In the mid-1990s the use of ground boreholes as a clue to paleoclimate history was becoming well-established. In 1995 David Deming, a geoscientist at the University of Oklahoma, published a study in Science4 that demonstrated the technique by generating a 150-year climate history for North America. Here, in his own words, is what happened next.


"With the publication of the article in Science, I gained significant credibility in the community of scientists working on climate change. They thought I was one of them, someone who would pervert science in the service of social and political causes. So one of them let his guard down. A major person working in the area of climate change and global warming sent me an astonishing email that said “We have to get rid of the Medieval Warm Period.”5

The Medieval Warm Period (MWP) is an interval from approximately AD1000 to AD1300 during which many places around the world exhibited conditions that seem warm compared to today.

...the sun can be eliminated as it has been going nowhere for the last 50 years.

Originally posted by undermind

...the sun can be eliminated as it has been going nowhere for the last 50 years.

really o

The same can't be said for the Hockey Team. What are you, like fourteen or something?

Originally posted by Johnmike
Hey, I just thought it didn't go over anything properly. There was barely a history lesson outside of "They've been saying it would happen! But you didn't listen!!!"

It doesn't say much about "the American denial of global warming" aside from some passing accusations of fake science propagated by the industry. It's basically a bunch of claims and a description of a couple scientists. I know you didn't claim that it was on par with a scientific paper, but I still think that it's nothing more than a bunch of claims.

As for global warming itself, I'm still on the fence. I have no idea what to believe. Analyzing the data is hard (do you know that site that had the up to date satellite temperature records? it was great) and I'm not just going to believe in something because I'm told to, you know?

My request for data pertains to two papers which are presently unpublished and for which the data is unarchived. One of the papers does not even list the data used. I request that you simply contact the authors who submitted the articles in question and ask him/her to provide an FTP location for the data so that it can be reviewed. The request can be made through a simple email and does not require resources beyond those available to you. You could have submitted the request as quickly as it took you to draft your reply to me. If the authors refuse to provide their data pursuant to a request from you, then that would be a factor in my review, as it should be for IPCC itself, as to whether the article should be referenced by IPCC.

The next day, Sep 23, 2005, Manning made the following shirty reply:

Let me repeat - If you wish to obtain data used in a paper then you should make a direct request to the original authors yourself. It would be inappropriate for the IPCC to become involved in that communication and I have no intention of allowing the IPCC support unit to provide you with what would in effect be a secretarial service. There are over 1200 other scientists on our list of reviewers and we simply can not get involved in providing special services for each. I gave you the courtesy of a detailed response earlier to ensure there was no confusion about our process which is my responsibility. Acting as an intermediary with other scientists is not. I will not be responding to further correspondence on this matter.

Now I had presumed that a unit entitled Technical Services Unit would not view “secretarial services” as beneath their dignity. Perhaps they’d been watching too many episodes of 24 and got the TSU and CTU units mixed up. In addition, by requiring me to contact the authors directly, obviously the anonymity of the process was forfeited.