly into the narrative of my letter?

So he doesn’t even feel the need to have a broad understanding of the papers, but will

let Jones write his own accolades of himself. Jones replies:

The 1980 and 1981 papers: I don’t have soft copies.

(summarizes each paper in one paragraph) I did look a while ago to see if Nature had back-scanned these papers, but they hadn’t.

Is the above enough? I have hard copies of these two papers—in Norwich.

Note that Jones does not take the opportunity of asking Mann to use the correct figure of H = 52 rather than 62. Jones is going along with Mann’s deception of the American Geophysical Union.

Mann:

Thanks, Phil—yes, that’s perfect. I just wanted to have some idea of the paper; that’s more than enough information. I wouldn’t bother worrying about scanning in, etc.

I should have a draft letter for you to comment on within a few days or so, after I return from Trieste.

Mann assumes that Jones would have scanned in the papers, simply for the purpose of his own nomination for an award—but previously argued against scanning in a paper for the purposes of critical review by a skeptic. It is good to understand the priorities of these “scientists”.

June 13, 2008: email 1213387146

Ben Santer writes to the Editor of American Liberty Publishers:

Dear Sir, Your website (link) was recently brought to my attention. On this site, you

make the following claims:

In the Second Assessment Report, Benjamin Santer, lead author of a crucial study, falsified a chart to make it appear to support global warming—a conclusion not supported at all by the original data. But two climatologists, Knappenberger and Michaels, looked up the data and exposed the fraud.

Santer said he adjusted the data to make it agree with political policy.

These claims have no factual basis whatsoever, and are demonstrably libellous. I did not falsify data. I did not commit fraud. I did not—nor have I ever—”adjusted” scientific data “to make it agree with political policy.” Nor did I ever state that I had made data adjustments in order to conform to political policy.

I request that you retract these claims immediately. They are completely fictitious, and are harmful to my scientific reputation. If you do not retract these claims immediately, I will transfer this matter to the attention of legal staff at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory.

Sincerely, Dr. Benjamin Santer United States Department of Energy Distinguished Scientist (2006) Ernest Orlando Lawrence Award (2002) John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Fellow (1998) Some explanatory comment is warranted here. The IPCC’s second assessment report (SAR) was published in 1996 and the Summary for Policy Makers (SFMP) included the oft-quoted words “the balance of evidence suggests that there is a discernible human influence on global climate”. These words were sourced to Chapter 8 of the scientific working group’s report, but that report had several disclaimers of any such influence, disclaimers that were removed by Ben Santer, the ‘lead author’ who also, without any reference to his peers, had included the words concerning a “discernible human influence” in the Policy Maker’s Summary. So Ben Santer, acting on the advice of Tim Wirth, then US Under-Secretary of State and a close confidant of Al Gore, deleted important disclaimers from the text of Chapter 8, and then wrote into the SFPM the opposite conclusion from that of the Working Group. This led to a strong letter of protest, published in the WSJ, from Frederick Seitz, former President of the US National Academy of Sciences, and of the American Physical Society.

Ben Santer admitted to the truth of these events on a popular American TV programme, hosted by former Minnesota Governor Jesse Ventura, in mid-December 2009.

June 14, 2008: email 1213882741

Mike Mann is still hard at work, getting Phil Jones his award. He writes to Jones:

Hi Phil, I’ve attached a copy of my nomination letter. I just want to make sure I’ve got all my facts right—please let me know if there is anything I’ve gotten wrong or should be changed. I would be shocked is this doesn’t go through—you’re a no-brainer, and long overdue for this.

I’ve got letters from three of the five other letter writers now; I am waiting on the two last ones, and then will submit the package.

Jones replies:

This is fine. … Another thanks for putting this all together.

Then Jones sends an addendum:

Mike, There is one typo in your nomination letter. I missed it the first time I read it. In the second paragraph, second line, remove the first “surface”. You have two, one before and one after “CRU”. Just the one after is needed.

Hilariously, Jones is correcting typos in his own nomination letter—but presumably letting the false citation number of H = 62 stand!!

Mann:

Thanks Phil—fixed!

I am waiting on two more letters, then I’ll send in the package to the American Geophysical Union. Should be a no-brainer!



Pages:     | 1 |   ...   | 22 | 23 || 25 | 26 |   ...   | 33 |


Similar works:

«MC Essence Moving-Coil Cartridge, Moving-Coil Tonabnehmer User manual Bedienungsanleitung Made in Germany clearaudio electronic® GmbH Hi-Fi Components Spardorfer Str. 150 • D-91054 Erlangen • Tel. +49 9131 40300100 • FAX + 49 9131 40300119 www.clearaudio.de • www.analogshop.de • info@clearaudio.de ©clearaudio electronic GmbH Version: 1.2_E+D_09.03.2016 MC Essence User manual / Bedienungsanleitung Dear audio enthusiast, Thank you and welcome to the GENERATION of Clearaudio MC...»

«Play as a Foundation for HunterGatherer Social Existence • Peter Gray The author offers the thesis that hunter-gatherers promoted, through cultural means, the playful side of their human nature and this made possible their egalitarian, nonautocratic, intensely cooperative ways of living. Hunter-gatherer bands, with their fluid membership, are likened to social-play groups, which people could freely join or leave. Freedom to leave the band sets the stage for the individual autonomy, sharing,...»

«K LIN ISCHE L EITL IN IE Hautschutz und Hautpflege beim Frühgeborenen 32 Schwangerschaftswochen Abgrenzung: Neugeborene 32 Schwangerschaftswochen Wundbehandlung Chronische Hauterkrankungen Temperaturmanagement AUTORINNEN: Stoffel Lilian, Pflegeexpertin HöFa II, UniversitätsKinderklinik, Inselspital Bern, cand. MNSc (Leitung) Dinten-Schmid Barbara, Pflegeexpertin HöFa II, Universitätsspital Zürich Körner Astrid, FA Intensivpflege, Pflegeexpertin HöFa II, Universitäts-Kinderspital beider...»

«THE RULES TO BREAK This page intentionally left blank THE RULES TO BREAK RICHARD TEMPLAR Vice President, Publisher: Tim Moore Associate Publisher and Director of Marketing: Amy Neidlinger Operations Specialist: Jodi Kemper Marketing Manager: Lisa Loftus Cover Designer: Alan Clements Managing Editor: Kristy Hart Project Editor: Sara Schumacher Proofreader: Sara Schumacher Senior Compositor: Gloria Schurick Manufacturing Buyer: Dan Uhrig ©2014 by Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as FT Press...»

«TRIBUTE: GONZALO GARCÍA PELAYO Eines der aufregendsten Geheimnisse des spanischen Kinos: Ein andalusischer Auteur, dessen schmales Schaffen sich auf eine so kurze wie entscheidende Periode in der Entwicklung des Landes beschränkt: die Transición (1976–1983), die Zeit zwischen dem Tod Francos und dem Sieg der Sozialisten. Beginnend mit seinem schon ein Jahr vor der Zeitenwende realisierten Debüt, MANUELA (1976), verkörpert Gonzalo García Pelayos Kino aufs Vollkommenste, worum es in jenen...»

«On Equilibration and Sparse Factorization of Matrices Arising in Finite Element Solutions of Partial Differential Equations Valmor F. de Almeida,1 Andrew M. Chapman,2 and Jeffrey J. Derby1 Department of Chemical Engineering and Materials Science Army High Performance Computing Research Center and Minnesota Supercomputer Institute University of Minnesota Minneapolis, MN 55455-0132 NEC Systems Inc. 4200 Research Forest #400 The Woodlands, TX 77381 Received October 2, 1998; revised August 5, 1999...»

«Oberndorfer Str. 2 · D-78628 Rottweil Tel. 0741 / 1 72 06 · Fax 0741 / 1 72 07 The Right Bank’s Quiet Champion info@bacchus-vinothek.com www.bacchus-vinothek.com Christian Moueix..is Wine Spectator’s 2011 Distinguished Service Award winner Wine Spectator – Nov. 15. 2011.liegt zwar schon einige Monde zurück aber ist immer noch gültig. Verglichen mit dem teilweise extrem selbstbewussten (ist positiv ausgedrückt. Arrogant trifft es oft besser) Verhalten mancher ChâteauBesitzer und...»

«Mecheril, Paul Natio-kulturelle Mitgliedschaft ein Begriff und die Methode seiner Generierung Tertium comparationis 8 (2002) 2, S. 104-115 urn:nbn:de:0111-opus-29242 Erstveröffentlichung bei: http://www.waxmann.com Nutzungsbedingungen pedocs gewährt ein nicht exklusives, nicht übertragbares, persönliches und beschränktes Recht auf Nutzung dieses Dokuments. Dieses Dokument ist ausschließlich für den persönlichen, nicht-kommerziellen Gebrauch bestimmt. Die Nutzung stellt keine...»

«Emergent Schooling Behavior in Fish by Gustaf Olson Abstract: Emergence is seen in the schooling behavior of many fish populations. The simple rules that govern individual fish behavior lead to collective motion and complex patterns within larger fish populations. This paper looks at the experimental observations of both individual fish behavior and the schooling behavior that arises within larger populations. The broad features of theoretical models which try to simulate schooling in fish are...»

«Eröffnungsrede Kunstraum B am 16. Januar 2007 Barbara Reschka, Dipl.-Soz. Institut für Frauenforschung und Gender-Studien, Fachhochschule Kiel Gender Sells Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren, ich bedanke mich für die Einladung und freue mich sehr über die Gelegenheit, Ihnen heute Abend ein paar Gedanken zur Eröffnung dieser Ausstellung vorzutragen. Als ich darum gebeten wurde und man mir den Titel der Ausstellung Gender Sells nannte, löste dieser kurz eine Irritation aus. Gender Sells? Ein...»





 
<<  HOME   |    CONTACTS
2016 www.book.dislib.info - Free e-library - Books, dissertations, abstract

Materials of this site are available for review, all rights belong to their respective owners.
If you do not agree with the fact that your material is placed on this site, please, email us, we will within 1-2 business days delete him.