“Needless to say, Singer quite easily showed how hopelessly flawed and ridiculous the analysis was…”
The e-mail is below.
date: Wed, 25 Aug 99 07:33:34 EDT
from: “Edward R. Cook”
subject: Que pasa, amigo?
to: Keith Briffa
How are things going these days. I am finally back for a fair length of
time and am trying to get back into work. Right now it is not so easy. Has
Wigley left yet? Did he try to reinvent the statistical wheel again? Fred
Singer was here on Monday and gave a rather uninspired talk criticizing
global warming, etc. He did show an example of the mis-use of statistics in
the greenhouse attribution debate and it was one of Wigley’s papers. It was
the one in which Tom tried to show that the autocorrelation function of
instrumental temperatures was far greater than the acf of temperatures from
unforced OAGCM models, therefore “proving” that greenhouse gases were
forcing instrumental temperatures. It was a pathetically poor paper that
had Mark Cane, Yochanan Kushnir, Upmanu Lall, Balaji Rajagoplan (all good
maths/stats people), and me just shaking our collective heads wondering
what the fuck Wigley was trying to do. Needless to say, Singer quite easily
showed how hopelessly flawed and ridiculous the analysis was, and everyone
agreed with him for once. Other than that he pretty much fell on his face.
Any new news on HIHOL? Just curious, and sorry for bringing it up if it is
a pain in the ass for you at this time. I hope all is well at home and that
you are rapidly getting into tiptop physical condition at the gym and
taking your vitamins.