To: neolib who wrote (20357 ) 2/15/2008 3:46:01 PM From: Thomas A Watson Respond to of 36917 Will the designated thread liar neolib provide a list of "reputable climate research institutions" neolib the author of invincible stupidity or generic lib lying. Wegman and peers are reputable reviewers of how professionals properly compile and present scientific information. They reviewed the methods and data Mann presented as the hockey stick graft. the graft designated thread liar neolib keeps insisting is some divine perfect revelation. Wegman testimony... In general, we found the writing in MBH98 and MBH99 to be somewhat obscure and incomplete and the criticisms by MM03/05a/05b to be valid. The criticism that is valid as listed in climatechangeissues.com Page 14 (i) MBH98 identified the hockey stick shape as the dominant pattern (PC1) in the proxy data by using a flawed PC method. Under a corrected method the hockey stick shape is demoted to the fourth PC and the analysis suggests it accounts for less than 8 percent of the total explained variance, making it at best a small background signal. If the inclusion of a single higher-order PC accounting for less than 8 percent of the variance in a single region changes all the results, it does not prove that the PC4 is actually the ?dominant climate pattern?, instead it shows that the model lacks robustness and the conclusions are unstable. Had this been admitted in 1998 the paper would likely never have been published. (ii) If the flawed bristlecone pine series are removed, the hockey stick disappears regardless of how the PCs are calculated and regardless of how many are included. The hockey stick shape is not global, it is a local phenomenon associated with eccentric proxies. Mann discovered this long ago and never reported it. 15 McIntyre, Stephen and Ross McKitrick (2005a) ?The M&M Critique of the MBH98 Northern Hemisphere Climate Index: Update and Implications.? Energy and Environment 16(1) pp. 69-100; (2005b) ?Hockey Sticks, Principal Components and Spurious Significance? Geophysical Research Letters Vol. 32, No. 3, L03710 10.1029/2004GL021750 12 February 2005. For copies please see www.climateaudit.org.