Ross McKitrick: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 20:29, 22 May 2005 editWilliam M. Connolley (talk \| contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers66,008 edits Rv: JG just can't cope with the fact that the paper was rejected.← Previous edit		Revision as of 22:20, 22 May 2005 edit undoMel Etitis (talk \| contribs)60,375 edits tidied, removed link to "something possibly relevant, in German"Next edit →
Line 1:		Line 1:
	'''Ross McKitrick''' is an ] (~~PhD~~ 1996 from the ] and the same year appointed Assistant Professor in the Department of Economics at the ] ). He has recently (since approximately 2002) worked on ]; in this connection he is a ]. His best-known work is , coauthored with ]. This presented an "audit" of work by ] and others; it appeared in the minor journal "Energy and Environment" in 2003. Mann et al. have replied. The matter was later referred to Nature, following which Mann et al. published a corrigendum, including a re-statement of their data and methods, which appeared on July 1, 2004. The corrigendum did not affect the results, however. McKitrick et al. wrote up a longer version of their results, which was rejected by Nature.		'''Ross McKitrick''' is an ] (] ] from the ] and the same year appointed Assistant Professor in the Department of Economics at the ] ).

			McKitrick has recently (since approximately ]) worked on ], concerning which he is a ]. His best-known work is , coauthored with ]. This presented an "audit" of work by ] and others; it appeared in the minor journal ''Energy and Environment'' in ]. Mann ''et al.'' have replied. The matter was later referred to '']'', following which Mann ''et al.'' published a corrigendum, including a re-statement of their data and methods, which appeared on ] ]. The corrigendum did not affect the results, however. McKitrick ''et al.'' wrote up a longer version of their results, which was rejected by Nature.
⚫	McKitrick's own ] has been strongly criticised, in particular by ], who has written on his web page about what he considers serious flaws in some of McKitrick's publications. One such flaw is a which Lambert claimed invalidates the conclusions of one of McKitrick's papers. The author's (nb this is the ~~authors~~ response; it is not yet clear whether the journal will accept it) acknowledges the error - describing ~~the mistake~~ as "a small error" without additional detail - but asserts the effects were minor and demonstrates how the error did not alter the paper's conclusions .

		⚫	McKitrick's own ] has been strongly criticised, in particular by ], who has written on his web page about what he considers serious flaws in some of McKitrick's publications. One such flaw is a which Lambert claimed invalidates the conclusions of one of McKitrick's papers. The author's (N.B.: this is the author's response; it is not yet clear whether the journal will accept it) acknowledges the error – describing it as "a small error" without additional detail – but asserts that the effects were minor, and demonstrates how the error did not alter the paper's conclusions .
⚫	McKitrick also wrote , coauthored with Christopher Essex and published by Key Porter Books. It was runner-up for the Donner Prize as the Best Canadian Book on Public Policy and finalist for the Canadian Science Writers' Association Book Prize.

		⚫	McKitrick also wrote , coauthored with Christopher Essex and published by Key Porter Books. It was runner-up for the ] as the Best Canadian Book on Public Policy and finalist for the ].

	=== More criticisms of MBH ===		=== More criticisms of MBH ===
	] and Ross McKitrick claim to have found further errors in the MBH approach . A paper claiming to show this was rejected by ]. ] has promoted their claims but it is by no means clear that their claims are correct . The essence of the claim is that the statistical techniques used by MBH has a built-in tendency to produce an upward trend over the last century as an ~~artifact~~ of the ~~dataprocessing~~. MBH deny this.		] and Ross McKitrick claim to have found further errors in the MBH approach . A paper claiming to show this was rejected by ''Nature''. ] has promoted their claims , but it is by no means clear that their claims are correct . The essence of the claim is that the statistical techniques used by MBH has a built-in tendency to produce an upward trend over the last century as an artefact of the data-processing. MBH deny this.

	== External links ==		== External links ==
	* http://www.uoguelph.ca/~rmckitri/ross.html - his home page		*
	* http://www.takenbystorm.info/ - home page for his book, "Taken by storm"		*
	* http://www.uoguelph.ca/~rmckitri/research/trc.html - "Corrections to the Mann et al (1998) Proxy Data Base and Northern Hemisphere Average Temperature Series"		*
	* http://www.climate2003.com/ - home page of his coauthor Stephen McIntyre		*
	* http://www.heise.de/tr/aktuell/meldung/52478 - something possibly relevant, in German

	]		]

Revision as of 22:20, 22 May 2005

Ross McKitrick is an economist (Ph.D. 1996 from the University of British Columbia and the same year appointed Assistant Professor in the Department of Economics at the University of Guelph ).

McKitrick has recently (since approximately 2002) worked on global warming, concerning which he is a sceptic. His best-known work is Corrections to the Mann et al. (1998) Proxy Data Base and Northern Hemispheric Average Temperature Series, coauthored with Stephen McIntyre. This presented an "audit" of work by Michael Mann and others; it appeared in the minor journal Energy and Environment in 2003. Mann et al. have replied. The matter was later referred to Nature, following which Mann et al. published a corrigendum, including a re-statement of their data and methods, which appeared on July 1 2004. The corrigendum did not affect the results, however. McKitrick et al. wrote up a longer version of their results, which was rejected by Nature.

McKitrick's own data analysis has been strongly criticised, in particular by Tim Lambert, who has written on his web page about what he considers serious flaws in some of McKitrick's publications. One such flaw is a programming error with regard to radians and degrees which Lambert claimed invalidates the conclusions of one of McKitrick's papers. The author's response (N.B.: this is the author's response; it is not yet clear whether the journal will accept it) acknowledges the error – describing it as "a small error" without additional detail – but asserts that the effects were minor, and demonstrates how the error did not alter the paper's conclusions .

McKitrick also wrote Taken By Storm: The Troubled Science, Policy and Politics of Global Warming, coauthored with Christopher Essex and published by Key Porter Books. It was runner-up for the Donner Prize as the Best Canadian Book on Public Policy and finalist for the Canadian Science Writers' Association Book Prize.

More criticisms of MBH

Stephen McIntyre and Ross McKitrick claim to have found further errors in the MBH approach . A paper claiming to show this was rejected by Nature. Richard A. Muller has promoted their claims , but it is by no means clear that their claims are correct . The essence of the claim is that the statistical techniques used by MBH has a built-in tendency to produce an upward trend over the last century as an artefact of the data-processing. MBH deny this.

External links

Categories: