Source:  http://frontpagemag.com/2010/02/19/the-heretics-mcintyre-and-mckitrick/

by  Rich Trzupek

When the infamous hockey-stick graph that purported to prove that human activities are causing runaway global warming was finally broken, there is some irony in the fact that a couple of Canadians did the breaking. Retired mining engineer Steve McIntyre and Ross McKitrick, Professor of Economics at the University of Guelph, have been a thorn in the side of global warming alarmists for years. McIntyre, McKitrick and, more often, the acronym “M&M” to refer to the pair, are the subject of many discussions in the e-mails released from the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit (CRU) last November. (more…)

Source:  http://climateaudit.org/2010/02/12/royal-society-of-edinburgh-oct-29-2009/

by Steve McIntyre

The Muir Russell FAQ states:

Do any of the Review team members have a predetermined view on climate change and climate science?

No. Members of the research team come from a variety of scientific backgrounds. They were selected on the basis they have no prejudicial interest in climate change and climate science and for the contribution they can make to the issues the Review is looking at.

In respect to Team member Geoffrey Boulton, General Secretary of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, they say:

Professor Geoffrey Boulton has expertise in fields related to climate change and is therefore aware of the scientific approach, through not in the climate change field itself. (more…)

Source:  http://www.amazon.com/Hockey-Stick-Illusion-Climategate-Independent/product-reviews/1906768358/ref=dp_top_cm_cr_acr_txt?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1

[SPPI Note:  See also:]

http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/reprint/climategate_analysis.html

http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/originals/climategate.html

http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/reprint/hockey_debate.html

http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/commentaries_essays/2000_year_record.html

http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/reprint/sub_to_epa.html

***********************

Review #1 — The “Bishop Hill” blog was well-respected, but not particularly remarkable until the posting of “Caspar and the Jesus paper” in August 2008. With this posting, we learned that the esteemed Bishop (now also revealed as Andrew Montford), the author of this new book, had a talent for putting scattered bits and pieces of information into a highly coherent presentation. It was remarkable enough that he was able to take myriad blog postings and figure out what they all added up to, and further remarkable that he was able to map this understanding into writing. Would it be possible to achieve this Casper-style in a more encompassing work? Too much to ask for? Well, HERE it is! (more…)

Source:  Climateaudit

by Steve McIntyre

The Polar Urals tree ring site is another staple of multiproxy studies, being used in Bradley and Jones [1993], Hughes and Diaz[1994], Overpeck et al. [1997], Jones et al. [1998], MBH98, MBH99, Crowley and Lowery [2000], Esper et al. [2002], Bradley, Hughes and Diaz [2003] and Rutherford et al. [2005] (which recycles MBH98). In fact, it seems to have been used in every study.

The Polar Urals site is considered in a series of studies, starting with Graybill and Shiyatov[1992], continuing with Briffa et al [Nature, 1995] and Briffa et al. [Nature, 1996]. (more…)

Source:  Climate Audit

One of the more interesting knock-ons of the opportunistic IPCC reliance on WWF and similar “authorities” is that it may compromise the ability of the U.S. EPA to argue that IPCC peer review meets the statutory standards required of EPA peer review.

In this respect, I refer to the Climate Audit submission to EPA last June, which considered this specific issue in considerable detail. See submission here, covering post here and first post on the topic here.

Here is an excerpt from the introduction to my submission: (more…)