Comments for delayed.oscillator

Comment on Yamal III: Summary and Update by Hank Roberts

Hank Roberts — Wed, 24 Mar 2010 03:37:29 +0000

I just cited you at dot.earth; watch for incoming.
http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/03/17/your-dot-climate-concerns/

Comment on Yamal Emulation I by Enron and the Case of the Zombie Fungus « The Policy Lass

Enron and the Case of the Zombie Fungus « The Policy Lass — Thu, 25 Feb 2010 02:18:54 +0000

[...] where Yamal is discussed by Tom P himself. You can also go to Deep Climate who discussed it or Delayed Oscillator. Categories: Uncategorized Comments (0) Trackbacks (0) Leave a comment [...]

Comment on Tuesday Links by delayedoscillator

delayedoscillator — Tue, 29 Dec 2009 03:23:18 +0000

Yes, it appears as though the CRU webpages with the Yamal raw data are still being rebuilt since the illegal hack of their system. Let me see if I can email you the raw data, although it is always better to get from the original source.

Comment on Seeing Red (Noise): Galactic Cosmic Ray Fluxes and Tree Rings by delayedoscillator

delayedoscillator — Tue, 29 Dec 2009 03:22:07 +0000

Hi Nancy,

‘I know that scotch and sunshine have an effect on me’ — Hah! Perfect

In all seriousness — yes, we’d want to see this repeated (with statistical significance this time!), as well as have a mechanism.

Comment on Seeing Red (Noise): Galactic Cosmic Ray Fluxes and Tree Rings by nancynaive

nancynaive — Mon, 28 Dec 2009 16:37:13 +0000

I’m just a poor backwoods mathematician trying to make it by in a cold cruel world, but seems to me that in order to make any such lofty claims, one should at least consider trees from some other place (at the same latitude) on which to conduct the same experiments. I should wonder if there is any industry in Scotland upwind from these trees whose effluent might be affected by cosmic rays and that in turn affects this stand of trees; a distillery perhaps (I know that scotch and sunshine have an effect on me.)

It’s been years since I have I mucked in statistics but correlation is still miles from causality.

Comment on Tuesday Links by nmatzke

nmatzke — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 02:27:27 +0000

Hi! Love this blog, it’s the best thing on tree rings that I’ve found. The CRU website is all messed up, do you know if there is anyplace the Yamal data is online? Or perhaps you can send it to me? I want to do a post at the Panda’s Thumb on the recent climate craziness, and just do a whole first-cut analysis in R. Kind of my winter-break project…

Comment on Tuesday Links by climafuturo

climafuturo — Fri, 11 Dec 2009 22:40:55 +0000

Hi there! Have you seen the regional reconstruction in Mann et al 2009?:
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/sci;326/5957/1256

Although they use more than 1000 proxies, I’ve been told (by a lay person, of course) that only 50 proxies go back to the Medieval Warm Period (supplementary material), therefore the extrapolation is so big that the regional reconstruction is not reliable. Any thoughts about it?

Thanks in any case

Comment on Talk about Tiljander by amac78

amac78 — Sat, 21 Nov 2009 18:33:14 +0000

[snip - needless to say, I won't be publishing stolen emails you attempt to reproduce here]

Comment on Yamal V: … but they pull me back in … by delayedoscillator

delayedoscillator — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 13:50:37 +0000

Hi DC,

I believe you are correct. The Esper et al. 2003 paper looks at two different species or two different sites (among other issues). I’ve already demonstrated to Jeff, for instance, why comparing 12 trees that grew at the same time during a period of changing climate vs. the full living and subfossil data over more than millennium doesn’t show what he wants it too.

Comment on Yamal V: … but they pull me back in … by Deep Climate

Deep Climate — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 02:12:33 +0000

McIntyre has done what he calls an Esper-style inhomogeneity test on Yamal data.

But as far as I can tell, Esper tests two populations over the same period of time, while McIntyre is comparing the live tree cores with the older sub-fossil “population”.

I can’t understand why the relationship between age and growth should be the same for times of very differing climatic change.

http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=7720