Climategate
Looks like this issue will be with us for a while. Might as well have a place to collect my writings.
CLIMATEGATE INQUIRIES: In light of the release of the IAC Report in August 2010, and the follow-up hearings in the UK House of Commons, I prepared a response to the climategate inquiries. I owe a vote of thanks to a number of readers who provided feedback on the first draft.
MUIR RUSSELL INQUIRY: My preliminary response is here .
INTER-ACADEMY REVIEW of the IPCC: I was asked by the IAC to submit a set of answers to their queries as part of a review of the policies and procedures of the IPCC. My submission is a bit long, but should make their task much easier.
BOOK CHAPTER ON GATEKEEPING: The process leading to publication of my paper on atmospheric oscillations took many bizarre twists and turns. In the end I went through seven journals, three of whom refused to review it and one which never replied to the submission. The journals that did review it obtained in total seven referee reports, six of which supported publication. The one who objected raised specific points to which I responded, but the editor would not acknowledge receipt of my responses. This episode has now been chronicled in a new book chapter:
CONGRESSIONAL BRIEFING ON CLIMATEGATE: Steve McIntyre and I spoke in the Senate Building in Washington DC on June 17 2010, sponsored by the Competitive Enterprise Institute. My presentation is here in PDF format.
SUBMISSIONS TO CRU INQUIRIES: I have made submissions both to the UK Parliamentary Inquiry into the CRU emails, as well as the Independent Inquiry headed by Sir Muir Russell.
Submission to Parliamentary Inquiry
Submission to Muir Russell Inquiry
CRU UPDATE: When the UK House of Commons Inquiry into Climategate reported, it punted most of the hard questions over to the Review led by Sir Muir Russell. To make sure they received the pass I sent them a letter.
CLIMATEGATE INQUIRIES: In light of the release of the IAC Report in August 2010, and the follow-up hearings in the UK House of Commons, I prepared a response to the climategate inquiries. I owe a vote of thanks to a number of readers who provided feedback on the first draft.
MUIR RUSSELL INQUIRY: My preliminary response is here .
INTER-ACADEMY REVIEW of the IPCC: I was asked by the IAC to submit a set of answers to their queries as part of a review of the policies and procedures of the IPCC. My submission is a bit long, but should make their task much easier.
BOOK CHAPTER ON GATEKEEPING: The process leading to publication of my paper on atmospheric oscillations took many bizarre twists and turns. In the end I went through seven journals, three of whom refused to review it and one which never replied to the submission. The journals that did review it obtained in total seven referee reports, six of which supported publication. The one who objected raised specific points to which I responded, but the editor would not acknowledge receipt of my responses. This episode has now been chronicled in a new book chapter:
- McKitrick, Ross R. (2011) "Bias in the Peer Review Process: A Cautionary and Personal Account" in Climate Coup, Patrick J. Michaels ed., Cato Inst. Washington DC.
CONGRESSIONAL BRIEFING ON CLIMATEGATE: Steve McIntyre and I spoke in the Senate Building in Washington DC on June 17 2010, sponsored by the Competitive Enterprise Institute. My presentation is here in PDF format.
SUBMISSIONS TO CRU INQUIRIES: I have made submissions both to the UK Parliamentary Inquiry into the CRU emails, as well as the Independent Inquiry headed by Sir Muir Russell.
Submission to Parliamentary Inquiry
Submission to Muir Russell Inquiry
CRU UPDATE: When the UK House of Commons Inquiry into Climategate reported, it punted most of the hard questions over to the Review led by Sir Muir Russell. To make sure they received the pass I sent them a letter.
