Andrew Bolt July 15 2012 (5:54am)
But what would I know? As Karoly recently wrote, in his contemptuous way:
Commentators with no scientific expertise, ranging from politicians such as Republican congressman Joe Barton from Texas, Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli, or Republican Senator James Inhofe from Oklahoma, to blog writers Stephen McIntyre and Marc Morano, have repeatedly promulgated misinformation and sought to launch formal investigations into Mann’s research, claiming professional misconduct or worse, even though it had been peer reviewed and confirmed by other scientists
Hmm. A couple of problems here.
First, one of those “commentators with no scientific expertise” he names is Stephen McIntyre, who is so inexpert that he spotted flaws that forced Karoly and his co-authors to withdraw a recent peer-reviewed paper that had made various wild claims about Australia never having seen such rapid warming.
As Karoly admitted to McIntyre at the time:
An issue has been identified in the processing of the data used in the study, which may affect the results. While the paper states that “both proxy climate and instrumental data were linearly detrended over the 1921–1990 period”, we discovered on Tuesday 5 June that the records used in the final analysis were not detrended for proxy selection, making this statement incorrect. Although this is an unfortunate data processing issue, it is likely to have implications for the results reported in the study. The journal has been contacted and the publication of the study has been put on hold.
But since then has come Karoly’s brazen attack of McIntyre for nevertheless being a klutz. And worse, as McIntyre now protests:
I try to write accurately and, to my knowledge, have not “promulgated misinformation” about Mann’s research, let alone done so “repeatedly”. Together with coauthor Ross McKitrick, I published criticism of Mann’s work in the same peer reviewed journal as Mann et al 1999. We published these criticisms in good faith. In my opinion, not only have the specific criticisms not been refuted in subsequent commentary, but, if anything, our findings have been confirmed even by adversaries…. I request that you either provide me forthwith with specific examples of the “misinformation” that you allege that I’ve promulgated or withdraw the allegation with an apology.
Karoly now sees in this request for evidence a threat, as he’s complained elsewhere:
This is a very welcome initiative [funding litigation by climate scientists]. The threats of legal action and FOI requests are not just occurring in North America. In Australia, I have just received a threat of legal action from Steve McIntyre in Canada and am currently dealing with 6 different FOI requests.
There is something in Karoly’s approach to debate and reaction to informed criticism that does not inspire me with confidence.
Steve McIntyre was once a Canadian mathematics prize winner. He is still active in statistics and geology and is a master squash player. Where he gets the time and energy to audit climate ‘scientists’ is beyond me. Go suck eggs Karoly, something the well mannered McIntyre wont say. Do yourself a favour and listen and learn from him. Your words are just projections of yourself. You are even funded by our government, whereas Steve McIntyre is entirely self funded.
Steve McIntyre has posted his letter to David Karoly regarding Karoly’s book review, covered by WUWT here. Karoly responds with a suggestion he’s been given a ‘legal threat’. After reading McIntyre’s letter, I’m reminded of the non-existent death threats towards climate scientists in Australia…because I sure can’t find any legal threat from Steve. Maybe David Appell can use his superior death threat knowledge to pinpoint this. /sarc
Steve McIntyre writes: Continue reading →
There are heaps of descriptions and suggestions for Professor Karoly in comments, definitely worth a visit. More Karoly blunders.