From: Kevin Trenberth <trenbert@ucar.edu>
To: Phil Jones <p.jones@uea.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: ENSO blamed over warming - paper in JGR
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2009 08:57:36 -0600
Cc: Michael Mann <mann@meteo.psu.edu>, Jim Salinger <j.salinger@auckland.ac.nz>, j.renwick@niwa.co.nz, b.mullan@niwa.co.nz, Gavin Schmidt <gschmidt@giss.nasa.gov>, James Annan <jdannan@jamstec.go.jp>, Grant Foster <tamino_9@hotmail.com>

   The leads and lags are analyzed in detail in this paper
   Trenberth, K. E., J. M. Caron, D. P. Stepaniak, and S. Worley 2002: [1]The evolution of
   ENSO and global atmospheric surface temperatures J. Geophys. Res., 107, D8,
   10.1029/2000JD000298.
   and we were not able to reproduce Tom Wigley's result (we tried).  It may depend in indices
   used.  In this paper we also document the extent to which ENSO contributes to warming
   overall.
   Kevin
   Phil Jones wrote:

      Mike,
         See below for instructions.
      Also, just because IPCC (2007, Ch 3) didn't point out the 6/7-month lag
      between the SOI and global temperatures doesn't mean it hasn't been
      known for years. IPCC is an assessment and not a review of everything
      done. If they had even read Wigley (2001) they would have seen this
      lag pointed out.  I wasn't the first to do this in 1989 either. I don't
      think Walker was either. I think the first was Hildebrandsson in the
      1890s. Why does it always go back to a Swede!
      file is at [2]ftp.cru.uea.ac.uk
      login anonymously with emails as pw
      then go to people/philjones
      and you should find santeretal2001.pdf
      Cheers
      Phil
     At 14:08 28/07/2009, Michael Mann wrote:

     thanks Phil,
     this is very helpful and reaffirms what we've identified as some of
     the main points that need to be covered in a formal response. I've
     taken the liberty of copying in a couple other colleagues who have
     been looking into this. Grant Foster was the first author on a
     response to a similarly bad paper by Schwartz that was published some
     time ago, and has been doing a number of analyses aimed at
     demonstrating the key problems in McClean et al.
     I've suggested that Grant sent out a draft of the response when it is
     ready to the broader group of people who have been included in these
     exchanges for feedback and potential co-authorship,
     mike
     p.s. Santer et al paper still didn't come through in your followup
     message. Can you post in on ftp where it can be downloaded?
     On Jul 28, 2009, at 5:15 AM, Phil Jones wrote:

      Jim et al,
          Having now read the paper in a moment of peace and quiet, there
     are a few things
      to bear in mind. The authors of the original will have a right of
     reply, so need to
      ensure that they don't have anything to come back on. From doing
     the attached a
      year or so ago, there is a word limit and also it is important to
     concentrate only
      on a few key points. As we all know there is so much wrong with the
     paper, it
      won't be difficult to come up with a few, but it does need to be
     just two or three.
          The three aspects I would emphasize are
      1. The first difference type filtering. Para 14 implies that they
     smooth the series
      with a 12 month running mean, then subtract the value in Jan 1980
     from that in
      Jan 1979, then Feb 1980 from Feb 1979 and so on.  As we know this
     removes
      any long-term trend.
        The running mean also probably distorts the phase, so this is
     possibly why
      they get different lags from others. Using running means also
     enhances the
      explained variance. Perhaps we should repeat the exercise without
     the smoothing.
      2. Figure 4 and Figure 1 show the unsmoothed GTTA series. These
     clearly have a
      trend. Perhaps show the residual after extracting the ENSO part.
      3. They do the same first difference on the smoothed SOI. The SOI
     doesn't explain
      the climate jump in the 1976/77 period. Their arguments in para 30
     are all wrong.
       A few minor points
        - there are some negative R*R values just after equation 3.
        - I'm sure Tom Wigley wouldn't have proposed El Nino events
     occurring after volcanoes!
          Attached this paper as well. From a quick read it doesn't say
     what is purported - in fact
          it seems to show clearly how the analysis should have been done.
        - there is a paper by Ben Santer (more recent) where he applies
     the same type
      of extraction procedure to models. I'll send this separately as it
     is large. In case it
      is too large here is the reference.
      Santer, B.D., Wigley, T.M.L., Doutriaux, C., Boyle, J.S., Hansen,
     J.E., Jones, P.D., Meehl, G.A., Roeckner, E., Sengupta, S. and
     Taylor K.E., 2001:  Accounting for the effects of volcanoes and ENSO
     in comparisons of modeled and observed temperature trends.  Journal
     of Geophysical Research 106, 2803328059.
      Finally I've attached a paper I wrote in 1990, where I did
     something similar to
      what they did. I looked at residuals from a Gaussian filter, and I
     added
      the smoothed data back afterwards. I was working at the annual
     timescale
      and I did have many more years.
      Cheers
      Phil
     At 00:19 25/07/2009, Michael Mann wrote:

     Hi Jim,
     Grant Foster ('Tamino') did a nice job in a previous response
     (attached) we wrote to a similarly bad article by Schwartz which
     got a
     lot of play in contrarian circles.
     since he's already done some of the initial work in debunking this, I
     sent him an email asking hi if we was interested in spearheading a
     similar effort w/ this one.
     let me get back to folks after I've heard back from him, and we can
     discuss possible strategy for moving this forward,
     mike
     On Jul 24, 2009, at 6:11 PM, Jim Salinger wrote:

     Kia orana All from the Tropical South Pacific
     Yes, Phil, a bit like 'A midsummer night's dream!'. and Gavin
     Tamino's bang up job is great, And good that you go up with stuff on
     Real Climate, Mike. As Kevin is preoccupied, for the scientific
     record we need a rebuttal somewhere pulled together. Who wants to
     join in on the multiauthored effort?? I am happy to coordinate it.
     Return to 'winter' this evening after enjoying a balmy south east
     trades and sunny dry 24 C in the Cook Islands.
     Jim
     Quoting Michael Mann [3]<mann@meteo.psu.edu>:

     folks, we're going to go up w/ something brief on RealClimate
     later  today, mostly just linking to other useful deconstructions
     of the  paper already up on other sites,
     mike
     On Jul 23, 2009, at 11:01 PM, Jim Salinger wrote:

     I am tied up next week, but could frame something up the
     following  week which , I hope would be multi-authored. It would
     be quite good  to have a rebuttal from the same Department at Uni
     of Auckland  (which Glenn McGregor of IJC is director of)!
     I haven't had tne oportunity to download the text here in the
     Cook  Islands, so this would give me the opportunity to do that.
     Who else  wants to join in??
     Jim
     Quoting Kevin Trenberth [4]<trenbert@ucar.edu>:

     I am on vacation today and don't have the time.  I have been on
     travel the
     past 4 weeks (including AR5 IPCC scoping mtg); the NCAR summer
     Colloquium
     is coming up in a week and then I am off to Oz and NZ for 3 weeks
     (GEWEX/iLeaps, CEOP) and I have an oceanobs'09 plenary paper to
     do.
     Kevin

     a formal comment to JGR seems like a worthwhile undertaking
     here.
     contrarians will continue to cite the paper regardless of
     whether or
     not its been rebutted, but for the purpose of future scientific
     assessments, its important that this be formally rebutted in
     the  peer-
     reviewed literature.
     mike
     On Jul 23, 2009, at 9:05 PM, Jim Salinger wrote:

     Hi All
     Thanks for the pro-activeness. Is there an opportunity to
     write a
     letter to JGR pointing out the junk science in this??....if
     it is
     not rebutted, then all sceptics will use this to justify their
     position.
     Jim
     Quoting Michael Mann [5]<mann@meteo.psu.edu>:

     2nd email
     ________
     Thanks Kevin, hadn't even noticed that in my terse initial
     skim of
     it.  yes--that makes things even worse than my initial
     impression.
     this is a truly horrible paper. one wonders who the editor
     was,
     and  what he/she was thinking (or drinking),
     m
     On Jul 23, 2009, at 3:51 PM, Kevin Trenberth wrote:

     I just looked briefly at the paper.  Their relationships use
     derivatives
     of the series.  Well derivatives are equivalent to a high
     pass
     filter,
     that is to say it filters out all the low frequency
     variability  and
     trends.
     If one takes y= A sin wt
     and does a differentiation one gets
     dy = Aw cos wt.
     So the amplitude goes from A to Aw where w is the frequency
     =  2*pi/
     L  where
     L is the period.
     So the response to this procedure is to reduce periods of 10
     years  by a
     factor of 5 compared with periods of 2 years, or 20 and 50
     years get
     reduced by factors of 10 an 25 relative to two year periods.
     i.e.  Their
     procedure is designed to only analyse the interannual
     variability
     not the
     trends.
     Kevin

     hi Seth, you always seem to catch me at airports. only got a
     few
     minutes. took a cursory look at the paper,  and it has all
     the
     worry
     signs of extremely bad science and scholarship. JGR is a
     legitimate
     journal, but some extremely bad papers have slipped through
     the
     cracks
     in recent years, and this is another one of them.
     first of all, the authors use two deeply flawed datasets
     that
     understate the warming trends: the Christy and Spencer MSU
     data and
     uncorrected radiosonde temperature estimates. There were a
     series
     of
     three key papers published in Science a few years ago, by
     Mears
     et  al,
     Santer et al, and Sherwood et al.
     see Gavin's excellent RealClimate article on this:
     [6]http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2005/08/et- tu- lt/
     these papers collectively showed that both datasets were
     deeply
     flawed
     and understate actual tropospheric temperature trends. I
     find it
     absolutely remarkable that this paper could get through a
     serious
     review w/out referencing any 3 of these critical papers--
     papers
     whose
     findings render that conclusions of the current article
     completely
     invalid!
     The Christy and Spencer MSU satellite-derived tropospheric
     temperature
     estimates contained two errors--a sign error and an
     algebraic
     error--
     that had the net effect of artificially removing the
     warming  trend.
     Christy and Spencer continue to produce revised versions of
     the MSU
     dataset, but they always seem to show less warming than
     every  other
     independent assessment, and their estimates are largely
     disregarded  by
     serious assessments such as that done by the NAS and the
     IPCC.
     So these guys have taken biased estimates of tropospheric
     temperatures
     that have artificially too little warming trend, and then
     shown,
     quite
     unremarkably, that El Nino dominates much of what is left
     (the
     interannual variability).
     the paper has absolutely no implications that I can see at
     all
     for  the
     role of natural variability on the observed warming trend
     of  recent
     decades.
     other far more careful analyses (a paper by David Thompson
     of  CSU,
     Phil Jones, and others published in Nature more than  year
     ago)
     used
     proper, widely-accepted surface temperature data to estimate
     the
     influence of natural factors (El Nino and volcanos) on the
     surface
     temperature record. their analysis was so careful and
     clever  that
     it
     detected a post-world war II error in sea surface
     temperature
     measurements (that yields artificial cooling during the mid
     1940s)
     that had never before been discovered in the global surface
     temperature record. needless to say, they removed that
     error  too.
     and
     the correct record, removing influences of ENSO, volcanoes,
     and
     even
     this newly detected error, reveal that a robust warming of
     global  mean
     surface temperature over the past century of a little less
     than 1C
     which has nothing to do w/ volcanic influences or ENSO
     influences.  the
     dominant source of the overall warming, as concluded in
     every
     legitimate  major scientific assessment, is anthropogenic
     influences
     (human greenhouse gas concentrations w/ some offsetting
     cooling
     due  to
     sulphate aerosols).
     this later paper provides absolutely nothing to cast that in
     doubt.  it
     uses a flawed set of surface temperature measurements for
     which the
     trend has been artificially suppressed, to show that whats
     left
     over
     (interannual variability) is due to natural influences. duh!
     its a joke! and the aptly named Mark "Morano" has fallen for
     it!
     m
     On Jul 23, 2009, at 11:54 AM, Borenstein, Seth wrote:

     Kevin, Gavin, Mike,
     It's Seth again. Attached is a paper in JGR today that
     Marc  Morano
     is hyping wildly. It's in a legit journal. Whatchya think?
     Seth
     Seth Borenstein
     Associated Press Science Writer
     [7]sborenstein@ap.org
     The Associated Press, 1100 13th St. NW, Suite 700,
     Washington, DC
     20005-4076
     202-641-9454
     The information contained in this communication is intended
     for
     the
     use
     of the designated recipients named above. If the reader of
     this
     communication is not the intended recipient, you are hereby
     notified
     that you have received this communication in error, and
     that  any
     review,
     dissemination, distribution or copying of this
     communication is
     strictly
     prohibited. If you have received this communication in
     error,
     please
     notify The Associated Press immediately by telephone at
     +1-212-621-1898
     and delete this e-mail. Thank you.
     [IP_US_DISC]
     msk dccc60c6d2c3a6438f0cf467d9a4938
     <McLean2008JD011637.pdf>

     On Jul 23, 2009, at 7:57 PM, Jim Salinger wrote:

     Precisely.
     Mike Mann: You better rush something up on RealClimate. Jim,
     Brett,  myself and maybe others will have to deal with the
     local
     fallout  this will cause...oh dear......
     Bye the way June was the warmest month on record for the
     oceans
     according tro NOAA
     Jim
     Quoting Kevin Trenberth [8]<trenbert@ucar.edu>:

     Exactly
     They use 2 datasets that are deficient in the first place
     and
     then  they
     use derivatives: differentiation is a high pass filter,
     and so
     they  show
     what we have long known that ENSO accounts for a lot of high
     frequency
     variability.  It should not have been published
     Kevin

     kia orana from Rarotonga
     How the h... did this get accepted!!
     Jim
     Dominion today {24/7/09]
     Nature blamed over warming - describing recently published
     paper
     in
     JGR by Chris de Freitas, Bob Carter and J McLean, and
     including
     comment by J Salinger  "little new"
     McLean J. D., C. R. de Freitas, R. M. Carter (2009),
     Influence
     of  the
     Southern Oscillation on tropospheric temperature, J.
     Geophys.
     Res.,
     114, D14104, doi:10.1029/2008JD011637.
     paper at
     [9]http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2009/2008JD011637.shtml
     --
     Associate Professor Jim Salinger
     School of Geography and Environmental Science
     University of Auckland
     Private Bag 92 019
     Auckland, New Zealand
     Tel: + 64 9 373 7599 ext 88473
     ----------------------------------------------------------------
     This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging
     Program.

     ___________________
     Kevin Trenberth
     Climate Analysis Section, NCAR
     PO Box 3000
     Boulder CO 80307
     ph 303 497 1318
     [10]http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/cas/trenbert.html

     ----------------------------------------------------------------
     This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging
     Program.

     --
     Michael E. Mann
     Professor
     Director, Earth System Science Center (ESSC)
     Department of Meteorology                 Phone: (814)
     863-4075
     503 Walker Building                              FAX:   (814)
     865-3663
     The Pennsylvania State University     email:  [11]mann@psu.edu
     University Park, PA 16802-5013
     website: [12]http://www.meteo.psu.edu/~mann/Mann/index.html
     "Dire Predictions" book site:
     [13]http://www.essc.psu.edu/essc_web/news/DirePredictions/index.html

     ----------------------------------------------------------------
     This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging
     Program.

     --
     Michael E. Mann
     Professor
     Director, Earth System Science Center (ESSC)
     Department of Meteorology                 Phone: (814) 863-4075
     503 Walker Building                              FAX:   (814)
     865-3663
     The Pennsylvania State University     email:  [14]mann@psu.edu
     University Park, PA 16802-5013
     website: [15]http://www.meteo.psu.edu/~mann/Mann/index.html
     "Dire Predictions" book site:
     [16]http://www.essc.psu.edu/essc_web/news/DirePredictions/index.html

     ___________________
     Kevin Trenberth
     Climate Analysis Section, NCAR
     PO Box 3000
     Boulder CO 80307
     ph 303 497 1318
     [17]http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/cas/trenbert.html

     ----------------------------------------------------------------
     This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.

     --
     Michael E. Mann
     Professor
     Director, Earth System Science Center (ESSC)
     Department of Meteorology                 Phone: (814) 863-4075
     503 Walker Building                              FAX:   (814)
     865-3663
     The Pennsylvania State University     email:  [18]mann@psu.edu
     University Park, PA 16802-5013
     website: [19]http://www.meteo.psu.edu/~mann/Mann/index.html
     "Dire Predictions" book site:
     [20]http://www.essc.psu.edu/essc_web/news/DirePredictions/index.html

     ----------------------------------------------------------------
     This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.

     --
     Michael E. Mann
     Professor
     Director, Earth System Science Center (ESSC)
     Department of Meteorology                 Phone: (814) 863-4075
     503 Walker Building                              FAX:   (814)
     865-3663
     The Pennsylvania State University     email:  [21]mann@psu.edu
     University Park, PA 16802-5013
     website: [22]http://www.meteo.psu.edu/~mann/Mann/index.html
     "Dire Predictions" book site:
     [23]http://www.essc.psu.edu/essc_web/news/DirePredictions/index.html
     Hi Jim,
     Grant Foster ('Tamino') did a nice job in a previous response
     (attached) we wrote to a similarly bad article by Schwartz which
     got a lot of play in contrarian circles.
     since he's already done some of the initial work in debunking this,
     I sent him an email asking hi if we was interested in spearheading
     a similar effort w/ this one.
     let me get back to folks after I've heard back from him, and we can
     discuss possible strategy for moving this forward,
     mike
     On Jul 24, 2009, at 6:11 PM, Jim Salinger wrote:

     Kia orana All from the Tropical South Pacific
     Yes, Phil, a bit like 'A midsummer night's dream!'. and Gavin
     Tamino's bang up job is great, And good that you go up with stuff
     on Real Climate, Mike. As Kevin is preoccupied, for the scientific
     record we need a rebuttal somewhere pulled together. Who wants to
     join in on the multiauthored effort?? I am happy to coordinate it.
     Return to 'winter' this evening after enjoying a balmy south east
     trades and sunny dry 24 C in the Cook Islands.
     Jim
     Quoting Michael Mann [24]<mann@meteo.psu.edu>:

     folks, we're going to go up w/ something brief on RealClimate
     later  today, mostly just linking to other useful deconstructions
     of the  paper already up on other sites,
     mike
     On Jul 23, 2009, at 11:01 PM, Jim Salinger wrote:

     I am tied up next week, but could frame something up the
     following  week which , I hope would be multi-authored. It would
     be quite good  to have a rebuttal from the same Department at
     Uni of Auckland  (which Glenn McGregor of IJC is director of)!
     I haven't had tne oportunity to download the text here in the
     Cook  Islands, so this would give me the opportunity to do that.
     Who else  wants to join in??
     Jim
     Quoting Kevin Trenberth [25]<trenbert@ucar.edu>:

     I am on vacation today and don't have the time.  I have been
     on  travel the
     past 4 weeks (including AR5 IPCC scoping mtg); the NCAR summer
     Colloquium
     is coming up in a week and then I am off to Oz and NZ for 3 weeks
     (GEWEX/iLeaps, CEOP) and I have an oceanobs'09 plenary paper to
     do.
     Kevin

     a formal comment to JGR seems like a worthwhile undertaking
     here.
     contrarians will continue to cite the paper regardless of
     whether or
     not its been rebutted, but for the purpose of future scientific
     assessments, its important that this be formally rebutted in
     the  peer-
     reviewed literature.
     mike
     On Jul 23, 2009, at 9:05 PM, Jim Salinger wrote:

     Hi All
     Thanks for the pro-activeness. Is there an opportunity to
     write a
     letter to JGR pointing out the junk science in this??....if
     it is
     not rebutted, then all sceptics will use this to justify their
     position.
     Jim
     Quoting Michael Mann [26]<mann@meteo.psu.edu>:

     2nd email
     ________
     Thanks Kevin, hadn't even noticed that in my terse initial
     skim of
     it.  yes--that makes things even worse than my initial
     impression.
     this is a truly horrible paper. one wonders who the editor
     was,
     and  what he/she was thinking (or drinking),
     m
     On Jul 23, 2009, at 3:51 PM, Kevin Trenberth wrote:

     I just looked briefly at the paper.  Their relationships use
     derivatives
     of the series.  Well derivatives are equivalent to a high
     pass
     filter,
     that is to say it filters out all the low frequency
     variability  and
     trends.
     If one takes y= A sin wt
     and does a differentiation one gets
     dy = Aw cos wt.
     So the amplitude goes from A to Aw where w is the frequency
     =  2*pi/
     L  where
     L is the period.
     So the response to this procedure is to reduce periods of 10
     years  by a
     factor of 5 compared with periods of 2 years, or 20 and 50
     years get
     reduced by factors of 10 an 25 relative to two year periods.
     i.e.  Their
     procedure is designed to only analyse the interannual
     variability
     not the
     trends.
     Kevin

     hi Seth, you always seem to catch me at airports. only got
     a few
     minutes. took a cursory look at the paper,  and it has all
     the
     worry
     signs of extremely bad science and scholarship. JGR is a
     legitimate
     journal, but some extremely bad papers have slipped
     through the
     cracks
     in recent years, and this is another one of them.
     first of all, the authors use two deeply flawed datasets
     that
     understate the warming trends: the Christy and Spencer
     MSU  data and
     uncorrected radiosonde temperature estimates. There were
     a  series
     of
     three key papers published in Science a few years ago, by
     Mears
     et  al,
     Santer et al, and Sherwood et al.
     see Gavin's excellent RealClimate article on this:
     [27]http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2005/08/et-tu-lt/
     these papers collectively showed that both datasets were
     deeply
     flawed
     and understate actual tropospheric temperature trends. I
     find it
     absolutely remarkable that this paper could get through a
     serious
     review w/out referencing any 3 of these critical papers-- papers
     whose
     findings render that conclusions of the current article
     completely
     invalid!
     The Christy and Spencer MSU satellite-derived tropospheric
     temperature
     estimates contained two errors--a sign error and an
     algebraic
     error--
     that had the net effect of artificially removing the
     warming  trend.
     Christy and Spencer continue to produce revised versions
     of  the MSU
     dataset, but they always seem to show less warming than
     every  other
     independent assessment, and their estimates are largely
     disregarded  by
     serious assessments such as that done by the NAS and the
     IPCC.
     So these guys have taken biased estimates of tropospheric
     temperatures
     that have artificially too little warming trend, and then
     shown,
     quite
     unremarkably, that El Nino dominates much of what is left
     (the
     interannual variability).
     the paper has absolutely no implications that I can see at
     all
     for  the
     role of natural variability on the observed warming trend
     of  recent
     decades.
     other far more careful analyses (a paper by David Thompson
     of  CSU,
     Phil Jones, and others published in Nature more than  year
     ago)
     used
     proper, widely-accepted surface temperature data to
     estimate the
     influence of natural factors (El Nino and volcanos) on
     the  surface
     temperature record. their analysis was so careful and
     clever  that
     it
     detected a post-world war II error in sea surface
     temperature
     measurements (that yields artificial cooling during the
     mid  1940s)
     that had never before been discovered in the global surface
     temperature record. needless to say, they removed that
     error  too.
     and
     the correct record, removing influences of ENSO,
     volcanoes, and
     even
     this newly detected error, reveal that a robust warming of
     global  mean
     surface temperature over the past century of a little
     less  than 1C
     which has nothing to do w/ volcanic influences or ENSO
     influences.  the
     dominant source of the overall warming, as concluded in
     every
     legitimate  major scientific assessment, is anthropogenic
     influences
     (human greenhouse gas concentrations w/ some offsetting
     cooling
     due  to
     sulphate aerosols).
     this later paper provides absolutely nothing to cast that in
     doubt.  it
     uses a flawed set of surface temperature measurements for
     which the
     trend has been artificially suppressed, to show that whats
     left
     over
     (interannual variability) is due to natural influences. duh!
     its a joke! and the aptly named Mark "Morano" has fallen
     for it!
     m
     On Jul 23, 2009, at 11:54 AM, Borenstein, Seth wrote:

     Kevin, Gavin, Mike,
     It's Seth again. Attached is a paper in JGR today that
     Marc  Morano
     is hyping wildly. It's in a legit journal. Whatchya think?
     Seth
     Seth Borenstein
     Associated Press Science Writer
     [28]sborenstein@ap.org
     The Associated Press, 1100 13th St. NW, Suite 700,
     Washington, DC
     20005-4076
     202-641-9454
     The information contained in this communication is
     intended for
     the
     use
     of the designated recipients named above. If the reader
     of this
     communication is not the intended recipient, you are hereby
     notified
     that you have received this communication in error, and
     that  any
     review,
     dissemination, distribution or copying of this
     communication is
     strictly
     prohibited. If you have received this communication in
     error,
     please
     notify The Associated Press immediately by telephone at
     +1-212-621-1898
     and delete this e-mail. Thank you.
     [IP_US_DISC]
     msk dccc60c6d2c3a6438f0cf467d9a4938
     <McLean2008JD011637.pdf>

     On Jul 23, 2009, at 7:57 PM, Jim Salinger wrote:

     Precisely.
     Mike Mann: You better rush something up on RealClimate. Jim,
     Brett,  myself and maybe others will have to deal with the
     local
     fallout  this will cause...oh dear......
     Bye the way June was the warmest month on record for the
     oceans
     according tro NOAA
     Jim
     Quoting Kevin Trenberth [29]<trenbert@ucar.edu>:

     Exactly
     They use 2 datasets that are deficient in the first place
     and
     then  they
     use derivatives: differentiation is a high pass filter,
     and so
     they  show
     what we have long known that ENSO accounts for a lot of high
     frequency
     variability.  It should not have been published
     Kevin

     kia orana from Rarotonga
     How the h... did this get accepted!!
     Jim
     Dominion today {24/7/09]
     Nature blamed over warming - describing recently
     published  paper
     in
     JGR by Chris de Freitas, Bob Carter and J McLean, and
     including
     comment by J Salinger  "little new"
     McLean J. D., C. R. de Freitas, R. M. Carter (2009),
     Influence
     of  the
     Southern Oscillation on tropospheric temperature, J.
     Geophys.
     Res.,
     114, D14104, doi:10.1029/2008JD011637.
     paper at
     [30]http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2009/2008JD011637.shtml
     --
     Associate Professor Jim Salinger
     School of Geography and Environmental Science
     University of Auckland
     Private Bag 92 019
     Auckland, New Zealand
     Tel: + 64 9 373 7599 ext 88473
     ----------------------------------------------------------------
     This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging
     Program.

     ___________________
     Kevin Trenberth
     Climate Analysis Section, NCAR
     PO Box 3000
     Boulder CO 80307
     ph 303 497 1318
     [31]http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/cas/trenbert.html

     ----------------------------------------------------------------
     This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging
     Program.

     --
     Michael E. Mann
     Professor
     Director, Earth System Science Center (ESSC)
     Department of Meteorology                 Phone: (814)
     863-4075
     503 Walker Building                              FAX:   (814)
     865-3663
     The Pennsylvania State University     email:  [32]mann@psu.edu
     University Park, PA 16802-5013
     website: [33]http://www.meteo.psu.edu/~mann/Mann/index.html
     "Dire Predictions" book site:
     [34]http://www.essc.psu.edu/essc_web/news/DirePredictions/index.html

     ----------------------------------------------------------------
     This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging
     Program.

     --
     Michael E. Mann
     Professor
     Director, Earth System Science Center (ESSC)
     Department of Meteorology                 Phone: (814) 863-4075
     503 Walker Building                              FAX:   (814)
     865-3663
     The Pennsylvania State University     email:  [35]mann@psu.edu
     University Park, PA 16802-5013
     website: [36]http://www.meteo.psu.edu/~mann/Mann/index.html
     "Dire Predictions" book site:
     [37]http://www.essc.psu.edu/essc_web/news/DirePredictions/index.html

     ___________________
     Kevin Trenberth
     Climate Analysis Section, NCAR
     PO Box 3000
     Boulder CO 80307
     ph 303 497 1318
     [38]http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/cas/trenbert.html

     ----------------------------------------------------------------
     This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.

     --
     Michael E. Mann
     Professor
     Director, Earth System Science Center (ESSC)
     Department of Meteorology                 Phone: (814) 863-4075
     503 Walker Building                              FAX:   (814)
     865-3663
     The Pennsylvania State University     email:  [39]mann@psu.edu
     University Park, PA 16802-5013
     website: [40]http://www.meteo.psu.edu/~mann/Mann/index.html
     "Dire Predictions" book site:
     [41]http://www.essc.psu.edu/essc_web/news/DirePredictions/index.html

     ----------------------------------------------------------------
     This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.

     --
     Michael E. Mann
     Professor
     Director, Earth System Science Center (ESSC)
     Department of Meteorology                 Phone: (814) 863-4075
     503 Walker Building                              FAX:   (814)
     865-3663
     The Pennsylvania State University     email:  [42]mann@psu.edu
     University Park, PA 16802-5013
     website: [43]http://www.meteo.psu.edu/~mann/Mann/index.html
     "Dire Predictions" book site:
     [44]http://www.essc.psu.edu/essc_web/news/DirePredictions/index.html

     Prof. Phil Jones
     Climatic Research Unit        Telephone +44 (0) 1603 592090
     School of Environmental Sciences    Fax +44 (0) 1603 507784
     University of East Anglia
     Norwich                          Email    [45]p.jones@uea.ac.uk
     NR4 7TJ
     UK
     ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
     <Parker-on-Pielke-2009.pdf><Jones_ENSO_1990.pdf><wigley2001.pdf>

     --
     Michael E. Mann
     Professor
     Director, Earth System Science Center (ESSC)
     Department of Meteorology                 Phone: (814) 863-4075
     503 Walker Building                              FAX:   (814) 865-3663
     The Pennsylvania State University     email:  [46]mann@psu.edu
     University Park, PA 16802-5013
     website: [47]http://www.meteo.psu.edu/~mann/Mann/index.html
     "Dire Predictions" book site:
     [48]http://www.essc.psu.edu/essc_web/news/DirePredictions/index.html
     thanks Phil,
     this is very helpful and reaffirms what we've identified as some of the main points that
     need to be covered in a formal response. I've taken the liberty of copying in a couple
     other colleagues who have been looking into this. Grant Foster was the first author on a
     response to a similarly bad paper by Schwartz that was published some time ago, and has
     been doing a number of analyses aimed at demonstrating the key problems in McClean et
     al.
     I've suggested that Grant sent out a draft of the response when it is ready to the
     broader group of people who have been included in these exchanges for feedback and
     potential co-authorship,
     mike
     p.s. Santer et al paper still didn't come through in your followup message. Can you post
     in on ftp where it can be downloaded?
     On Jul 28, 2009, at 5:15 AM, Phil Jones wrote:

      Jim et al,
          Having now read the paper in a moment of peace and quiet, there are a few things
      to bear in mind. The authors of the original will have a right of reply, so need to
      ensure that they don't have anything to come back on. From doing the attached a
      year or so ago, there is a word limit and also it is important to concentrate only
      on a few key points. As we all know there is so much wrong with the paper, it
      won't be difficult to come up with a few, but it does need to be just two or three.
          The three aspects I would emphasize are
      1. The first difference type filtering. Para 14 implies that they smooth the series
      with a 12 month running mean, then subtract the value in Jan 1980 from that in
      Jan 1979, then Feb 1980 from Feb 1979 and so on.  As we know this removes
      any long-term trend.
        The running mean also probably distorts the phase, so this is possibly why
      they get different lags from others. Using running means also enhances the
      explained variance. Perhaps we should repeat the exercise without the smoothing.
      2. Figure 4 and Figure 1 show the unsmoothed GTTA series. These clearly have a
      trend. Perhaps show the residual after extracting the ENSO part.
      3. They do the same first difference on the smoothed SOI. The SOI doesn't explain
      the climate jump in the 1976/77 period. Their arguments in para 30 are all wrong.
       A few minor points
        - there are some negative R*R values just after equation 3.
        - I'm sure Tom Wigley wouldn't have proposed El Nino events occurring after
     volcanoes!
          Attached this paper as well. From a quick read it doesn't say what is purported -
     in fact
          it seems to show clearly how the analysis should have been done.
        - there is a paper by Ben Santer (more recent) where he applies the same type
      of extraction procedure to models. I'll send this separately as it is large. In case it
      is too large here is the reference.
      Santer, B.D., Wigley, T.M.L., Doutriaux, C., Boyle, J.S., Hansen, J.E., Jones, P.D.,
     Meehl, G.A., Roeckner, E., Sengupta, S. and Taylor K.E., 2001:  Accounting for the
     effects of volcanoes and ENSO in comparisons of modeled and observed temperature
     trends.  Journal of Geophysical Research 106, 28033-28059.
      Finally I've attached a paper I wrote in 1990, where I did something similar to
      what they did. I looked at residuals from a Gaussian filter, and I added
      the smoothed data back afterwards. I was working at the annual timescale
      and I did have many more years.
      Cheers
      Phil
     At 00:19 25/07/2009, Michael Mann wrote:

     Hi Jim,
     Grant Foster ('Tamino') did a nice job in a previous response
     (attached) we wrote to a similarly bad article by Schwartz which got a
     lot of play in contrarian circles.
     since he's already done some of the initial work in debunking this, I
     sent him an email asking hi if we was interested in spearheading a
     similar effort w/ this one.
     let me get back to folks after I've heard back from him, and we can
     discuss possible strategy for moving this forward,
     mike
     On Jul 24, 2009, at 6:11 PM, Jim Salinger wrote:

     Kia orana All from the Tropical South Pacific
     Yes, Phil, a bit like 'A midsummer night's dream!'. and Gavin
     Tamino's bang up job is great, And good that you go up with stuff on
     Real Climate, Mike. As Kevin is preoccupied, for the scientific
     record we need a rebuttal somewhere pulled together. Who wants to
     join in on the multiauthored effort?? I am happy to coordinate it.
     Return to 'winter' this evening after enjoying a balmy south east
     trades and sunny dry 24 C in the Cook Islands.
     Jim
     Quoting Michael Mann <[49]mann@meteo.psu.edu>:

     folks, we're going to go up w/ something brief on RealClimate
     later  today, mostly just linking to other useful deconstructions
     of the  paper already up on other sites,
     mike
     On Jul 23, 2009, at 11:01 PM, Jim Salinger wrote:

     I am tied up next week, but could frame something up the
     following  week which , I hope would be multi-authored. It would
     be quite good  to have a rebuttal from the same Department at Uni
     of Auckland  (which Glenn McGregor of IJC is director of)!
     I haven't had tne oportunity to download the text here in the
     Cook  Islands, so this would give me the opportunity to do that.
     Who else  wants to join in??
     Jim
     Quoting Kevin Trenberth <[50]trenbert@ucar.edu>:

     I am on vacation today and don't have the time.  I have been on
     travel the
     past 4 weeks (including AR5 IPCC scoping mtg); the NCAR summer
     Colloquium
     is coming up in a week and then I am off to Oz and NZ for 3 weeks
     (GEWEX/iLeaps, CEOP) and I have an oceanobs'09 plenary paper to do.
     Kevin

     a formal comment to JGR seems like a worthwhile undertaking here.
     contrarians will continue to cite the paper regardless of
     whether or
     not its been rebutted, but for the purpose of future scientific
     assessments, its important that this be formally rebutted in
     the  peer-
     reviewed literature.
     mike
     On Jul 23, 2009, at 9:05 PM, Jim Salinger wrote:

     Hi All
     Thanks for the pro-activeness. Is there an opportunity to write a
     letter to JGR pointing out the junk science in this??....if it is
     not rebutted, then all sceptics will use this to justify their
     position.
     Jim
     Quoting Michael Mann <[51]mann@meteo.psu.edu>:

     2nd email
     ________
     Thanks Kevin, hadn't even noticed that in my terse initial
     skim of
     it.  yes--that makes things even worse than my initial
     impression.
     this is a truly horrible paper. one wonders who the editor was,
     and  what he/she was thinking (or drinking),
     m
     On Jul 23, 2009, at 3:51 PM, Kevin Trenberth wrote:

     I just looked briefly at the paper.  Their relationships use
     derivatives
     of the series.  Well derivatives are equivalent to a high pass
     filter,
     that is to say it filters out all the low frequency
     variability  and
     trends.
     If one takes y= A sin wt
     and does a differentiation one gets
     dy = Aw cos wt.
     So the amplitude goes from A to Aw where w is the frequency
     =  2*pi/
     L  where
     L is the period.
     So the response to this procedure is to reduce periods of 10
     years  by a
     factor of 5 compared with periods of 2 years, or 20 and 50
     years get
     reduced by factors of 10 an 25 relative to two year periods.
     i.e.  Their
     procedure is designed to only analyse the interannual
     variability
     not the
     trends.
     Kevin

     hi Seth, you always seem to catch me at airports. only got a
     few
     minutes. took a cursory look at the paper,  and it has all the
     worry
     signs of extremely bad science and scholarship. JGR is a
     legitimate
     journal, but some extremely bad papers have slipped through
     the
     cracks
     in recent years, and this is another one of them.
     first of all, the authors use two deeply flawed datasets that
     understate the warming trends: the Christy and Spencer MSU
     data and
     uncorrected radiosonde temperature estimates. There were a
     series
     of
     three key papers published in Science a few years ago, by
     Mears
     et  al,
     Santer et al, and Sherwood et al.
     see Gavin's excellent RealClimate article on this:
     [52]http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2005/08/et-tu- lt/
     these papers collectively showed that both datasets were
     deeply
     flawed
     and understate actual tropospheric temperature trends. I
     find it
     absolutely remarkable that this paper could get through a
     serious
     review w/out referencing any 3 of these critical papers-- papers
     whose
     findings render that conclusions of the current article
     completely
     invalid!
     The Christy and Spencer MSU satellite-derived tropospheric
     temperature
     estimates contained two errors--a sign error and an algebraic
     error--
     that had the net effect of artificially removing the
     warming  trend.
     Christy and Spencer continue to produce revised versions of
     the MSU
     dataset, but they always seem to show less warming than
     every  other
     independent assessment, and their estimates are largely
     disregarded  by
     serious assessments such as that done by the NAS and the IPCC.
     So these guys have taken biased estimates of tropospheric
     temperatures
     that have artificially too little warming trend, and then
     shown,
     quite
     unremarkably, that El Nino dominates much of what is left (the
     interannual variability).
     the paper has absolutely no implications that I can see at all
     for  the
     role of natural variability on the observed warming trend
     of  recent
     decades.
     other far more careful analyses (a paper by David Thompson
     of  CSU,
     Phil Jones, and others published in Nature more than  year
     ago)
     used
     proper, widely-accepted surface temperature data to estimate
     the
     influence of natural factors (El Nino and volcanos) on the
     surface
     temperature record. their analysis was so careful and
     clever  that
     it
     detected a post-world war II error in sea surface temperature
     measurements (that yields artificial cooling during the mid
     1940s)
     that had never before been discovered in the global surface
     temperature record. needless to say, they removed that
     error  too.
     and
     the correct record, removing influences of ENSO, volcanoes,
     and
     even
     this newly detected error, reveal that a robust warming of
     global  mean
     surface temperature over the past century of a little less
     than 1C
     which has nothing to do w/ volcanic influences or ENSO
     influences.  the
     dominant source of the overall warming, as concluded in every
     legitimate  major scientific assessment, is anthropogenic
     influences
     (human greenhouse gas concentrations w/ some offsetting
     cooling
     due  to
     sulphate aerosols).
     this later paper provides absolutely nothing to cast that in
     doubt.  it
     uses a flawed set of surface temperature measurements for
     which the
     trend has been artificially suppressed, to show that whats
     left
     over
     (interannual variability) is due to natural influences. duh!
     its a joke! and the aptly named Mark "Morano" has fallen for
     it!
     m
     On Jul 23, 2009, at 11:54 AM, Borenstein, Seth wrote:

     Kevin, Gavin, Mike,
     It's Seth again. Attached is a paper in JGR today that
     Marc  Morano
     is hyping wildly. It's in a legit journal. Whatchya think?
     Seth
     Seth Borenstein
     Associated Press Science Writer
     [53]sborenstein@ap.org
     The Associated Press, 1100 13th St. NW, Suite 700,
     Washington, DC
     20005-4076
     202-641-9454
     The information contained in this communication is intended
     for
     the
     use
     of the designated recipients named above. If the reader of
     this
     communication is not the intended recipient, you are hereby
     notified
     that you have received this communication in error, and
     that  any
     review,
     dissemination, distribution or copying of this
     communication is
     strictly
     prohibited. If you have received this communication in error,
     please
     notify The Associated Press immediately by telephone at
     +1-212-621-1898
     and delete this e-mail. Thank you.
     [IP_US_DISC]
     msk dccc60c6d2c3a6438f0cf467d9a4938
     <McLean2008JD011637.pdf>

     On Jul 23, 2009, at 7:57 PM, Jim Salinger wrote:

     Precisely.
     Mike Mann: You better rush something up on RealClimate. Jim,
     Brett,  myself and maybe others will have to deal with the
     local
     fallout  this will cause...oh dear......
     Bye the way June was the warmest month on record for the oceans
     according tro NOAA
     Jim
     Quoting Kevin Trenberth <[54]trenbert@ucar.edu>:

     Exactly
     They use 2 datasets that are deficient in the first place and
     then  they
     use derivatives: differentiation is a high pass filter, and so
     they  show
     what we have long known that ENSO accounts for a lot of high
     frequency
     variability.  It should not have been published
     Kevin

     kia orana from Rarotonga
     How the h... did this get accepted!!
     Jim
     Dominion today {24/7/09]
     Nature blamed over warming - describing recently published
     paper
     in
     JGR by Chris de Freitas, Bob Carter and J McLean, and
     including
     comment by J Salinger  "little new"
     McLean J. D., C. R. de Freitas, R. M. Carter (2009),
     Influence
     of  the
     Southern Oscillation on tropospheric temperature, J. Geophys.
     Res.,
     114, D14104, doi:10.1029/2008JD011637.
     paper at
     [55]http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2009/2008JD011637.shtml
     --
     Associate Professor Jim Salinger
     School of Geography and Environmental Science
     University of Auckland
     Private Bag 92 019
     Auckland, New Zealand
     Tel: + 64 9 373 7599 ext 88473
     ----------------------------------------------------------------
     This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging
     Program.

     ___________________
     Kevin Trenberth
     Climate Analysis Section, NCAR
     PO Box 3000
     Boulder CO 80307
     ph 303 497 1318
     [56]http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/cas/trenbert.html

     ----------------------------------------------------------------
     This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging
     Program.

     --
     Michael E. Mann
     Professor
     Director, Earth System Science Center (ESSC)
     Department of Meteorology                 Phone: (814) 863-4075
     503 Walker Building                              FAX:   (814)
     865-3663
     The Pennsylvania State University     email:  [57]mann@psu.edu
     University Park, PA 16802-5013
     website: [58]http://www.meteo.psu.edu/~mann/Mann/index.html
     "Dire Predictions" book site:
     [59]http://www.essc.psu.edu/essc_web/news/DirePredictions/index.html

     ----------------------------------------------------------------
     This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.

     --
     Michael E. Mann
     Professor
     Director, Earth System Science Center (ESSC)
     Department of Meteorology                 Phone: (814) 863-4075
     503 Walker Building                              FAX:   (814)
     865-3663
     The Pennsylvania State University     email:  [60]mann@psu.edu
     University Park, PA 16802-5013
     website: [61]http://www.meteo.psu.edu/~mann/Mann/index.html
     "Dire Predictions" book site:
     [62]http://www.essc.psu.edu/essc_web/news/DirePredictions/index.html

     ___________________
     Kevin Trenberth
     Climate Analysis Section, NCAR
     PO Box 3000
     Boulder CO 80307
     ph 303 497 1318
     [63]http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/cas/trenbert.html

     ----------------------------------------------------------------
     This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.

     --
     Michael E. Mann
     Professor
     Director, Earth System Science Center (ESSC)
     Department of Meteorology                 Phone: (814) 863-4075
     503 Walker Building                              FAX:   (814)
     865-3663
     The Pennsylvania State University     email:  [64]mann@psu.edu
     University Park, PA 16802-5013
     website: [65]http://www.meteo.psu.edu/~mann/Mann/index.html
     "Dire Predictions" book site:
     [66]http://www.essc.psu.edu/essc_web/news/DirePredictions/index.html

     ----------------------------------------------------------------
     This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.

     --
     Michael E. Mann
     Professor
     Director, Earth System Science Center (ESSC)
     Department of Meteorology                 Phone: (814) 863-4075
     503 Walker Building                              FAX:   (814) 865-3663
     The Pennsylvania State University     email:  [67]mann@psu.edu
     University Park, PA 16802-5013
     website: [68]http://www.meteo.psu.edu/~mann/Mann/index.html
     "Dire Predictions" book site:
     [69]http://www.essc.psu.edu/essc_web/news/DirePredictions/index.html
     Hi Jim,
     Grant Foster ('Tamino') did a nice job in a previous response (attached) we wrote to a
     similarly bad article by Schwartz which got a lot of play in contrarian circles.
     since he's already done some of the initial work in debunking this, I sent him an email
     asking hi if we was interested in spearheading a similar effort w/ this one.
     let me get back to folks after I've heard back from him, and we can discuss possible
     strategy for moving this forward,
     mike
     On Jul 24, 2009, at 6:11 PM, Jim Salinger wrote:

     Kia orana All from the Tropical South Pacific
     Yes, Phil, a bit like 'A midsummer night's dream!'. and Gavin Tamino's bang up job is
     great, And good that you go up with stuff on Real Climate, Mike. As Kevin is
     preoccupied, for the scientific record we need a rebuttal somewhere pulled together. Who
     wants to join in on the multiauthored effort?? I am happy to coordinate it.
     Return to 'winter' this evening after enjoying a balmy south east trades and sunny dry
     24 C in the Cook Islands.
     Jim
     Quoting Michael Mann <[70]mann@meteo.psu.edu>:

     folks, we're going to go up w/ something brief on RealClimate later  today, mostly just
     linking to other useful deconstructions of the  paper already up on other sites,
     mike
     On Jul 23, 2009, at 11:01 PM, Jim Salinger wrote:

     I am tied up next week, but could frame something up the following  week which , I hope
     would be multi-authored. It would be quite good  to have a rebuttal from the same
     Department at Uni of Auckland  (which Glenn McGregor of IJC is director of)!
     I haven't had tne oportunity to download the text here in the Cook  Islands, so this
     would give me the opportunity to do that. Who else  wants to join in??
     Jim
     Quoting Kevin Trenberth <[71]trenbert@ucar.edu>:

     I am on vacation today and don't have the time.  I have been on  travel the
     past 4 weeks (including AR5 IPCC scoping mtg); the NCAR summer  Colloquium
     is coming up in a week and then I am off to Oz and NZ for 3 weeks
     (GEWEX/iLeaps, CEOP) and I have an oceanobs'09 plenary paper to do.
     Kevin

     a formal comment to JGR seems like a worthwhile undertaking here.
     contrarians will continue to cite the paper regardless of whether or
     not its been rebutted, but for the purpose of future scientific
     assessments, its important that this be formally rebutted in the  peer-
     reviewed literature.
     mike
     On Jul 23, 2009, at 9:05 PM, Jim Salinger wrote:

     Hi All
     Thanks for the pro-activeness. Is there an opportunity to write a
     letter to JGR pointing out the junk science in this??....if it is
     not rebutted, then all sceptics will use this to justify their
     position.
     Jim
     Quoting Michael Mann <[72]mann@meteo.psu.edu>:

     2nd email
     ________
     Thanks Kevin, hadn't even noticed that in my terse initial skim of
     it.  yes--that makes things even worse than my initial impression.
     this is a truly horrible paper. one wonders who the editor was,
     and  what he/she was thinking (or drinking),
     m
     On Jul 23, 2009, at 3:51 PM, Kevin Trenberth wrote:

     I just looked briefly at the paper.  Their relationships use
     derivatives
     of the series.  Well derivatives are equivalent to a high pass
     filter,
     that is to say it filters out all the low frequency variability  and
     trends.
     If one takes y= A sin wt
     and does a differentiation one gets
     dy = Aw cos wt.
     So the amplitude goes from A to Aw where w is the frequency =  2*pi/
     L  where
     L is the period.
     So the response to this procedure is to reduce periods of 10
     years  by a
     factor of 5 compared with periods of 2 years, or 20 and 50  years get
     reduced by factors of 10 an 25 relative to two year periods.
     i.e.  Their
     procedure is designed to only analyse the interannual variability
     not the
     trends.
     Kevin

     hi Seth, you always seem to catch me at airports. only got a few
     minutes. took a cursory look at the paper,  and it has all the
     worry
     signs of extremely bad science and scholarship. JGR is a  legitimate
     journal, but some extremely bad papers have slipped through the
     cracks
     in recent years, and this is another one of them.
     first of all, the authors use two deeply flawed datasets that
     understate the warming trends: the Christy and Spencer MSU  data and
     uncorrected radiosonde temperature estimates. There were a  series
     of
     three key papers published in Science a few years ago, by Mears
     et  al,
     Santer et al, and Sherwood et al.
     see Gavin's excellent RealClimate article on this:
     [73]http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2005/08/et-tu-lt/
     these papers collectively showed that both datasets were deeply
     flawed
     and understate actual tropospheric temperature trends. I find it
     absolutely remarkable that this paper could get through a  serious
     review w/out referencing any 3 of these critical papers--papers
     whose
     findings render that conclusions of the current article  completely
     invalid!
     The Christy and Spencer MSU satellite-derived tropospheric
     temperature
     estimates contained two errors--a sign error and an algebraic
     error--
     that had the net effect of artificially removing the warming  trend.
     Christy and Spencer continue to produce revised versions of  the MSU
     dataset, but they always seem to show less warming than every  other
     independent assessment, and their estimates are largely
     disregarded  by
     serious assessments such as that done by the NAS and the IPCC.
     So these guys have taken biased estimates of tropospheric
     temperatures
     that have artificially too little warming trend, and then shown,
     quite
     unremarkably, that El Nino dominates much of what is left (the
     interannual variability).
     the paper has absolutely no implications that I can see at all
     for  the
     role of natural variability on the observed warming trend of  recent
     decades.
     other far more careful analyses (a paper by David Thompson of  CSU,
     Phil Jones, and others published in Nature more than  year ago)
     used
     proper, widely-accepted surface temperature data to estimate the
     influence of natural factors (El Nino and volcanos) on the  surface
     temperature record. their analysis was so careful and clever  that
     it
     detected a post-world war II error in sea surface temperature
     measurements (that yields artificial cooling during the mid  1940s)
     that had never before been discovered in the global surface
     temperature record. needless to say, they removed that error  too.
     and
     the correct record, removing influences of ENSO, volcanoes, and
     even
     this newly detected error, reveal that a robust warming of
     global  mean
     surface temperature over the past century of a little less  than 1C
     which has nothing to do w/ volcanic influences or ENSO
     influences.  the
     dominant source of the overall warming, as concluded in every
     legitimate  major scientific assessment, is anthropogenic
     influences
     (human greenhouse gas concentrations w/ some offsetting cooling
     due  to
     sulphate aerosols).
     this later paper provides absolutely nothing to cast that in
     doubt.  it
     uses a flawed set of surface temperature measurements for  which the
     trend has been artificially suppressed, to show that whats left
     over
     (interannual variability) is due to natural influences. duh!
     its a joke! and the aptly named Mark "Morano" has fallen for it!
     m
     On Jul 23, 2009, at 11:54 AM, Borenstein, Seth wrote:

     Kevin, Gavin, Mike,
     It's Seth again. Attached is a paper in JGR today that Marc  Morano
     is hyping wildly. It's in a legit journal. Whatchya think?
     Seth
     Seth Borenstein
     Associated Press Science Writer
     [74]sborenstein@ap.org
     The Associated Press, 1100 13th St. NW, Suite 700,  Washington, DC
     20005-4076
     202-641-9454
     The information contained in this communication is intended for
     the
     use
     of the designated recipients named above. If the reader of this
     communication is not the intended recipient, you are hereby
     notified
     that you have received this communication in error, and that  any
     review,
     dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is
     strictly
     prohibited. If you have received this communication in error,
     please
     notify The Associated Press immediately by telephone at
     +1-212-621-1898
     and delete this e-mail. Thank you.
     [IP_US_DISC]
     msk dccc60c6d2c3a6438f0cf467d9a4938
     <McLean2008JD011637.pdf>

     On Jul 23, 2009, at 7:57 PM, Jim Salinger wrote:

     Precisely.
     Mike Mann: You better rush something up on RealClimate. Jim,
     Brett,  myself and maybe others will have to deal with the local
     fallout  this will cause...oh dear......
     Bye the way June was the warmest month on record for the oceans
     according tro NOAA
     Jim
     Quoting Kevin Trenberth <[75]trenbert@ucar.edu>:

     Exactly
     They use 2 datasets that are deficient in the first place and
     then  they
     use derivatives: differentiation is a high pass filter, and so
     they  show
     what we have long known that ENSO accounts for a lot of high
     frequency
     variability.  It should not have been published
     Kevin

     kia orana from Rarotonga
     How the h... did this get accepted!!
     Jim
     Dominion today {24/7/09]
     Nature blamed over warming - describing recently published  paper
     in
     JGR by Chris de Freitas, Bob Carter and J McLean, and including
     comment by J Salinger  "little new"
     McLean J. D., C. R. de Freitas, R. M. Carter (2009), Influence
     of  the
     Southern Oscillation on tropospheric temperature, J. Geophys.
     Res.,
     114, D14104, doi:10.1029/2008JD011637.
     paper at
     [76]http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2009/2008JD011637.shtml
     --
     Associate Professor Jim Salinger
     School of Geography and Environmental Science
     University of Auckland
     Private Bag 92 019
     Auckland, New Zealand
     Tel: + 64 9 373 7599 ext 88473
     ----------------------------------------------------------------
     This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging  Program.

     ___________________
     Kevin Trenberth
     Climate Analysis Section, NCAR
     PO Box 3000
     Boulder CO 80307
     ph 303 497 1318
     [77]http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/cas/trenbert.html

     ----------------------------------------------------------------
     This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.

     --
     Michael E. Mann
     Professor
     Director, Earth System Science Center (ESSC)
     Department of Meteorology                 Phone: (814) 863-4075
     503 Walker Building                              FAX:   (814)
     865-3663
     The Pennsylvania State University     email:  [78]mann@psu.edu
     University Park, PA 16802-5013
     website: [79]http://www.meteo.psu.edu/~mann/Mann/index.html
     "Dire Predictions" book site:
     [80]http://www.essc.psu.edu/essc_web/news/DirePredictions/index.html

     ----------------------------------------------------------------
     This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.

     --
     Michael E. Mann
     Professor
     Director, Earth System Science Center (ESSC)
     Department of Meteorology                 Phone: (814) 863-4075
     503 Walker Building                              FAX:   (814)  865-3663
     The Pennsylvania State University     email:  [81]mann@psu.edu
     University Park, PA 16802-5013
     website: [82]http://www.meteo.psu.edu/~mann/Mann/index.html
     "Dire Predictions" book site:
     [83]http://www.essc.psu.edu/essc_web/news/DirePredictions/index.html

     ___________________
     Kevin Trenberth
     Climate Analysis Section, NCAR
     PO Box 3000
     Boulder CO 80307
     ph 303 497 1318
     [84]http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/cas/trenbert.html

     ----------------------------------------------------------------
     This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.

     --
     Michael E. Mann
     Professor
     Director, Earth System Science Center (ESSC)
     Department of Meteorology                 Phone: (814) 863-4075
     503 Walker Building                              FAX:   (814) 865-3663
     The Pennsylvania State University     email:  [85]mann@psu.edu
     University Park, PA 16802-5013
     website: [86]http://www.meteo.psu.edu/~mann/Mann/index.html
     "Dire Predictions" book site:
     [87]http://www.essc.psu.edu/essc_web/news/DirePredictions/index.html

     ----------------------------------------------------------------
     This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.

     --
     Michael E. Mann
     Professor
     Director, Earth System Science Center (ESSC)
     Department of Meteorology                 Phone: (814) 863-4075
     503 Walker Building                              FAX:   (814) 865-3663
     The Pennsylvania State University     email:  [88]mann@psu.edu
     University Park, PA 16802-5013
     website: [89]http://www.meteo.psu.edu/~mann/Mann/index.html
     "Dire Predictions" book site:
     [90]http://www.essc.psu.edu/essc_web/news/DirePredictions/index.html

     Prof. Phil Jones
     Climatic Research Unit        Telephone +44 (0) 1603 592090
     School of Environmental Sciences    Fax +44 (0) 1603 507784
     University of East Anglia
     Norwich                          Email    [91]p.jones@uea.ac.uk
     NR4 7TJ
     UK
     ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

     <Parker-on-Pielke-2009.pdf><Jones_ENSO_1990.pdf><wigley2001.pdf>

     --
     Michael E. Mann
     Professor
     Director, Earth System Science Center (ESSC)
     Department of Meteorology                 Phone: (814) 863-4075
     503 Walker Building                              FAX:   (814) 865-3663
     The Pennsylvania State University     email:  [92]mann@psu.edu
     University Park, PA 16802-5013
     website: [93]http://www.meteo.psu.edu/~mann/Mann/index.html
     "Dire Predictions" book site:
     [94]http://www.essc.psu.edu/essc_web/news/DirePredictions/index.html

     Prof. Phil Jones
     Climatic Research Unit        Telephone +44 (0) 1603 592090
     School of Environmental Sciences    Fax +44 (0) 1603 507784
     University of East Anglia
     Norwich                          Email    [95]p.jones@uea.ac.uk
     NR4 7TJ
     UK
     ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

--
****************
Kevin E. Trenberth                  e-mail: [96]trenbert@ucar.edu
Climate Analysis Section,           [97]www.cgd.ucar.edu/cas/trenbert.html
NCAR
P. O. Box 3000,                     (303) 497 1318
Boulder, CO 80307                   (303) 497 1333 (fax)

Street address: 1850 Table Mesa Drive, Boulder, CO  80305

References

   1. http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/cas/papers/2000JD000298.pdf
   2. ftp://ftp.cru.uea.ac.uk/
   3. mailto:mann@meteo.psu.edu
   4. mailto:trenbert@ucar.edu
   5. mailto:mann@meteo.psu.edu
   6. http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2005/08/et
   7. mailto:sborenstein@ap.org
   8. mailto:trenbert@ucar.edu
   9. http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2009/2008JD011637.shtml
  10. http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/cas/trenbert.html
  11. mailto:mann@psu.edu
  12. http://www.meteo.psu.edu/%7Emann/Mann/index.html
  13. http://www.essc.psu.edu/essc_web/news/DirePredictions/index.html
  14. mailto:mann@psu.edu
  15. http://www.meteo.psu.edu/%7Emann/Mann/index.html
  16. http://www.essc.psu.edu/essc_web/news/DirePredictions/index.html
  17. http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/cas/trenbert.html
  18. mailto:mann@psu.edu
  19. http://www.meteo.psu.edu/%7Emann/Mann/index.html
  20. http://www.essc.psu.edu/essc_web/news/DirePredictions/index.html
  21. mailto:mann@psu.edu
  22. http://www.meteo.psu.edu/%7Emann/Mann/index.html
  23. http://www.essc.psu.edu/essc_web/news/DirePredictions/index.html
  24. mailto:mann@meteo.psu.edu
  25. mailto:trenbert@ucar.edu
  26. mailto:mann@meteo.psu.edu
  27. http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2005/08/et-tu-lt/
  28. mailto:sborenstein@ap.org
  29. mailto:trenbert@ucar.edu
  30. http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2009/2008JD011637.shtml
  31. http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/cas/trenbert.html
  32. mailto:mann@psu.edu
  33. http://www.meteo.psu.edu/%7Emann/Mann/index.html
  34. http://www.essc.psu.edu/essc_web/news/DirePredictions/index.html
  35. mailto:mann@psu.edu
  36. http://www.meteo.psu.edu/%7Emann/Mann/index.html
  37. http://www.essc.psu.edu/essc_web/news/DirePredictions/index.html
  38. http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/cas/trenbert.html
  39. mailto:mann@psu.edu
  40. http://www.meteo.psu.edu/%7Emann/Mann/index.html
  41. http://www.essc.psu.edu/essc_web/news/DirePredictions/index.html
  42. mailto:mann@psu.edu
  43. http://www.meteo.psu.edu/%7Emann/Mann/index.html
  44. http://www.essc.psu.edu/essc_web/news/DirePredictions/index.html
  45. mailto:p.jones@uea.ac.uk
  46. mailto:mann@psu.edu
  47. http://www.meteo.psu.edu/%7Emann/Mann/index.html
  48. http://www.essc.psu.edu/essc_web/news/DirePredictions/index.html
  49. mailto:mann@meteo.psu.edu
  50. mailto:trenbert@ucar.edu
  51. mailto:mann@meteo.psu.edu
  52. http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2005/08/et-tu
  53. mailto:sborenstein@ap.org
  54. mailto:trenbert@ucar.edu
  55. http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2009/2008JD011637.shtml
  56. http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/cas/trenbert.html
  57. mailto:mann@psu.edu
  58. http://www.meteo.psu.edu/%7Emann/Mann/index.html
  59. http://www.essc.psu.edu/essc_web/news/DirePredictions/index.html
  60. mailto:mann@psu.edu
  61. http://www.meteo.psu.edu/%7Emann/Mann/index.html
  62. http://www.essc.psu.edu/essc_web/news/DirePredictions/index.html
  63. http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/cas/trenbert.html
  64. mailto:mann@psu.edu
  65. http://www.meteo.psu.edu/%7Emann/Mann/index.html
  66. http://www.essc.psu.edu/essc_web/news/DirePredictions/index.html
  67. mailto:mann@psu.edu
  68. http://www.meteo.psu.edu/%7Emann/Mann/index.html
  69. http://www.essc.psu.edu/essc_web/news/DirePredictions/index.html
  70. mailto:mann@meteo.psu.edu
  71. mailto:trenbert@ucar.edu
  72. mailto:mann@meteo.psu.edu
  73. http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2005/08/et-tu-lt/
  74. mailto:sborenstein@ap.org
  75. mailto:trenbert@ucar.edu
  76. http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2009/2008JD011637.shtml
  77. http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/cas/trenbert.html
  78. mailto:mann@psu.edu
  79. http://www.meteo.psu.edu/%7Emann/Mann/index.html
  80. http://www.essc.psu.edu/essc_web/news/DirePredictions/index.html
  81. mailto:mann@psu.edu
  82. http://www.meteo.psu.edu/%7Emann/Mann/index.html
  83. http://www.essc.psu.edu/essc_web/news/DirePredictions/index.html
  84. http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/cas/trenbert.html
  85. mailto:mann@psu.edu
  86. http://www.meteo.psu.edu/%7Emann/Mann/index.html
  87. http://www.essc.psu.edu/essc_web/news/DirePredictions/index.html
  88. mailto:mann@psu.edu
  89. http://www.meteo.psu.edu/%7Emann/Mann/index.html
  90. http://www.essc.psu.edu/essc_web/news/DirePredictions/index.html
  91. mailto:p.jones@uea.ac.uk
  92. mailto:mann@psu.edu
  93. http://www.meteo.psu.edu/%7Emann/Mann/index.html
  94. http://www.essc.psu.edu/essc_web/news/DirePredictions/index.html
  95. mailto:p.jones@uea.ac.uk
  96. mailto:trenbert@ucar.edu
  97. http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/cas/trenbert.html

