There is no debate on the basics, the debate is around the intensity, sensitivity, effects and what mitigation or accomodation that should be made - if any is required.
There is also no conspiracy or consensus, thats a volcanic ash screen
Its interesting that a particular scientist who's work is funded by taxes, and is (or rather was - it seems to have been dropped these days and is described as "crap" by other scientists) used as a key material to promote the idea of doom seems more than willing to share everything with some people who think the same, but not with others.
Its also interesting to note how many $s his university spent in legal fees trying to keep his "working out" secret.
If they were my taxes I'd be annoyed. Just saying.
- Bishop Hill blog - Caspar and the Jesus paper
Quote:
|
...McIntyre had reconciled their work with his own so that he understood every difference. And he therefore now knew that Wahl and Amman's work suffered from exactly the same problem as the hockey stick itself: the R2 number was so low as to suggest that the hockey stick had no meaning at all, although another statistic, the reduction of error statistic (or RE) was relatively high
|
Quote:
|
And here there was an upside because, buried deep within the paper, Amman and Wahl had quietly revealed their verification R2 figures, which were, just as McIntyre had predicted, close to zero for most of the reconstruction, strongly suggesting that the hockey stick had little predictive power.
|