From: Phil Jones <[email protected]>
To: “Michael E. Mann” <[email protected]>
Subject: HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
Date: Thu Jul 8 16:30:16 2004I can’t see either of these papers being in the next IPCC report. Kevin and I will keep them out somehow – even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is !
Cheers
Phil
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Is Antarctica Melting?
- High Speed Analysis And Visualization
- El Nino To The Rescue?
- Fake News Update
- Growth Of Antarctic Sea Ice
- 65 Years Of Progress!
- El Nino To The Rescue?
- Worst March Drought On Record
- ChartGL Process Control Demo
- The Biggest Money Laundering Scam
- Drought In The Headwaters Of Lake Powell
- Unrealistic Expectations Of Water Availability
- Did Bill Gates Do This?
- Worst March Drought On Record In The US
- The Real Hockey Stick Graph
- Analyzing The Western Water Crisis
- Gaslighting 1924
- “Why Do You Resist?”
- Climate Attribution Model
- Fact Checking NASA
- Fact Checking Grok
- Fact Checking The New York Times
- New Visitech Features
- Ice-Free Arctic By 2014
- Debt-Free US Treasury Forecast
Recent Comments
- conrad ziefle on Is Antarctica Melting?
- Gordon Vigurs on Is Antarctica Melting?
- Bob G on Is Antarctica Melting?
- conrad ziefle on High Speed Analysis And Visualization
- Bob G on 65 Years Of Progress!
- Bob G on 65 Years Of Progress!
- Gordon Vigurs on 65 Years Of Progress!
- arn on 65 Years Of Progress!
- arn on 65 Years Of Progress!
- Bob G on 65 Years Of Progress!
Peer Pressure
http://littleguurrl.files.wordpress.com/2010/11/peer-pressure.gif
They redefined “Peer-Review” years ago! Peer-Review was not about results being valid, it was just about the paper agreeing with the “Peers”! They tried to claim Peer-Review is something more than it ever has been.
Their form of peer review means sticking with the narrative.
Peer review is fine if the peers are serious people who are expert in the given field. But when a field is broken then so is its peer review.
Reblogged this on CACA.
Hide the decline! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fAlMomLvu_4
Many alarmists attempt to defend climategate by claiming the emails were “taken out of context”. I’m curious as to what context that particular email was taken out of. That particular one should have resulted in Jones’ immediate dismissal.
Mann disciple Mr Chris Turney can peer review this!
http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2014-01-23/federal-government-to-seek-costs-over-antarctica-rescue/5214846