Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Mann's Files Disappearing?

13 views
Skip to first unread message
Message has been deleted

James Acker

unread,
Dec 2, 2003, 1:57:07 PM12/2/03
to
O. Epstein <O_Ep...@att.net> wrote:
: http://www.vision.net.au/~daly/#cop9

: pcproxy.mat pcproxy.txt

I guess they're back online now, according to Daly.

Jim Acker


*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
Jim Acker
jac...@gl.umbc.edu
"Since we are assured that an all-wise Creator has observed the
most exact proportions, of number, weight, and measure, in the
make of all things, the most likely way therefore, to get any
insight into the nature of those parts of the creation, which
come within our observation, must in all reason be to number,
weigh, and measure." - Stephen Hales


Roger Coppock

unread,
Dec 3, 2003, 8:48:29 PM12/3/03
to
No, Mann's Files aren't disappearing.
Daly does not realize that these data
exist in several archives. Twit!

--

"One who joyfully guards his mind
And fears his own confusion
Can not fall.
He has found his way to peace."

-- Buddha, in the "Pali Dhammapada,"
~5th century BCE


-.-. --.- Roger Coppock (rcop...@adnc.com)


-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

Nigel Persaud

unread,
Dec 4, 2003, 9:10:19 AM12/4/03
to
The files pcproxy.txt and pcproxy.mat remain as "disappeared". They
were not located on any other server. Speaking of twits, Mann's
remaining proxy files do not exist on any other server than the
University of Virginia - and were not posted there prior to mid-2002.


Roger Coppock <rcop...@adnc.com> wrote in message news:<3FCE925B...@adnc.com>...

Josh Halpern

unread,
Dec 4, 2003, 8:33:26 PM12/4/03
to

Nigel Persaud wrote:

>The files pcproxy.txt and pcproxy.mat remain as "disappeared". They
>were not located on any other server. Speaking of twits, Mann's
>remaining proxy files do not exist on any other server than the
>University of Virginia - and were not posted there prior to mid-2002.
>

Frankly I fail to see the point. I've transferred many files by putting
them on my server for others to pick up, and after they got them,
I've removed the files. That's the normal course of business. It
is often a lot more convenient then attaching them to EMail.

Computer files are not set in concrete, nor are computer systems
normally set up to be archives of everything ever written on them.

josh halpern

Steve Schulin

unread,
Dec 4, 2003, 9:17:40 PM12/4/03
to
In article <GfRzb.1066$E9....@nwrddc02.gnilink.net>,
Josh Halpern <j.ha...@incoming.verizon.net> wrote:

> Nigel Persaud wrote:
>
> >The files pcproxy.txt and pcproxy.mat remain as "disappeared". They
> >were not located on any other server. Speaking of twits, Mann's
> >remaining proxy files do not exist on any other server than the
> >University of Virginia - and were not posted there prior to mid-2002.
> >
>
> Frankly I fail to see the point. I've transferred many files by putting
> them on my server for others to pick up, and after they got them,

> I've removed the files. That's the normal course of business. ...

It's a big deal in this case. The first public Mann response to M&M
portrayed the pcprocxy.txt file as something that was made at McIntyre's
request, in the Excel spreadsheet format McIntyre requested. The
pcproxy.txt and pcproxy.mat files on the newly disclosed ftp site show
that the ballocksed pcproxy.txt file existed long before McIntyre's
inquiry, and that it was not an Excel product.
With the subsequent vacuuming of the ftp site, we know
for a fact that Mann is quite capable of removing contrary evidence
before, or even possibly in lieu of, retracting the accusations he made
which the evidence flatly contradicts.

> ... It

David Ball

unread,
Dec 4, 2003, 9:48:10 PM12/4/03
to
On Thu, 04 Dec 2003 21:17:40 -0500, Steve Schulin
<steve....@nuclear.com> wrote:

>In article <GfRzb.1066$E9....@nwrddc02.gnilink.net>,
> Josh Halpern <j.ha...@incoming.verizon.net> wrote:
>
>> Nigel Persaud wrote:
>>
>> >The files pcproxy.txt and pcproxy.mat remain as "disappeared". They
>> >were not located on any other server. Speaking of twits, Mann's
>> >remaining proxy files do not exist on any other server than the
>> >University of Virginia - and were not posted there prior to mid-2002.
>> >
>>
>> Frankly I fail to see the point. I've transferred many files by putting
>> them on my server for others to pick up, and after they got them,
>> I've removed the files. That's the normal course of business. ...
>
>It's a big deal in this case. The first public Mann response to M&M
>portrayed the pcprocxy.txt file as something that was made at McIntyre's
>request, in the Excel spreadsheet format McIntyre requested. The
>pcproxy.txt and pcproxy.mat files on the newly disclosed ftp site show
>that the ballocksed pcproxy.txt file existed long before McIntyre's
>inquiry, and that it was not an Excel product.
>With the subsequent vacuuming of the ftp site, we know
>for a fact that Mann is quite capable of removing contrary evidence
>before, or even possibly in lieu of, retracting the accusations he made
>which the evidence flatly contradicts.

Only to you, Steve. How's YOUR analysis coming along, BTW?
Reaching any conclusions all on your lonesome? Waiting for the next
hack to tell you what to say?


David Ball

unread,
Dec 4, 2003, 9:54:06 PM12/4/03
to
On Fri, 05 Dec 2003 01:33:26 GMT, Josh Halpern
<j.ha...@incoming.verizon.net> wrote:

>
>
>Nigel Persaud wrote:
>
>>The files pcproxy.txt and pcproxy.mat remain as "disappeared". They
>>were not located on any other server. Speaking of twits, Mann's
>>remaining proxy files do not exist on any other server than the
>>University of Virginia - and were not posted there prior to mid-2002.
>>
>
>Frankly I fail to see the point. I've transferred many files by putting
>them on my server for others to pick up, and after they got them,
>I've removed the files. That's the normal course of business. It
>is often a lot more convenient then attaching them to EMail.

Especially since many e-mail servers have put strict limits on
file sizes in an effort to reduce the possibility of anything noxious
making its way onto the system. Our's automatically deletes anything
more than a meg. That's why USB mass storage devices are becoming so
popular.
As you correctly point out, who cares if a file produced
specifically for M&M disappears. The people doing the whining have
obviously never dealt with anything bigger than a Commodore 64 if they
think it good policy to keep a host of legacy files lurking on your
file system. It's not a good idea when you've got gigabytes and even
terrabytes of disc to manage.


Josh Halpern

unread,
Dec 5, 2003, 12:19:09 AM12/5/03
to

David Ball wrote:

><j.ha...@incoming.verizon.net> wrote:
>
>
>>Nigel Persaud wrote:
>>
>>
>>>The files pcproxy.txt and pcproxy.mat remain as "disappeared". They
>>>were not located on any other server. Speaking of twits, Mann's
>>>remaining proxy files do not exist on any other server than the
>>>University of Virginia - and were not posted there prior to mid-2002.
>>>
>>>
>>Frankly I fail to see the point. I've transferred many files by putting
>>them on my server for others to pick up, and after they got them,
>>I've removed the files. That's the normal course of business. It
>>is often a lot more convenient then attaching them to EMail.
>>
>>
> Especially since many e-mail servers have put strict limits on
>file sizes in an effort to reduce the possibility of anything noxious
>making its way onto the system. Our's automatically deletes anything
>more than a meg. That's why USB mass storage devices are becoming so
>popular.
>

Good God, the return of sneaker net

josh halpern

Josh Halpern

unread,
Dec 5, 2003, 12:23:18 AM12/5/03
to

Steve Schulin wrote:

>In article <GfRzb.1066$E9....@nwrddc02.gnilink.net>,
> Josh Halpern <j.ha...@incoming.verizon.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>>Nigel Persaud wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>The files pcproxy.txt and pcproxy.mat remain as "disappeared". They
>>>were not located on any other server. Speaking of twits, Mann's
>>>remaining proxy files do not exist on any other server than the
>>>University of Virginia - and were not posted there prior to mid-2002.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>Frankly I fail to see the point. I've transferred many files by putting
>>them on my server for others to pick up, and after they got them,
>>I've removed the files. That's the normal course of business. ...
>>
>>
>
>It's a big deal in this case. The first public Mann response to M&M
>portrayed the pcprocxy.txt file as something that was made at McIntyre's
>request, in the Excel spreadsheet format McIntyre requested. The
>pcproxy.txt and pcproxy.mat files on the newly disclosed ftp site show
>that the ballocksed pcproxy.txt file existed long before McIntyre's
>inquiry, and that it was not an Excel product.
>

You are assuming that they were the same files. It could easily have
been the Mann group's practice to name pc data files prepared for
external use by the same name. Again, I've done that. The important
point is to label the exchange file so you know to take it off after it
has been downloaded.

In other words, you know no such thing.

josh halpern

josh halpern

H. E. Taylor

unread,
Dec 5, 2003, 2:51:25 AM12/5/03
to
In article <hzUzb.5548$lv4....@nwrddc01.gnilink.net>,
<j.ha...@incoming.verizon.net> Josh Halpern wrote:
> David Ball wrote:
>>>[...]

>> Especially since many e-mail servers have put strict limits on
>>file sizes in an effort to reduce the possibility of anything noxious
>>making its way onto the system. Our's automatically deletes anything
>>more than a meg. That's why USB mass storage devices are becoming so
>>popular.
>>
>
> Good God, the return of sneaker net
>

There is a classic line from Tanenbaum:
"Never underestimate the bandwidth of a stationwagon full
of tapes barrelling down the freeway."

<kabong>
-het

--
"progress in software has not followed Moore's law." -John Holland

Computer Links: http://www.autobahn.mb.ca/~het/clinks.html
H.E. Taylor http://www.autobahn.mb.ca/~het/

Eric Swanson

unread,
Dec 5, 2003, 9:23:04 AM12/5/03
to
In article <3FD038...@despam.autobahn.mb.ca>, h...@despam.autobahn.mb.ca says...

>
>In article <hzUzb.5548$lv4....@nwrddc01.gnilink.net>,
><j.ha...@incoming.verizon.net> Josh Halpern wrote:
>> David Ball wrote:
>>>>[...]
>>> Especially since many e-mail servers have put strict limits on
>>>file sizes in an effort to reduce the possibility of anything noxious
>>>making its way onto the system. Our's automatically deletes anything
>>>more than a meg. That's why USB mass storage devices are becoming so
>>>popular.
>>>
>>
>> Good God, the return of sneaker net
>>
>
> There is a classic line from Tanenbaum:
> "Never underestimate the bandwidth of a stationwagon full
> of tapes barrelling down the freeway."

Can we update that one?

"Never underestimate the bandwidth of an suv crawling along
in rush hour traffic with a load of pirate DVD's."

--
Eric Swanson --- E-mail address: e_swanson(at)skybest.com :-)
--------------------------------------------------------------

James Acker

unread,
Dec 5, 2003, 12:47:45 PM12/5/03
to
Nigel Persaud <pers...@yahoo.com> wrote:
: The files pcproxy.txt and pcproxy.mat remain as "disappeared". They

: were not located on any other server. Speaking of twits, Mann's
: remaining proxy files do not exist on any other server than the
: University of Virginia - and were not posted there prior to mid-2002.

OK, Daly wasn't real clear on that. Here's what he said
first:

More file deletions were to follow. Some data used in the M & M study was
originally located at Mann's old FTP site at the University of
Massachusetts. Mann's webpage on MBH98 links to this FTP site. Shortly
after M & M made an initial reply to Mann's claims on an internet `blog'
site, on November 13, 2003 (a reply which said that they had new results
to report about the Virginia FTP site), the entire Massachusetts FTP folder
on MBH98 was also deleted before M&M were able to copy it.

The deletion of the University of Massachusetts FTP site is surely the
strangest event yet. The mere deletion of these files which had been on
public view for over a year and probably as far back as 2000, implies an
attempt at concealment. We can only wonder at what they contained.

-----
And then he said:

Update: 20th Nov -

On Tuesday 18th Nov, I emailed the webmaster of University of Massachussetts
regarding the deleted directory. They replied that the deletions were done
to conserve server space and that the timing was co-incidental.

As of today, the deleted files have re-appeared on the Massachussetts FTP
server.

-----

So this aspect of the conspiracy doesn't appear so conspiratorial.

Jim Acker

: Roger Coppock <rcop...@adnc.com> wrote in message news:<3FCE925B...@adnc.com>...


:> No, Mann's Files aren't disappearing.
:> Daly does not realize that these data
:> exist in several archives. Twit!

*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
Jim Acker
jac...@gl.umbc.edu
A second flood, a simple famine, plagues of locusts everywhere,
Or a cataclysmic earthquake, I'd accept with some despair.
But no, you sent us Congress! Good God, sir, was that fair?
--- John Adams, "Piddle, Twiddle, and Resolve", from the
musical "1776"

Steve Schulin

unread,
Dec 5, 2003, 2:01:42 PM12/5/03
to
In article <aDUzb.5554$lv4....@nwrddc01.gnilink.net>,
Josh Halpern <j.ha...@incoming.verizon.net> wrote:

> Steve Schulin wrote:
> > Josh Halpern <j.ha...@incoming.verizon.net> wrote:
> >>Nigel Persaud wrote:
> >>
> >>>The files pcproxy.txt and pcproxy.mat remain as "disappeared". They
> >>>were not located on any other server. Speaking of twits, Mann's
> >>>remaining proxy files do not exist on any other server than the
> >>>University of Virginia - and were not posted there prior to mid-2002.
> >>>
> >>Frankly I fail to see the point. I've transferred many files by putting
> >>them on my server for others to pick up, and after they got them,
> >>I've removed the files. That's the normal course of business. ...
> >
> >It's a big deal in this case. The first public Mann response to M&M
> >portrayed the pcprocxy.txt file as something that was made at McIntyre's
> >request, in the Excel spreadsheet format McIntyre requested. The
> >pcproxy.txt and pcproxy.mat files on the newly disclosed ftp site show
> >that the ballocksed pcproxy.txt file existed long before McIntyre's
> >inquiry, and that it was not an Excel product.
>
> You are assuming that they were the same files. It could easily have
> been the Mann group's practice to name pc data files prepared for
> external use by the same name. Again, I've done that. The important
> point is to label the exchange file so you know to take it off after it
> has been downloaded.
>
> In other words, you know no such thing.
>

I respectfully disagree. Both files I mentioned contained the identical
data to the file pcproxy.txt emailed to McIntyre in April 2003,
including all collation errors, fills and other problems identified in
M&M. The header of the pcproxy.mat file read: ³MATLAB 5.0 MAT-file,
Platform: SOL2, Created on: Thu Aug 8 10:18:19 2002.² Likewise, the date
of creation of the pcproxy.txt file at UVA was August 8 2002.

Robert Grumbine

unread,
Dec 5, 2003, 3:43:57 PM12/5/03
to
In article <bqq4c7$bijs$1...@news3.infoave.net>,

Eric Swanson <swanson@nospam_on.net> wrote:
>In article <3FD038...@despam.autobahn.mb.ca>,
>h...@despam.autobahn.mb.ca says...
>>
>>In article <hzUzb.5548$lv4....@nwrddc01.gnilink.net>,
>><j.ha...@incoming.verizon.net> Josh Halpern wrote:
>>> David Ball wrote:
>>>>>[...]
>>>> Especially since many e-mail servers have put strict limits on
>>>>file sizes in an effort to reduce the possibility of anything noxious
>>>>making its way onto the system. Our's automatically deletes anything
>>>>more than a meg. That's why USB mass storage devices are becoming so
>>>>popular.
>>>
>>> Good God, the return of sneaker net
>>
>> There is a classic line from Tanenbaum:
>> "Never underestimate the bandwidth of a stationwagon full
>> of tapes barrelling down the freeway."
>
>Can we update that one?
>
> "Never underestimate the bandwidth of an suv crawling along
> in rush hour traffic with a load of pirate DVD's."

Carrier pigeons, I keep saying. Tie a tape to their ankle
and let them fly a nice 20 mph over the traffic. The bandwidth
for, say, a 1 hour flight is amazingly high. The bandwidth is
also independant of whether other people are using pigeon-net.


--
Robert Grumbine http://www.radix.net/~bobg/ Science faqs and amateur activities notes and links.
Sagredo (Galileo Galilei) "You present these recondite matters with too much
evidence and ease; this great facility makes them less appreciated than they
would be had they been presented in a more abstruse manner." Two New Sciences

Josh Halpern

unread,
Dec 8, 2003, 8:46:20 PM12/8/03
to
I missed this.  However, I thought that M&M first contacted Mann in 2003 and that someone in Mann's group was tasked with creating an Excel file for them?

josh halpern

Nigel Persaud

unread,
Dec 9, 2003, 11:56:22 AM12/9/03
to
> >I respectfully disagree. Both files I mentioned contained the identical =
>
> >data to the file pcproxy.txt emailed to McIntyre in April 2003,=20
> >including all collation errors, fills and other problems identified in=20
> >M&M. The header of the pcproxy.mat file read: =B3MATLAB 5.0 MAT-file,=20
> >Platform: SOL2, Created on: Thu Aug 8 10:18:19 2002.=B2 Likewise, the da=
> te=20

> >of creation of the pcproxy.txt file at UVA was August 8 2002.
> >
>
> I missed this. However, I thought that M&M first contacted Mann in 2003 =
>
> and that someone in Mann's group was tasked with creating an Excel file=20
> for them?
>
> josh halpern
>

You've missed the whole point. The story of the Excel file being made
for M&M looks like a complete fabrication by Mann.

M&M didn't ask for an Excel file, as they've stated and shown - they
asked for an FTP site. Mann's group sent a file that was already on
hand - made long before M&M's request. It looks doubtful to me that
the MBH98 directory was even public in April 2003 (as opposed to being
in one of the private directories on the Mann FTP site). If the FTP
directory was where it now is, Rutherford and Mann would have known
about it and simply given the FTP site to M&M. (There are no
references to this FTP site in Mann's webpage on MBH98). It's far more
likely that between April 2003 and October 2003, Mann moved the MBH98
file into the public directory. It's also suspicious that this is the
only datafile in the public area - where is the data for MBH99 and all
of Mann's other papers.

So when Mann trashed M&M for using the "wrong" data and then
discovered to his horror that the exact same file and data was on his
FTP site, he immediately had the files deleted, hoping that no one
would notice. Mann's behaviour sure has a furtive and guilty aspect to
it.

Ian St. John

unread,
Dec 9, 2003, 12:31:10 PM12/9/03
to

"Nigel Persaud" <pers...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:2860b88e.03120...@posting.google.com...

> > >I respectfully disagree. Both files I mentioned contained the identical
=
> >
> > >data to the file pcproxy.txt emailed to McIntyre in April 2003,=20
> > >including all collation errors, fills and other problems identified
in=20
> > >M&M. The header of the pcproxy.mat file read: =B3MATLAB 5.0
MAT-file,=20
> > >Platform: SOL2, Created on: Thu Aug 8 10:18:19 2002.=B2 Likewise, the
da=
> > te=20
> > >of creation of the pcproxy.txt file at UVA was August 8 2002.
> > >
> >
> > I missed this. However, I thought that M&M first contacted Mann in 2003
=
> >
> > and that someone in Mann's group was tasked with creating an Excel
file=20
> > for them?
> >
> > josh halpern
> >
>
> You've missed the whole point.

Actually, this whole thread misses the point. Mann has no obligation to make
any data publicly available. Legitimate researchers ( and there is a
question as to whether M&M fit under this category since they don't know the
first thing about the field, have the right to ask for an receive the data,
but are required to 'figure it out' on their own. Mann is NOT obligated to
hold their hands and step them through the procedure point by point while
enduring a constant bombardment of negative comments and innuendo. M&M is
mostly to blame for confusion about the data files basically because they
didn't know what to ask FOR and how to tell if it was complete.

The 'whole point' here is mainly that they did a hatchet job based on their
own failures and Mann is only obligated to respond to competent research. A
whole separate 'assessment' should be made by some researchers that are
familiar enough with the field to render a true judgement.


Josh Halpern

unread,
Dec 9, 2003, 10:57:07 PM12/9/03
to

Nigel Persaud wrote:

>>>I respectfully disagree. Both files I mentioned contained the identical =
>>>
>>>

>>>data to the file pcproxy.txt emailed to McIntyre in April 2003, including all collation errors, fills and other problems identified in M&M. The header of the pcproxy.mat file read: =B3MATLAB 5.0 MAT-file, Platform: SOL2, Created on: Thu Aug 8 10:18:19 2002, Likewise, the date of creation of the pcproxy.txt file at UVA was August 8 2002.
>>>
>>>
>>I missed this. However, I thought that M&M first contacted Mann in 2003 and that someone in Mann's group was tasked with creating an Excel file for them?


>>
>>
>You've missed the whole point. The story of the Excel file being made for M&M looks like a complete fabrication by Mann.
>
>M&M didn't ask for an Excel file, as they've stated and shown - they asked for an FTP site.
>

An odd request if you don't know such a site exists. Since one of the
threads here is that M&M did not know of the UVa FTP site, were they
asking that Mann's group set one up for them

>Mann's group sent a file that was already on hand - made long before M&M's request.
>

In what format? BTW, it could have been based on an old file that was
modified, which makes just as much sense. You have something that is
2/3 of the way to something else you have to construct and you just
modify it.

>It looks doubtful to me that the MBH98 directory was even public in April 2003 (as opposed to being in one of the private directories on the Mann FTP site). If the FTP directory was where it now is, Rutherford and Mann would have known about it and simply given the FTP site to M&M.
>

Now it is interesting to note that there are two directories in
ftp://holocene.evsc.virginia.edu/pub which were set up 7/30/02, the
MBH98 and /incoming. The latter is empty. A simple speculation is that
this was set up as a place where collaborators could deposit large
files, just as MBH98 was set up for collaborators to pick up files
involved in the MBH98 analysis. If one goes up the tree, one finds that
the computer system was set up....7/30/02


The question remains why M&M ASKED for an FTP site (address). Either
they knew such an FTP site existed (probable in light of what Paul
Farrar has said) or they were ASKING for Mann to set one up for them
(crazy, no one asks for folk to do work like that and expects anything
but being told to go pound sand) or they were asking Mann;s group to
place the requested information on an FTP site of Mann's group that M&M
knew about. Since AFAIK, the only such site in 2003 was
ftp://holocene.evsc.virginia.edu/pub (I assume they knew he had left
UMass) a reasonable person is that M&M knew about the FTP site where the
MBH directory is placed.


Now, let us add to this, that before ftp://
www://holocene.evsc.virginia.edu existed, Mann's group's web pages were
at http://www.people.virginia.edu/~mem6u/ and appear to have moved over
to the holocene computer in 02. In particular,
http://www.people.virginia.edu/~mem6u/mbh98.html existed which was the
gateway to the data from MBH98, located at
ftp://eclogite.geo.umass.edu/pub/mann/MANNETAL98/ as well as data and
information on other Mann co-authored papers at
ftp://eclogite.geo.umass.edu/pub/mann/


Now, how you ask do I know that the stuff was there earlier than last
weekend. Well, you can use the net to find a Seminar report dated 2000
by a Carlo Casty at the University of Bern from which I will quote and
translate a sentence from page 29:
http://www.giub.unibe.ch/~casty/seminar_ccasty.pdf


"Es handelt sich dabei um die Temperaturrekonstruktion für die
Nordhemisphäre für das letzte Jahrtausend von Mann et al. (1998,1999).
Die Daten sind ebenfalls frei über das Internet unter der Adresse
http://www.people.Virginia.EDU/~mem6u/mbh98.html erhältich."


"Mann, et al's Northern Hemisphere temperature reconstruction of the
last thousand years can be used for this purpose. The data are freely
accessible over the Internet at the address ........"


BTW, if you read German it is not a bad introduction to climate change.


So yes, Nigel, Mann's results (PCs/eigenvectors etc were available on
the web, on another FTP site and at the NOAA Paleoclimate site before
7/30/02).

>(There are no references to this FTP site in Mann's webpage on MBH98).
>

Why should there be. This is a set of working files that could, if
requested, be shared with others working in the same area, and I might
add, at Mann's discretion. The data (the real data) is all public at
the paleoclimatology site as are the PCs and eigenvectors from MBH98 and
99 etc.


Mann shares proprietary ownership of the work documents with Bradley and
Hughes. They are under no obligation to share these work documents with
every Tom Dick and Harry who asks.

>It's far more likely that between April 2003 and October 2003, Mann moved the MBH98 file into the public directory. It's also suspicious that this is the only datafile in the public area - where is the data for MBH99 and all of Mann's other papers.
>

There are no new data series used in MBH99 and the methods are the
same. Why put up a separate directory? Data which fully meets the
obligation of Mann, Bradley and Huges for public disclosure (actually
goes well beyond it) for MBH98, MBH99 and other Mann papers can be found
by searching under Mann's name at
http://oas.ngdc.noaa.gov/paleo_s/plsql/contribseries.search
Two important such links are.
http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/paleo/ei/ei_cover.html
Data for Mann and Jones 03 are at
http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/paleo/pubs/mann2003b/mann2003b.html


FWIW, some of Mann's working files are in
ftp://holocene.evsc.virginia.edu/pub/mann, including a whole bunch
dumped there this month in a new directory, and some other stuff in one
of the other directories. Now, if you want a mystery, why are some of
the subdirectories called /MANNETAL97

>So when Mann trashed M&M for using the "wrong" data and then discovered to his horror that the exact same file and data was on his FTP site, he immediately had the files deleted, hoping that no one would notice. Mann's behaviour sure has a furtive and guilty aspect to
>it.
>

Frankly you are stretching so far you are splitting your seams. To
start with let's confront the fact that M&M went into this whole thing
as a provocation and Mann would have been within his rights, and a whole
lot better off to tell them to go suck.

josh halpern

Steve Schulin

unread,
Dec 10, 2003, 10:02:44 AM12/10/03
to
In article <nQwBb.1267$5t3...@nwrddc01.gnilink.net>,
Josh Halpern <j.ha...@incoming.verizon.net> wrote:

> Nigel Persaud wrote:
>
> >>>I respectfully disagree. Both files I mentioned contained the identical =
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>data to the file pcproxy.txt emailed to McIntyre in April 2003, including
> >>>all collation errors, fills and other problems identified in M&M. The
> >>>header of the pcproxy.mat file read: =B3MATLAB 5.0 MAT-file, Platform:
> >>>SOL2, Created on: Thu Aug 8 10:18:19 2002, Likewise, the date of creation
> >>>of the pcproxy.txt file at UVA was August 8 2002.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>I missed this. However, I thought that M&M first contacted Mann in 2003
> >>and that someone in Mann's group was tasked with creating an Excel file
> >>for them?
> >>
> >>
> >You've missed the whole point. The story of the Excel file being made for
> >M&M looks like a complete fabrication by Mann.
> >
> >M&M didn't ask for an Excel file, as they've stated and shown - they asked
> >for an FTP site.
> >
>
> An odd request if you don't know such a site exists. Since one of the
> threads here is that M&M did not know of the UVa FTP site, were they
> asking that Mann's group set one up for them

McIntyre found the ftp site for the Mann et al 1999 paper to be quite
useful in understanding what Mann et al had done. He asked if similar
ftp site was available for the Mann et al 1998 paper.

>
> >Mann's group sent a file that was already on hand - made long before M&M's
> >request.
> >
>

> In what format? ...

A text file.

> ... BTW, it could have been based on an old file that was

> http://www.giub.unibe.ch/~casty/seminar ccasty.pdf


>
>
> "Es handelt sich dabei um die Temperaturrekonstruktion für die
> Nordhemisphäre für das letzte Jahrtausend von Mann et al. (1998,1999).
> Die Daten sind ebenfalls frei über das Internet unter der Adresse
> http://www.people.Virginia.EDU/~mem6u/mbh98.html erhältich."
>
>
> "Mann, et al's Northern Hemisphere temperature reconstruction of the
> last thousand years can be used for this purpose. The data are freely
> accessible over the Internet at the address ........"
>
>
> BTW, if you read German it is not a bad introduction to climate change.
>
>
> So yes, Nigel, Mann's results (PCs/eigenvectors etc were available on
> the web, on another FTP site and at the NOAA Paleoclimate site before
> 7/30/02).

Yes. Some of the info is available. McIntyre availed himself of it
before his April question to Mann, as he mentioned at the time.

>
> >(There are no references to this FTP site in Mann's webpage on MBH98).
> >
>
> Why should there be. This is a set of working files that could, if
> requested, be shared with others working in the same area, and I might
> add, at Mann's discretion. The data (the real data) is all public at

> the paleoclimatology site ...

Not all.

> ... as are the PCs and eigenvectors from MBH98 and

> 99 etc.
>
>
> Mann shares proprietary ownership of the work documents with Bradley and
> Hughes. They are under no obligation to share these work documents with
> every Tom Dick and Harry who asks.
>
> >It's far more likely that between April 2003 and October 2003, Mann moved
> >the MBH98 file into the public directory. It's also suspicious that this is
> >the only datafile in the public area - where is the data for MBH99 and all
> >of Mann's other papers.
> >
>
> There are no new data series used in MBH99 and the methods are the
> same. Why put up a separate directory? Data which fully meets the
> obligation of Mann, Bradley and Huges for public disclosure (actually
> goes well beyond it) for MBH98, MBH99 and other Mann papers can be found
> by searching under Mann's name at

> http://oas.ngdc.noaa.gov/paleo s/plsql/contribseries.search


> Two important such links are.

> http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/paleo/ei/ei cover.html


> Data for Mann and Jones 03 are at
> http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/paleo/pubs/mann2003b/mann2003b.html
>
>
> FWIW, some of Mann's working files are in
> ftp://holocene.evsc.virginia.edu/pub/mann, including a whole bunch
> dumped there this month in a new directory, and some other stuff in one
> of the other directories. Now, if you want a mystery, why are some of
> the subdirectories called /MANNETAL97
>
> >So when Mann trashed M&M for using the "wrong" data and then discovered to
> >his horror that the exact same file and data was on his FTP site, he
> >immediately had the files deleted, hoping that no one would notice. Mann's
> >behaviour sure has a furtive and guilty aspect to
> >it.
> >
>
> Frankly you are stretching so far you are splitting your seams. To
> start with let's confront the fact that M&M went into this whole thing
> as a provocation and Mann would have been within his rights, and a whole
> lot better off to tell them to go suck.

McIntyre wanted to understand what Mann et al did. There's nothing
provocative in that. His later decisions to perform as full an audit as
possible and formalize his findings in a paper were quite reasonable,
IMHO.
>
> josh halpern
>

Josh Halpern

unread,
Dec 10, 2003, 8:10:23 PM12/10/03
to

Steve Schulin wrote:

> Josh Halpern <j.ha...@incoming.verizon.net> wrote:
>
>
>>Nigel Persaud wrote:
>>
>>

SNIP....

>>>>I missed this. However, I thought that M&M first contacted Mann in 2003
>>>>and that someone in Mann's group was tasked with creating an Excel file
>>>>for them?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>You've missed the whole point. The story of the Excel file being made for
>>>M&M looks like a complete fabrication by Mann.
>>>
>>>M&M didn't ask for an Excel file, as they've stated and shown - they asked
>>>for an FTP site.
>>>
>>>
>>An odd request if you don't know such a site exists. Since one of the
>>threads here is that M&M did not know of the UVa FTP site, were they
>>asking that Mann's group set one up for them
>>
>>
>
>McIntyre found the ftp site for the Mann et al 1999 paper to be quite
>useful in understanding what Mann et al had done. He asked if similar
>ftp site was available for the Mann et al 1998 paper.
>
>

WHICH ftp site? The one at UMass, the several at noaa, one at UVa,
you're going to have to be more specific.

>>>Mann's group sent a file that was already on hand - made long before M&M's request.
>>>
>>>
>>In what format? ...
>>
>>
>A text file.
>

This is pcproxy.txt? What about the other pcproxy.nb or whatever, where
did this come from.

>>... BTW, it could have been based on an old file that was modified, which makes just as much sense. You have something that is 2/3 of the way to something else you have to construct and you just modify it.
>>
>>
>>

Far be it from me to speculate, but the .txt file could have been
created in Excel and saved as txt.

>>>It looks doubtful to me that the MBH98 directory was even public in April
>>>2003 (as opposed to being in one of the private directories on the Mann FTP
>>>site). If the FTP directory was where it now is, Rutherford and Mann would
>>>have known about it and simply given the FTP site to M&M.
>>>
>>>
>>>

SNIP...

>>Now, let us add to this, that before ftp://
>>www://holocene.evsc.virginia.edu existed, Mann's group's web pages were
>>at http://www.people.virginia.edu/~mem6u/ and appear to have moved over
>>to the holocene computer in 02. In particular,
>>http://www.people.virginia.edu/~mem6u/mbh98.html existed which was the
>>gateway to the data from MBH98, located at
>>ftp://eclogite.geo.umass.edu/pub/mann/MANNETAL98/ as well as data and
>>information on other Mann co-authored papers at
>>ftp://eclogite.geo.umass.edu/pub/mann/
>>
>>

Which is why I asked you to specify which ftp site.

>>So yes, Nigel, Mann's results (PCs/eigenvectors etc were available on
>>the web, on another FTP site and at the NOAA Paleoclimate site before
>>7/30/02).
>>
>>
>
>Yes. Some of the info is available. McIntyre availed himself of it
>before his April question to Mann, as he mentioned at the time.
>
>

Again, it would be interesting to know from which site.

>>>(There are no references to this FTP site in Mann's webpage on MBH98).
>>>
>>>
>>Why should there be. This is a set of working files that could, if
>>requested, be shared with others working in the same area, and I might
>>add, at Mann's discretion. The data (the real data) is all public at
>>the paleoclimatology site ...
>>
>>
>
>Not all.
>

Which are missing? Not necessarily at the holocene ftp site, but at the
paleoclimate site which is the depository of record. Note that I
consider the pc reconstructions not as data but as fits to the data.

SNIP....

>>Frankly you are stretching so far you are splitting your seams. To
>>start with let's confront the fact that M&M went into this whole thing
>>as a provocation and Mann would have been within his rights, and a whole
>>lot better off to tell them to go suck.
>>
>>
>
>McIntyre wanted to understand what Mann et al did. There's nothing
>provocative in that. His later decisions to perform as full an audit as
>possible and formalize his findings in a paper were quite reasonable,
>IMHO.
>

Right. Sure. You are far more trusting than I, and indeed to his
detriment, so was Mann. Look, between Nigel, David and me, we have gone
a fair way to understanding what MBH98 (& 99) did. BTW, the "audit"
thing is a red flag.

josh halpern

Steve Schulin

unread,
Dec 10, 2003, 9:47:13 PM12/10/03
to
In article <3uPBb.4193$UF1...@nwrddc02.gnilink.net>,
Josh Halpern <j.ha...@incoming.verizon.net> wrote:

> Steve Schulin wrote:
>
> > Josh Halpern <j.ha...@incoming.verizon.net> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Nigel Persaud wrote:
> >>
> >>
> SNIP....
>
> >>>>I missed this. However, I thought that M&M first contacted Mann in 2003
> >>>>and that someone in Mann's group was tasked with creating an Excel file
> >>>>for them?
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>You've missed the whole point. The story of the Excel file being made for
> >>>M&M looks like a complete fabrication by Mann.
> >>>
> >>>M&M didn't ask for an Excel file, as they've stated and shown - they asked
> >>>for an FTP site.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>An odd request if you don't know such a site exists. Since one of the
> >>threads here is that M&M did not know of the UVa FTP site, were they
> >>asking that Mann's group set one up for them
> >>
> >>
> >
> >McIntyre found the ftp site for the Mann et al 1999 paper to be quite
> >useful in understanding what Mann et al had done. He asked if similar
> >ftp site was available for the Mann et al 1998 paper.
> >
> >
> WHICH ftp site? The one at UMass, the several at noaa, one at UVa,
> you're going to have to be more specific.

Your quesion is answered in McIntyre's April 8, 2003 email to Mann,
which went like this:

Dear Dr. Mann,
I have been studying MBH98 and 99. I located datasets for the 13 series
used in 99 at
ftp://eclogite.geo.umass.edu/pub/mann/ONLINE-PREPRINTS/Millennium/DATA/PR
OXIES/ (the convenience of the ftp: location being excellent) and was
intereseted in locating similar information on the 112 proxies referred
to in MBH98, as well as listing (the listing at
http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/paleo/ei/data_supp.html is for 390 datasets,
and I gather/presume that many of these listed datasets have been
condensed into PCs, as mentioned in the paper itself. Thank you for your
attention.
Yours truly,


>
> >>>Mann's group sent a file that was already on hand - made long before M&M's
> >>>request.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>In what format? ...
> >>
> >>
> >A text file.
> >

> This is pcproxy.txt? ...

Yes.

> ... What about the other pcproxy.nb or whatever, where
> did this come from.

All I know about the Matlab 5.0 file named pcproxy.mat on the newly
disclosed Mann et al 1998 ftp site is that the file is dated as months
before McIntyre's April 2003 inquiry and it contains the same data as
the pcproxy.txt file provided to McIntyre, including all collation

errors, fills and other problems identified in M&M.

>

> >>... BTW, it could have been based on an old file that was modified, which
> >>makes just as much sense. You have something that is 2/3 of the way to
> >>something else you have to construct and you just modify it.
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
> Far be it from me to speculate, but the .txt file could have been
> created in Excel and saved as txt.

If the ftp directory is correct regarding the date, the .txt file was
created months before McIntyre's inquiry. The .mat file's internal
header has the same date specified, BTW.

>
> >>>It looks doubtful to me that the MBH98 directory was even public in April
> >>>2003 (as opposed to being in one of the private directories on the Mann
> >>>FTP
> >>>site). If the FTP directory was where it now is, Rutherford and Mann would
> >>>have known about it and simply given the FTP site to M&M.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> SNIP...
>
> >>Now, let us add to this, that before ftp://
> >>www://holocene.evsc.virginia.edu existed, Mann's group's web pages were
> >>at http://www.people.virginia.edu/~mem6u/ and appear to have moved over
> >>to the holocene computer in 02. In particular,
> >>http://www.people.virginia.edu/~mem6u/mbh98.html existed which was the
> >>gateway to the data from MBH98, located at
> >>ftp://eclogite.geo.umass.edu/pub/mann/MANNETAL98/ as well as data and
> >>information on other Mann co-authored papers at
> >>ftp://eclogite.geo.umass.edu/pub/mann/
> >>
> >>
> Which is why I asked you to specify which ftp site.

Happy to be of assistance.

>
> >>So yes, Nigel, Mann's results (PCs/eigenvectors etc were available on
> >>the web, on another FTP site and at the NOAA Paleoclimate site before
> >>7/30/02).
> >>
> >>
> >
> >Yes. Some of the info is available. McIntyre availed himself of it
> >before his April question to Mann, as he mentioned at the time.
> >
> >
> Again, it would be interesting to know from which site.

For all your expression of interest, you seem quite ignorant of what M&M
have written so far.

>
> >>>(There are no references to this FTP site in Mann's webpage on MBH98).
> >>>
> >>>
> >>Why should there be. This is a set of working files that could, if
> >>requested, be shared with others working in the same area, and I might
> >>add, at Mann's discretion. The data (the real data) is all public at
> >>the paleoclimatology site ...
> >>
> >>
> >
> >Not all.
> >
> Which are missing? Not necessarily at the holocene ftp site, but at the
> paleoclimate site which is the depository of record. Note that I
> consider the pc reconstructions not as data but as fits to the data.

The following are proxy series which are not at either site you mention.

Mann et al 1998 series #16 Dunde Ice Core dO18
Mann et al 1998 series #17 West Greenland Ice Melt
Mann et al 1998 series #19 Penny, Baffin Island dO18
Mann et al 1998 series #20 Central Greenland (Stack) dO18

None of the above are PC series, so I guess they meet your criteria as
to what is data.

>
> SNIP....
>
> >>Frankly you are stretching so far you are splitting your seams. To
> >>start with let's confront the fact that M&M went into this whole thing
> >>as a provocation and Mann would have been within his rights, and a whole
> >>lot better off to tell them to go suck.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >McIntyre wanted to understand what Mann et al did. There's nothing
> >provocative in that. His later decisions to perform as full an audit as
> >possible and formalize his findings in a paper were quite reasonable,
> >IMHO.
> >
>
> Right. Sure. You are far more trusting than I, and indeed to his
> detriment, so was Mann. Look, between Nigel, David and me, we have gone
> a fair way to understanding what MBH98 (& 99) did. BTW, the "audit"
> thing is a red flag.

An audit is a pretty standard quality assurance tool. I've gotten over
my surprise at how several regulars here seem to share your red flag
notion. To characterize Mann as a victim, as you do, is really
laughable.

>
> josh halpern
>

Nigel Persaud

unread,
Dec 11, 2003, 12:47:41 AM12/11/03
to
> > An odd request if you don't know such a site exists. Since one of the
> > threads here is that M&M did not know of the UVa FTP site, were they
> > asking that Mann's group set one up for them
>
> McIntyre found the ftp site for the Mann et al 1999 paper to be quite
> useful in understanding what Mann et al had done. He asked if similar
> ftp site was available for the Mann et al 1998 paper.
>

That's exactly what the first request was - the assumption presumably
being that thre was an FTP site but McIntyre couldn't locate it and
simply asked for a URL. What's wrong with that?

> >
> > >Mann's group sent a file that was already on hand - made long before M&M's
> > >request.
> > >
> >
> > In what format? ...
>
> A text file.
>
> > ... BTW, it could have been based on an old file that was
> > modified, which makes just as much sense. You have something that is
> > 2/3 of the way to something else you have to construct and you just
> > modify it.
> >

Except that the file was dated August 8, 2002 on Mann's FTP site. So
it wasn't modified in April 2003. That looks like a fabrication by
Mann.

> >
> > >It looks doubtful to me that the MBH98 directory was even public in April
> > >2003 (as opposed to being in one of the private directories on the Mann FTP
> > >site). If the FTP directory was where it now is, Rutherford and Mann would
> > >have known about it and simply given the FTP site to M&M.
> > >
> >
> > Now it is interesting to note that there are two directories in
> > ftp://holocene.evsc.virginia.edu/pub which were set up 7/30/02, the
> > MBH98 and /incoming. The latter is empty. A simple speculation is that
> > this was set up as a place where collaborators could deposit large
> > files, just as MBH98 was set up for collaborators to pick up files
> > involved in the MBH98 analysis. If one goes up the tree, one finds that
> > the computer system was set up....7/30/02
> >

Actually, going up the tree, many directories were set up on 7/30/02.
I presume that MBH98 could have been in the Incoming directory and
transferred to pub without changing the apparent date on the
directory.

> >
> > The question remains why M&M ASKED for an FTP site (address). Either
> > they knew such an FTP site existed (probable in light of what Paul
> > Farrar has said) or they were ASKING for Mann to set one up for them
> > (crazy, no one asks for folk to do work like that and expects anything
> > but being told to go pound sand) or they were asking Mann;s group to
> > place the requested information on an FTP site of Mann's group that M&M
> > knew about. Since AFAIK, the only such site in 2003 was
> > ftp://holocene.evsc.virginia.edu/pub (I assume they knew he had left
> > UMass) a reasonable person is that M&M knew about the FTP site where the
> > MBH directory is placed.
> >

Your premise is wrong. Mann had an FTP site at UMass - which is
hyperlinked from his webpage at UVA. That has the data for MBH99,
which McIntyre had identified. Again, McIntyre's request is simply a
request for a URL - which is a trivial response. Since there was an
FTP site for MBH99, I'm sure it seemed reasonable for him to inquire
as to the URL for MBH98.

I agree with Steve here. You're missing the point here as usual. The
request was for the proxy data - not the eigenvectors. Note that the
eigenvectors were still at UMass and not at UVa.


> >
> > >(There are no references to this FTP site in Mann's webpage on MBH98).
> > >
> >
> > Why should there be. This is a set of working files that could, if
> > requested, be shared with others working in the same area, and I might
> > add, at Mann's discretion. The data (the real data) is all public at
> > the paleoclimatology site ...
>
> Not all.

He had hyperlinks to eigenvectors - why wouldn't he have hyperlinks to
proxy data? Some of the data is at the WDCP, but not all of it. Also
Mann deleted some years from several series (!) and used obsolete
data. So the data that Mann actually used is of interest as distinct
from the correct data.


>
> > ... as are the PCs and eigenvectors from MBH98 and
> > 99 etc.
> >
> >
> > Mann shares proprietary ownership of the work documents with Bradley and
> > Hughes. They are under no obligation to share these work documents with
> > every Tom Dick and Harry who asks.

Nature has pretty strong obligation on disclosure.

> >
> > >It's far more likely that between April 2003 and October 2003, Mann moved
> > >the MBH98 file into the public directory. It's also suspicious that this is
> > >the only datafile in the public area - where is the data for MBH99 and all
> > >of Mann's other papers.
> > >
> >
> > There are no new data series used in MBH99 and the methods are the
> > same. Why put up a separate directory?

He has a separate directory at UMass. The series are not the same.
MBH99 goes back to 1000.

>Data which fully meets the
> > obligation of Mann, Bradley and Huges for public disclosure (actually
> > goes well beyond it) for MBH98, MBH99 and other Mann papers can be found
> > by searching under Mann's name at
> > http://oas.ngdc.noaa.gov/paleo s/plsql/contribseries.search
> > Two important such links are.
> > http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/paleo/ei/ei cover.html
> > Data for Mann and Jones 03 are at
> > http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/paleo/pubs/mann2003b/mann2003b.html
> >

Since the proxy series are not there, this does not "fully" meet his
obligations.

> >
> > FWIW, some of Mann's working files are in
> > ftp://holocene.evsc.virginia.edu/pub/mann, including a whole bunch
> > dumped there this month in a new directory, and some other stuff in one
> > of the other directories. Now, if you want a mystery, why are some of
> > the subdirectories called /MANNETAL97

Sounds like a good mystery. Except when I looked just now, I couldn't
find it. Is it still there?

> >
> > >So when Mann trashed M&M for using the "wrong" data and then discovered to
> > >his horror that the exact same file and data was on his FTP site, he
> > >immediately had the files deleted, hoping that no one would notice. Mann's
> > >behaviour sure has a furtive and guilty aspect to
> > >it.
> > >
> >
> > Frankly you are stretching so far you are splitting your seams. To
> > start with let's confront the fact that M&M went into this whole thing
> > as a provocation and Mann would have been within his rights, and a whole
> > lot better off to tell them to go suck.
>
> McIntyre wanted to understand what Mann et al did. There's nothing
> provocative in that. His later decisions to perform as full an audit as
> possible and formalize his findings in a paper were quite reasonable,
> IMHO.
> >

I doubt that any provocation was planned. McIntyre said he didn't meet
McKitrick until September. Why would anyone have expected that the
data would be a mess?

Nigel.

Josh Halpern

unread,
Dec 11, 2003, 11:25:24 PM12/11/03
to

Nigel Persaud wrote:

>>>An odd request if you don't know such a site exists. Since one of the threads here is that M&M did not know of the UVa FTP site, were they asking that Mann's group set one up for them
>>>
>>>
>>McIntyre found the ftp site for the Mann et al 1999 paper to be quite useful in understanding what Mann et al had done. He asked if similar ftp site was available for the Mann et al 1998 paper.
>>
>>

>That's exactly what the first request was - the assumption presumably being that there was an FTP site
>
Well, for one thing, if you start at
http://www.people.virginia.edu/~mem6u/mbh99.html and go to the data for
the reconstruction
ftp://eclogite.geo.umass.edu/pub/mann/ONLINE-PREPRINTS/Millennium/DATA/RECONS/nhem-recon.dat
and truncate that to
ftp://eclogite.geo.umass.edu/pub/mann/ONLINE-PREPRINTS/Millennium/DATA/
you find /PROXIES and /RECONS, and the PROXIES is what I presume you
mean for the data. Now, there are only 14 series (2 are doubled, see
below). Comparing the contents of these directories to that of the
holocene /MBH98, makes it absolutely clear that /MBH98 is not an
archive. So where is the archive? (Note, very few to almost no
publicatuions in Nature and indeed very few scientific publications have
their data and intermediate work products archived at all on line, nor
is it true that authors have to release their raw data to anyone who asks.)

The data for MBH98 is archived at,
http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/paleo/data.html, and the PCs, etc, can be found
hyperlinked http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/paleo/pubs/mann1998/frames.htm,
http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/paleo/ei/ei_cover.html.

>but McIntyre couldn't locate it and simply asked for a URL. What's wrong with that?
>
>

Well, I really don't know if I would hire him as an auditor, cause, what
two levels up we have ftp://eclogite.geo.umass.edu/pub/mann/ which has a
subdirectory MANNETAL98 with a creation date of 8/22/00. Not everything
is there, but a lot is. And, like I said it was well known that the
data came from the NOAA Paleo site, so the question remains, what was
McIntryre fishing for.

>>>... BTW, it could have been based on an old file that was modified, which makes just as much sense. You have something that is 2/3 of the way to something else you have to construct and you just
>>>modify it.
>>>
>>>
>
>Except that the file was dated August 8, 2002 on Mann's FTP site. So it wasn't modified in April 2003.
>

And you know this how? It depends on how the file was created and
modified and on what systems. Get it through your head, unless one uses
specially designed electronic laboratory notebooks or has an archival
back-up system the dates on files are at best advisory, even if that,
and especially if you are going between one OS and another.

You seem awfully quick on the trigger here.

>That looks like a fabrication by Mann.
>

Right, sure. It appears to me that you folk are getting awfully close
to libel, and have gone over the line if you are not posting from the US.

>>>>It looks doubtful to me that the MBH98 directory was even public in April 2003 (as opposed to being in one of the private directories on the Mann FTP site). If the FTP directory was where it now is, Rutherford and Mann would have known about it and simply given the FTP site to M&M.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>Now it is interesting to note that there are two directories in ftp://holocene.evsc.virginia.edu/pub which were set up 7/30/02, the MBH98 and /incoming. The latter is empty. A simple speculation is that this was set up as a place where collaborators could deposit large files, just as MBH98 was set up for collaborators to pick up files involved in the MBH98 analysis. If one goes up the tree, one finds that the computer system was set up....7/30/02
>>>
>>>
>
>Actually, going up the tree, many directories were set up on 7/30/02. I presume that MBH98 could have been in the Incoming directory and transferred to pub without changing the apparent date on the directory.
>
>

Is it not easier to assume that the COMPUTER was set up on 7/30/02 or at
least the OS loaded on that date, given that the directories with that
date include /bin, and /usr and then MBH98 transferred from some zip
disk or a CD? You are really stretching the point. Occam says the OS
was set up 7/30/02 and a bunch of files were transferred to the new
system.

>>>The question remains why M&M ASKED for an FTP site (address). Either they knew such an FTP site existed (probable in light of what Paul Farrar has said) or they were ASKING for Mann to set one up for them (crazy, no one asks for folk to do work like that and expects anything but being told to go pound sand) or they were asking Mann;s group to place the requested information on an FTP site of Mann's group that M&M knew about. Since AFAIK, the only such site in 2003 was ftp://holocene.evsc.virginia.edu/pub (I assume they knew he had left UMass) a reasonable person is that M&M knew about the FTP site where the MBH directory is placed.
>>>
>>>
>Your premise is wrong. Mann had an FTP site at UMass - which is hyperlinked from his webpage at UVA. That has the data for MBH99, which McIntyre had identified. Again, McIntyre's request is simply a request for a URL - which is a trivial response. Since there was an FTP site for MBH99, I'm sure it seemed reasonable for him to inquire as to the URL for MBH98.
>

A blind man should have been able to find MANNETAL98, and anyone who
could Google the NOAA Paleoclimate site.

>>>Now, let us add to this, that before ftp:// www://holocene.evsc.virginia.edu existed, Mann's group's web pages were
>>>at http://www.people.virginia.edu/~mem6u/ and appear to have moved over to the holocene computer in 02. In particular, http://www.people.virginia.edu/~mem6u/mbh98.html existed which was the gateway to the data from MBH98, located at ftp://eclogite.geo.umass.edu/pub/mann/MANNETAL98/ as well as data and information on other Mann co-authored papers at ftp://eclogite.geo.umass.edu/pub/mann/
>>>
>>>Now, how you ask do I know that the stuff was there earlier than last weekend. Well, you can use the net to find a Seminar report dated 2000 by a Carlo Casty at the University of Bern from which I will quote and
>>>translate a sentence from page 29: http://www.giub.unibe.ch/~casty/seminar ccasty.pdf
>>>
>>>
>>>"Es handelt sich dabei um die Temperaturrekonstruktion für die
>>>Nordhemisphäre für das letzte Jahrtausend von Mann et al. (1998,1999).
>>>Die Daten sind ebenfalls frei über das Internet unter der Adresse
>>>http://www.people.Virginia.EDU/~mem6u/mbh98.html erhältich."
>>>
>>>
>>>"Mann, et al's Northern Hemisphere temperature reconstruction of the
>>>last thousand years can be used for this purpose. The data are freely
>>>accessible over the Internet at the address ........"
>>>
>>>
>>>BTW, if you read German it is not a bad introduction to climate change.
>>>
>>>
>>>So yes, Nigel, Mann's results (PCs/eigenvectors etc were available on
>>>the web, on another FTP site and at the NOAA Paleoclimate site before
>>>7/30/02).
>>>
>>>
>>Yes. Some of the info is available. McIntyre availed himself of it before his April question to Mann, as he mentioned at the time.
>>
>>
>

>I agree with Steve here. You're missing the point here as usual. Therequest was for the proxy data - not the eigenvectors. Note that the eigenvectors were still at UMass and not at UVa.
>

THE PROXY DATA WERE ALL AT THE NOAA PALEOCLIMATE SITE AND FREELY
AVAILABLE TO MCINTYRE

>>>>(There are no references to this FTP site in Mann's webpage on MBH98).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>Why should there be. This is a set of working files that could, if requested, be shared with others working in the same area, and I might add, at Mann's discretion. The data (the real data) is all public at
>>>the paleoclimatology site ...
>>>
>>>
>>Not all.
>>
>>
>
>He had hyperlinks to eigenvectors - why wouldn't he have hyperlinks to proxy data?
>

Because it is not organized in a way that is easy to hyperlink a single
data series as a anyone can see if they use
http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/paleo/data.html, you would need a separate URL
for each series such as
ftp://ftp.ngdc.noaa.gov/paleo/icecore/trop/quelccaya/q83cor1.txt for one
of the quelccaya ice cores, ie, a list of hundreds of URLs. Since MBH98
and the various web sites indicate that the proxy series came from
http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/paleo/data.html and this site has an efficient
database driver to extract the data series, nothing more is needed
assuming you are not fishing for a stick to beat someone with. That may
be a bad assumption.

> Some of the data is at the WDCP, but not all of it. Also Mann deleted some years from several series (!) and used obsolete data. So the data that Mann actually used is of interest as distinct from the correct data.
>

I would not be as certain of this as you are. You also need to be more
definite in your claims. Which data is obsolete, when was it
superceded, are you sure that the experts in the area agree that the
"newer" series is better, are you sure that MBH98 used the older series,
and further what effect would, say a NH tree ring series have on the
data. It appears that M&M did some serious editing themselves.

>>> Mann shares proprietary ownership of the work documents with Bradley and
>>>Hughes. They are under no obligation to share these work documents with
>>>every Tom Dick and Harry who asks.
>>>
>>>
>Nature has pretty strong obligation on disclosure.
>
>

Care to reference this and show that MBH did not follow the obligations?

>>>>It's far more likely that between April 2003 and October 2003, Mann moved the MBH98 file into the public directory. It's also suspicious that this is the only datafile in the public area - where is the data for MBH99 and all
>>>>of Mann's other papers.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>There are no new data series used in MBH99 and the methods are the same. Why put up a separate directory?
>>>
>>>
>
>He has a separate directory at UMass. The series are not the same. MBH99 goes back to 1000.
>

Read MBH99. In particular "The multiproxy data network and instrumental
temperature data used to calibrate it are discussed in detail by MBH98
(see supplementary information therein). Before AD 1400 only 12
indicators of the more than 100 described by MBH98 are available. This
includes the first 3 pCs of the (28) dendroclimatic series avilable back
to AD 1000 in the ITRDB - all from NA. The 12 indicators (14 counting
two nearby ice core sites are summarized in Table I. "

here MBH99 mean that the ice core sites each have two ice cores which
were measured, so if you count sites there are 12.and the caption on
Table I. : "12 Proxy indicators available back to AC1000. Description
("SERIES" see MBH98 for details regarding data and reference),
........These data (and the NH series discussed in the text are
available over the internet through the World Data Center-A for
Paleoclimatology (http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/paler/paleo.html)"

MBH99 is int the ONLINEREPRINT area, which is different in nature from
the files in MANNETAL98 and MBH98

>>
>>
>>>Data which fully meets the obligation of Mann, Bradley and Huges for public disclosure (actually goes well beyond it) for MBH98, MBH99 and other Mann papers can be found by searching under Mann's name at http://oas.ngdc.noaa.gov/paleo s/plsql/contribseries.search Two important such links are. http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/paleo/ei/ei cover.html
>>>Data for Mann and Jones 03 are at http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/paleo/pubs/mann2003b/mann2003b.html
>>>
>>>
>
>Since the proxy series are not there, this does not "fully" meet his obligations.
>

THE PROXY SERIES ARE IN THE DATA SETS KEPT AT
http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/paleo You continually ignore the point that
the proxy series are not MBH's, but are

>>> FWIW, some of Mann's working files are in ftp://holocene.evsc.virginia.edu/pub/mann, including a whole bunch
>>>dumped there this month in a new directory, and some other stuff in one of the other directories. Now, if you want a mystery, why are some of the subdirectories called /MANNETAL97
>>>
>>>
>
>Sounds like a good mystery. Except when I looked just now, I couldn't find it. Is it still there?
>

Gee it's a conspiracy, Mann is lying.....ooooo. No you just have to dig
down. Most of the subdirectories of /MBH98 have something like
ftp://holocene.evsc.virginia.edu/pub/MBH98/CORAL/MANNETAL97 Got it
now. The logical explanation is that these files were created early
on. Remember the heavy breathing about how long the paper was in review.

>>>>So when Mann trashed M&M for using the "wrong" data and then discovered to his horror that the exact same file and data was on his FTP site, he immediately had the files deleted, hoping that no one would notice. Mann's
>>>>behaviour sure has a furtive and guilty aspect to it.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>Frankly you are stretching so far you are splitting your seams. To start with let's confront the fact that M&M went into this whole thing as a provocation and Mann would have been within his rights, and a whole lot better off to tell them to go suck.
>>>
>>>
>>McIntyre wanted to understand what Mann et al did. There's nothing provocative in that. His later decisions to perform as full an audit as possible and formalize his findings in a paper were quite reasonable, IMHO.
>>
>>
>
>I doubt that any provocation was planned. McIntyre said he didn't meet McKitrick until September. Why would anyone have expected that the data would be a mess?
>

So what. Both of them were not looking for an excuse to make trouble
for MBH? Only one was? It seems to me that the data was freely
available to all at the NOAA site. If all they wanted was the data,
they could have gotten it.

josh halpern

Nigel Persaud

unread,
Dec 12, 2003, 8:59:18 AM12/12/03
to
Josh,

you have to learn to distinguish between proxy data and eigenvectors.
Just because eigenvector data is at FTP sites doesn't mean that the
proxy data is as well. Also, the proxy data at NOAA is different from
the proxy data that MBH used. You continue to miss this simple point.
I've snipped below to pick out the main points. Nigel


SNIP


>
> THE PROXY DATA WERE ALL AT THE NOAA PALEOCLIMATE SITE AND FREELY
> AVAILABLE TO MCINTYRE

Not all of the MBH proxy data is at NOAA. Also M&M point out that the
the proxy versions used by MBH usually differ from the versions at
NOAA. This is what they call MBH using obsolete data. M&M used NOAA
paleoclimate proxy data and included URLs for series that they located
at NOAA.

> >>>>(There are no references to this FTP site in Mann's webpage on MBH98)
> .
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>Why should there be. This is a set of working files that could, if re
> quested, be shared with others working in the same area, and I might add,
> at Mann's discretion. The data (the real data) is all public at
> >>>the paleoclimatology site ...
> >>>
> >>>
> >>Not all.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >He had hyperlinks to eigenvectors - why wouldn't he have hyperlinks to p
> roxy data?
> >
> Because it is not organized in a way that is easy to hyperlink a single
> data series as a anyone can see if they use
> http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/paleo/data.html, you would need a separate URL
> for each series such as
> ftp://ftp.ngdc.noaa.gov/paleo/icecore/trop/quelccaya/q83cor1.txt for one
>
> of the quelccaya ice cores, ie, a list of hundreds of URLs. Since MBH98
>
> and the various web sites indicate that the proxy series came from
> http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/paleo/data.html and this site has an efficient
> database driver to extract the data series, nothing more is needed
> assuming you are not fishing for a stick to beat someone with. That may
>
> be a bad assumption.

If MBH98 said that the proxy series came from NOAA, then this is
false, because many of the proxy series are not on NOAA.


> > Some of the data is at the WDCP, but not all of it. Also Mann deleted
> some years from several series (!) and used obsolete data. So the data t
> hat Mann actually used is of interest as distinct from the correct data.
> >
>
> I would not be as certain of this as you are. You also need to be more
> definite in your claims. Which data is obsolete, when was it
> superceded, are you sure that the experts in the area agree that the
> "newer" series is better, are you sure that MBH98 used the older series,
>
> and further what effect would, say a NH tree ring series have on the
> data. It appears that M&M did some serious editing themselves.

M&M give a listing of series. But you don't seem to have ever read
M&M. If MBH results are not stable to newer editions of proxy series,
then that's surely a problem.

> >>
> >>
> >>>Data which fully meets the obligation of Mann, Bradley and Huges for p
> ublic disclosure (actually goes well beyond it) for MBH98, MBH99 and oth
> er Mann papers can be found by searching under Mann's name at http://oas.
> ngdc.noaa.gov/paleo s/plsql/contribseries.search Two important such links
> are. http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/paleo/ei/ei cover.html
> >>>Data for Mann and Jones 03 are at http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/paleo/pubs
> /mann2003b/mann2003b.html
> >>>

The proxy data is not listed there.

> >>>
> >
> >Since the proxy series are not there, this does not "fully" meet his obl
> igations.
> >
>
> THE PROXY SERIES ARE IN THE DATA SETS KEPT AT
> http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/paleo You continually ignore the point that
> the proxy series are not MBH's, but are

Again, you continually state that the MBH proxy data is at NOAA. This
is false.


> >>> FWIW, some of Mann's working files are in ftp://holocene.evsc.virgini
> a.edu/pub/mann, including a whole bunch
> >>>dumped there this month in a new directory, and some other stuff in on
> e of the other directories. Now, if you want a mystery, why are some of
> the subdirectories called /MANNETAL97
> >>>
> >>>
> >
> >Sounds like a good mystery. Except when I looked just now, I couldn't fi
> nd it. Is it still there?
> >
> Gee it's a conspiracy, Mann is lying.....ooooo. No you just have to dig
>
> down. Most of the subdirectories of /MBH98 have something like
> ftp://holocene.evsc.virginia.edu/pub/MBH98/CORAL/MANNETAL97 Got it
> now. The logical explanation is that these files were created early
> on. Remember the heavy breathing about how long the paper was in review.
>

I saw those files. I was wondering about the files dumped this month;
I thought that you meant that they had something to do with this
dispute.


> So what. Both of them were not looking for an excuse to make trouble
> for MBH? Only one was? It seems to me that the data was freely
> available to all at the NOAA site. If all they wanted was the data,
> they could have gotten it.
>

Again, the NOAA data is different from the MBH data. BTW Have you
figured out the 159 series yet?

Josh Halpern

unread,
Dec 12, 2003, 9:50:03 PM12/12/03
to


Nigel Persaud wrote:
Josh,

you have to learn to distinguish between proxy data and eigenvectors.
Just because eigenvector data is at FTP sites doesn't mean that the
proxy data is as well. Also, the proxy data at NOAA is different from
the proxy data that MBH used. You continue to miss this simple point. 
I've snipped below to pick out the main points. Nigel


SNIP
  
THE PROXY DATA WERE ALL AT THE NOAA PALEOCLIMATE SITE AND FREELY 
AVAILABLE TO MCINTYRE
    
Not all of the MBH proxy data is at NOAA. Also M&M point out that the
the proxy versions used by MBH usually differ from the versions at
NOAA. This is what they call MBH using obsolete data. M&M used NOAA
paleoclimate proxy data and included URLs for series that they located
at NOAA.

Please list all such series.


If MBH98 said that the proxy series came from NOAA, then this is
false, because many of the proxy series are not on NOAA.
  

Please list all such series.


  
 Some of the data is at the WDCP, but not all of it. Also Mann deleted 
      
some years from several series (!) and used obsolete data.  So the data t
hat Mann actually used is of interest as distinct from the correct data.
    
I would not be as certain of this as you are.  You also need to be more 
definite in your claims.  Which data is obsolete, when was it 
superceded, are you sure that the experts in the area agree that the 
"newer" series is better, are you sure that MBH98 used the older series, 

and further what effect would, say a NH tree ring series have on the 
data.  It appears that M&M did some serious editing themselves.
    
M&M give a listing of series. But  you don't seem to have ever read
M&M. If MBH results are not stable to newer editions of proxy series,
then that's surely a problem.

Please list all such series. 

josh halpern

Nigel Persaud

unread,
Dec 13, 2003, 10:42:37 PM12/13/03
to
Josh Halpern <j.ha...@incoming.verizon.net> wrote in message news:<v7vCb.686$gk1...@nwrddc01.gnilink.net>...

> Nigel Persaud wrote:
>
> >Josh,
> >
> >you have to learn to distinguish between proxy data and eigenvectors.
> >Just because eigenvector data is at FTP sites doesn't mean that the
> >proxy data is as well. Also, the proxy data at NOAA is different from
> >the proxy data that MBH used. You continue to miss this simple point.
> >I've snipped below to pick out the main points. Nigel
> >
> >
> >SNIP
> >
> >
> >>THE PROXY DATA WERE ALL AT THE NOAA PALEOCLIMATE SITE AND FREELY
> >>AVAILABLE TO MCINTYRE
> >>
> >>
> >
> >Not all of the MBH proxy data is at NOAA. Also M&M point out that the
> >the proxy versions used by MBH usually differ from the versions at
> >NOAA. This is what they call MBH using obsolete data. M&M used NOAA
> >paleoclimate proxy data and included URLs for series that they located
> >at NOAA.
> >
>
> Please list all such series.

M&M state the following:

"Digitally published versions at the World Data Center for
Paleoclimatology
(WDCP, http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/paleo/paleo.html) supercede the
versions used by MBH98 for the following 24 series: #1, #2, #3, #6,
#7, #8, #9, #21, #23, #27, #28, #30, #35, #37, #43, #51, #52, #54,
#55, #56, #58, #65, #105 and #112. A listing of FTP sources is
provided in the Appendix and details for each of the above series,
including comparisons of different data editions, is provided in the
Supplementary Information. (Since many datasets used by MBH98 remain
digitally unpublished, this listing is only from datasets where a
comparand was identified.)"

>
> >
> >If MBH98 said that the proxy series came from NOAA, then this is
> >false, because many of the proxy series are not on NOAA.
> >
> >
>
> Please list all such series.

See Appendix to M&M, where URLs at NOAA/WDCP are listed; series
without URLs are presumably not at NOAA/WDCP.

> >
> >
> >
> >>> Some of the data is at the WDCP, but not all of it. Also Mann deleted
> >>>
> >>>
> >>some years from several series (!) and used obsolete data. So the data t
> >>hat Mann actually used is of interest as distinct from the correct data.
> >>
> >>
> >>I would not be as certain of this as you are. You also need to be more
> >>definite in your claims. Which data is obsolete, when was it
> >>superceded, are you sure that the experts in the area agree that the
> >>"newer" series is better, are you sure that MBH98 used the older series,
> >>
> >>and further what effect would, say a NH tree ring series have on the
> >>data. It appears that M&M did some serious editing themselves.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >M&M give a listing of series. But you don't seem to have ever read
> >M&M. If MBH results are not stable to newer editions of proxy series,
> >then that's surely a problem.
> >
>
> Please list all such series.
>

See above.

I've answered you. Now have you identified Mann's 159 series. Please
admit that you have tried and failed or identify them.

w...@bas.ac.uk

unread,
Dec 14, 2003, 12:11:33 PM12/14/03
to
Nigel Persaud <pers...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >Not all of the MBH proxy data is at NOAA. Also M&M point out that the
>> >the proxy versions used by MBH usually differ from the versions at
>> >NOAA. This is what they call MBH using obsolete data. M&M used NOAA
>> >paleoclimate proxy data and included URLs for series that they located
>> >at NOAA.

>M&M state the following:

>"Digitally published versions at the World Data Center for
>Paleoclimatology
>(WDCP, http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/paleo/paleo.html) supercede the

>versions used by MBH98 for the following 24 series: #1, #2, #3...

It wouldn't be too surprising if series used in a 1998 publication,
and thus presumably dated a year or two earlier, had been updated.

-W.

--
William M Connolley | w...@bas.ac.uk | http://www.antarctica.ac.uk/met/wmc/
Climate Modeller, British Antarctic Survey | Disclaimer: I speak for myself
I'm a .signature virus! copy me into your .signature file & help me spread!

0 new messages