Climategate 3.0: Mann warns Jones to be careful sharing info with NYTimes Revkin: ‘Not as predictable as we’d like’

“As we all know, this isn’t about truth at all, its about plausibly deniable accusations.”

The e-mail exchange is below.

###

At 17:07 27/10/2009, Michael Mann wrote:
Hi Phil,
Thanks–we know that. The point is simply that if we want to talk about
about a
meaningful “2009” anomaly, every additional month that is available from
which to
calculate an annual mean makes the number more credible. We already have
this for
GISTEMP, but have been awaiting HadCRU to be able to do a more decisive
update of the
status of the disingenuous “globe is cooling” contrarian talking point,
mike
p.s. be a bit careful about what information you send to Andy and what
emails you copy
him in on. He’s not as predictable as we’d like
On Oct 27, 2009, at 1:04 PM, Phil Jones wrote:
Mike,
Yes a link will be fine.
I’ll look into Sept numbers, but you shouldn’t be looking at individual
months.
Cheers
Phil
At 16:54 27/10/2009, Michael Mann wrote:
thanks Phil,
Perhaps we’ll do a simple update to the Yamal post, e.g. linking Keith/s
new
page–Gavin t?
As to the issues of robustness, particularly w.r.t. inclusion of the Yamal
series, we
actually emphasized that (including the Osborn and Briffa ’06 sensitivity
test) in our
original post! As we all know, this isn’t about truth at all, its about
plausibly
deniable accusations,
m
p.s. any word on HadCRU Sep numbers yet???
On Oct 27, 2009, at 12:37 PM, Phil Jones wrote:
Gavin, Mike, Andy,
It has taken Keith longer than he would have liked, but it is up. There
is a lot to
read and understand. It is structured for different levels. The link goes
to the top
level. There is more detail below this and then there are the data below
that.
You can either go to our main page
[1]http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/ then click on the link
or directly here
[2]http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/people/briffa/yamal2009/
I’ll let you make up you own minds! It seems to me as though McIntyre
cherry picked for
effect.
There is an additional part that shows how many series from Ch 6 of AR4
used Yamal –
most didn’t! Also there is a sensitivity test of omitting it – which comes
from the
Supplementary Info with Osborn and Briffa (2006). As expected omitting it
makes very
little difference. To get to this follow the links from the above link.
McIntyre knows that the millennial temperature record is pretty robust,
otherwise he
would produce his own series. Similarly the instrumental temperature is
even more
robust, which he also knows.
Cheers
Phil
Prof. Phil Jones
Climatic Research Unit Telephone +44 (0) 1603 592090
School of Environmental Sciences Fax +44 (0) 1603 507784
University of East Anglia
Norwich Email [3]p.jones@uea.ac.uk
NR4 7TJ
UK
—————————————————————————


Michael E. Mann
Professor
Director, Earth System Science Center (ESSC)
Department of Meteorology Phone: (814) 863-4075
503 Walker Building FAX: (814) 865-3663
The Pennsylvania State University email: [4]mann@psu.edu
University Park, PA 16802-5013
website: [5]http://www.meteo.psu.edu/~mann/Mann/index.html
“Dire Predictions” book site:
[6]http://www.essc.psu.edu/essc_web/news/DirePredictions/index.html
Prof. Phil Jones
Climatic Research Unit Telephone +44 (0) 1603 592090
School of Environmental Sciences Fax +44 (0) 1603 507784
University of East Anglia
Norwich Email [7]p.jones@uea.ac.uk
NR4 7TJ
UK
—————————————————————————


Michael E. Mann
Professor
Director, Earth System Science Center (ESSC)
Department of Meteorology Phone: (814) 863-4075
503 Walker Building FAX: (814) 865-3663
The Pennsylvania State University email: [8]mann@psu.edu
University Park, PA 16802-5013
website: [9]http://www.meteo.psu.edu/~mann/Mann/index.html
“Dire Predictions” book site:
[10]http://www.essc.psu.edu/essc_web/news/DirePredictions/index.html
Prof. Phil Jones
Climatic Research Unit Telephone +44 (0) 1603 592090
School of Environmental Sciences Fax +44 (0) 1603 507784
University of East Anglia
Norwich Email [11]p.jones@uea.ac.uk
NR4 7TJ
UK

2 thoughts on “Climategate 3.0: Mann warns Jones to be careful sharing info with NYTimes Revkin: ‘Not as predictable as we’d like’”

  1. This email seems like pretty good evidence of a conspiracy to defraud. There must be much more dialog between co-conspirators.

  2. As we all know, this isn’t about truth at all, its about
    plausibly deniable accusations

    Obviously taken out of context, eh Mikey?

Comments are closed.