tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8216971263350849959.post6372830261373341620..comments2023-08-07T16:41:49.660+02:00Comments on Die Klimazwiebel: Mann angry at WSJ articleeduardohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17725131974182980651noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8216971263350849959.post-44403319539654743082010-03-01T10:19:21.330+01:002010-03-01T10:19:21.330+01:00@Reiner
the MBH Hockeystick is not caused by the d...@Reiner<br />the MBH Hockeystick is not caused by the divergence problem or "Prof Briffas tree-rings". Therefore the WSJ is wrong. <br /><br />Furthermore, the divergence problem is and was well known and not solved. So, the suggestion of the WSJ that it was "admitted" or even hidden is also wrong. The last sentence in the brackets does not make any sense.<br /><br />So, because the WSJ was wrong, Prof Mann could say anything he wanted. And he did. <br /><br />It would be better to ask him what was the problem (or at least the main critiques from colleagues) with the MBH stick, I mean there are new works now, from his team and others. And why was it so dominant in that report? Why was it not dominant in the AR4? Prof Mann said once: he would do things differently now. Why not asking what exactly would he do differently?<br /><br />At least, in my opinion it would be more constructive and interesting.ghostnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8216971263350849959.post-81235488402811169922010-02-28T18:21:07.418+01:002010-02-28T18:21:07.418+01:00I doubt Mann will succeed in saving his reputation...I doubt Mann will succeed in saving his reputation by constantly putting the work of other scientists down. He has made many friends of the kind no one needs during his hockey career. The air has really got to be getting thin for him.P Gosselinnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8216971263350849959.post-16471395685736375702010-02-27T20:43:46.753+01:002010-02-27T20:43:46.753+01:00By their fruits ye shall know them.By their fruits ye shall know them.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com