While Dr. Mann and his attorneys are busy sending letters to threaten legal action against authors of a parody video depicting him chopping down trees, such as this one he hasn’t gotten to yet, Steve McIntyre points out that Dr. Mann has a bigger problem. Oak Trees were found in his paper Mann 2008 et al, which was touted as his “do over” of the original MBH98 hockey stick in response to critics. With this revelation, Sudden Oak Death appears to have afflicted the “robustness” of the paper.
Steve McIntyre writes:
Doug Keenan has received a favorable decision from the FOI Commissioner in his lengthy FOI/EIR battle for tree ring data collected by Mike Baillie of Queen’s University, Belfast. The data is from Irish oaks and was collected mostly in the 1970s. The decision has been covered by the Times, the New Scientist and the Guardian and at Bishop Hill here and here.
Responses to the decision from Baillie, Rob Wilson and Phil Willis are as interesting as the decision. Baillie and Wilson argued that oak chronologies were “virtually useless” as temperature proxies and “dangerous” in a temperature reconstruction. Nonetheless, as I report below, no fewer than 119 oak chronologies (including 3 Baillie chronologies) were used in Mann et al 2008 without any complaint by Wilson or other specialists. CA readers will also be interested in Baillie’s 2005 response to a Climate Audit post urging climate scientists to update the proxies.
Oak as a Temperature Proxy
The scientist who had been withholding the data, Michael Baillie, ridiculed the idea that his Irish oak data was relevant to temperature reconstructions, saying that it would be “dangerous” to use this data for reconstructing temperature. Hannah Devlin of The Times:
However, the lead scientist involved, Michael Bailee, said that the oak ring data requested was not relevant to temperature reconstruction records.
Although ancient oaks could give an indication of one-off dramatic climatic events, such as droughts, they were not useful as a temperature proxy because they were highly sensitive to water availability as well as past temperatures, he added.
“It’s been dressed up as though we are suppressing climate data, but we have never produced climate records from our tree rings,” Professor Bailee said.
“In my view it would be dangerous to try and make interpretations about the temperature from this data.”
Baillie made a similar statement to the Guardian:
“Keenan is the only person in the world claiming that our oak-ring patterns are temperature records,” Baillie told the Guardian.
Rob Wilson agreed with Baillie on this point, telling the Times that “oaks were virtually useless as a temperature proxy”.
Mann et al 2008
Notwithstanding the considered opinion of Baillie and Wilson that oaks are “virtually useless as a temperature proxy” and “dangerous” to use in a temperature reconstruction, no fewer than 119 oak chronologies were used in Mann et al 2008.
Among Mann’s oak chronologies were three Baillie chronologies: brit008 – Lockwood; brit042 – Shanes Castle, Northern Ireland; brit044 – Castle Coole, Northern Ireland.
…
Far be it from me to disagree with the specialist view of Wilson and Baillie that these oak chronologies are “virtually useless” as a temperature or “dangerous” to use in a temperature reconstruction.
However, surely it would have been far more relevant for them to speak up at the time of the publication of Mann et al 2008 and to have expressed this view as a comment on that publication. At the time, Climate Audit urged specialists to speak out against known misuse of proxies, but they refused to do so. (see Silence of the Lambs).
More here at Climate Audit
=========
Kinda puts a death knell on the entire paper when another tree ring specialist argues vehemently that oak trees are “virtually useless” for temperature and then we see that Mann used the very same oak tree data the scientist was arguing against releasing, because it would “dangerous” to use it as a temperature proxy.
Dr. Mann has bigger credibility problems to worry about than parody videos.
As I’ve written before, the whole premise of treemometers is not without its problems:
A look at treemometers and tree ring growth
Are you absolutely sure it’s the same stuff?
If it is then this man(n) is truly without scruple or a pompous buffoon ….. or both.
I don’t like thinking ill of people so I ask again are you certain they’re the exact same records?
REPLY: In Steve McIntyre’s article, he has them identified by number – Anthony
Penn State, you got some more splainin to do!
Is it just me, or is it becoming patently obvious to anyone interested in the truth, that the vast majority of academics who have anything to do with climate science are liars and hypocrites? The education system in the West is now so corrupt that nothing these academics say can be taken for the truth, and the whole system will have to be torn down to fix it. Climategate has had no real effect on these people, because really, it’s all about the narrative, isn’t it?
Is there anything special about the oak trees or are Baillie and Wilson’s claim applicable to all tree rings used as temperature proxies? Anyone know what percent the 119 oak chronologies are in relation to all those used in Mann’s work?
Mann 2008 may be unimpacted. Mann used a statistical test to find temperature correlation with tree rings and to determine the amount of weight to give each data set.
If the oak data are uncorrelated with the temperature data, then they would be given a low weight and would have little impact on the results.
I’m not saying treemometers make sense, quite the opposite. I’m saying that you could probably remove any or all of the tree ring data and still come up with the same hockey stick shape using his methods.
I’m sure Dr. Mann is on the phone with his attorneys as we speak, demanding that they find a way to eliminate this post.
For the robustness of using Oaks, who ya gonna trust, the experts or Dr. Mann?????
templar knight (08:12:03) :
“Is it just me, or is it becoming patently obvious to anyone interested in the truth, that the vast majority of academics who have anything to do with climate science are liars and hypocrites? The education system in the West is now so corrupt that nothing these academics say can be taken for the truth, and the whole system will have to be torn down to fix it. Climategate has had no real effect on these people, because really, it’s all about the narrative, isn’t it?”
Steady on Mr Templar! Don’t tar us all with the same brush. Besides as vboring says above, if they don’t contain a Hockey Stick then Mann’s algorithm would practically ignore them.
Patchy Moral Syndrome named after the IPCC leader’s ‘typo’ excuse to cover up deceit.
Like
The Donald says, bad publicity is better than no publicity.
Mann is the new bad boy in regards to good sampling methods and techniques. They tell him the data is not suited for his purpose and he pushes forward anyhow.
Should they sue Mann to have him take down his compelling story he pretends is research?
S. McIntyre makes some good points as he usually does. If memory serves, often less well then I am like, a Canadian researcher has published on a technique of oxygen ratios in tree rings that produces temperature proxies. Her method removes most of the usual objections about about growth rates. Assuming this technique is valid then the samples being talked about, not the data as captured to date, may offer some future benefit. That said, Mann’s refusal to fall on his metaphorical sward places him in the company of other dubious egos history. As for the others “Me thinks they dough protest to much.”
I’m glad Steve McIntyre isn’t after me. I wouldn’t go out of the house.
From 2009: (excusé le lap)
Northern Ireland Trees Provide Clues to Climate Change
The results of a new study “Climate signal in tree-ring chronologies in a temperate climate: a multi-species approach” (Full paper – PDF) involving researchers Ana García-Suárez and John Butler at Armagh Observatory and Mike Baillie at Queen’s University Belfast have recently been published in the scientific journal Dendrochronologia. Tree-ring widths and densities have been used as indicators of climate change for several decades, but the question of which aspects of climate, for example average temperature, rainfall, drought or sunshine, the trees really respond to has remained open.
The background to this study is that trees grown close to one of their geographical limits, for example at their upper altitude limit, may be particularly susceptible to changes in temperature, and such stressed trees from high altitudes or high latitudes have most often been used to estimate mean atmospheric temperatures for the period before thermometers came into general use in the 18th and 19th centuries. For example, tree rings have sometimes been used to estimate how warm the world is now compared to, say, the late medieval period or the time when the Romans ruled Britain.
The new work attempts to establish which climate parameters on a monthly or seasonal scale are most important for the growth of four common species currently widespread in the British Isles, namely Oak, Ash, Beech and Pine. The authors use trees grown close to one of the longest running meteorological stations in Europe, namely that at Armagh Observatory, Northern Ireland, in an attempt to link the tree-ring widths to an array of climate variables. Here the trees have grown in relatively benign conditions with adequate rainfall and moderate temperatures, and have mostly grown well within their geographical limits.
The study draws three main conclusions of interest to the climate-change community. First, none of the four species allows reconstruction of any Annual climate variable, though they can allow reconstruction of specific seasonal climate parameters. These seasonal reconstructions can sometimes be unstable in time. Secondly, they find that Ash and Beech are more sensitive to climate changes than Oak and that these species respond more clearly to rainfall and drought conditions than to mean temperature. This could provide a way to estimate changes in rainfall over the past few centuries in parts of the British Isles where a reliable instrumental record does not exist. Thirdly, they find that combinations of tree-ring widths from several species that have grown together are more successful in reconstructing climate than those of a single species.
These are promising results, but it will be difficult to extrapolate them back further than the last few centuries owing to the requirement to date the specimen trees. Currently, there is only the long Northern Ireland Oak chronology (Queen’s University Belfast) and it is unlikely that parallel chronologies for other species can be constructed because of the lack of suitable sources. Also, the growth of trees is affected by the local environmental conditions (i.e. whether they have grown in forests, in open country, or on bogs), which may not have been the same in the past as now. Tree-ring widths nevertheless may provide an important proxy to climate change as long as these causes and effects can be unravelled.
I’m glad that McIntyre is keeping these scientists honest.
Steve, if you’re reading this, thanks!
New article by Richard Lindzen:
Climate Science In Denial
From The wall Street Journal, 22 April 2010, page A23:
http://www.rittercnc.com/metalworking/OT-Climate-Science-In-Denial-Global-warming-alarmists-h-234311-.htm
Sorry, the paper can be found on: http://climate.arm.ac.uk/publications/tree_rings.pdf
Then why all the effin fuss over the data if it is useless? Why put up such a big fight over nothing? Unless it reveals something other than the honest pursuit of truth.
I agree with Templar that the majority of the climate scientists are liars and hypocrites. With few exceptions, the remainder are charlatans.
Mann is becoming less and less relevant and more and more laughable. As for Baillie and his crew, are they asking us to believe they didn’t know what Mann was trying to do with the tree ring data? Just more players in the dirty game of climatology.
Over on ABC a guy who has charted diameters of Trees in (virginia?) are on a accelerated growth pattern ostensibly from (Bad) CO2 increases. He worries that although the tree growth is good, it’s as if they are on steroids, the QUALITY OF THE WOOD might be affected.
Gordon Bennett!
Perhaps the Oaks died because of AGW.
Steve is a Great White. Anything straggling from the pack, ignoring FOIs, losing data, hiding declines, calling people names, and generally flapping around in a sloppy manner is going to get it! It’s what makes swimming in the deep so much fun! Right Jones?
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/09/29/yamal_scandal/
Somehow I feel that I would be remiss if I don’t point out El Reg’s excellent “Treemometers: A new scientific scandal” article. Oh well, at least it is still a great introduction into the tree-ring mess for newcomers, and good reading in general.
Fantastic picure with that hockey stick in the back ground!
If the old chronologies are ‘made available’ does that mean the measurements or are the actual samples of woods still around? If so, the 18O technique might be used on them.
Edbhoy (08:24:00) :
Steady on Mr Templar! Don’t tar us all with the same brush. Besides as vboring says above, if they don’t contain a Hockey Stick then Mann’s algorithm would practically ignore them.
______
Isn’t this just the point? How can a study be any use if it is designed to ignore all contrary data? If the oak series are included, but then excluded de facto because they don’t support the thesis, this is more damning of the protocol than if they were left out entirely. Nothing can get in unless it meets the hockey stick meme. Isn’t that why Steve M found that even random noise produces a Mann made hockey stick.