date: Fri Oct 31 16:48:59 2003
from: Keith Briffa <k.briffa@uea.ac.uk>
subject: Fwd: Attack on  Mann et al (IPCC) work
to: mann@virginia.edu, rbradley@geo.umass.edu, mhughes@ltrr.arizona.edu

   Mike et al
   Here is what we sent to Heike - I suspect she will forward it to the New York News desk. I
   am happy to approach others later and you should definitely send to Dick Kerr. We have
   drafted a posting for CLIMLIST and the skeptics site but Tim is sending these in from home
   . I have to turn to doing the final PhD proposal here now because the deadline is tonight .
   At least your response in the in the public domain and I think it is pitched right and was
   a good decision. Lets see how things go from here and pick up the issue of further
   supporting statements , work etc when you see how the chips fall. Mike , you need to have a
   few drinks and step away from this now for a while - take counsel from Ray and Malcolm and
   take a deserved rest. Have a good weekend all of you - signing off for a few days.
   Keith

     Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2003 16:33:21 +0000
     To: h.langenberg@nature.com
     From: Keith Briffa <k.briffa@uea.ac.uk>
     Subject: Attack on  Mann et al (IPCC) work
     Cc: t.osborn@uea.ac.uk, p.jones@uea.ac.uk
     Dear Heike
     following on from our 'phone conversation this morning , I am attaching a response by
     Mann and his colleagues , to what seems at this time to be a seriously flawed so-called
     "audit" of their well known paper originally published in Nature in 1998. The "audit"
     was published (with free-access) in Energy and Environment (Vol.14, No6.) see -
     http://www.multi-science.co.uk/ee_openaccess.htm

     News of this audit , by McInyre and McKitrick   (MM) is spreading rapidly and has
     already been reported in USA Today see-
      http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2003-10-28-schulz_x.htm
     and is likely to be picked up by the wider press in the near future.
     The amazing and depressing aspect of this is that Mann and his colleagues were never
     given the opportunity to see or comment on the MM paper before it was published . Nor
     were they given the chance to comment before the newspaper article . It seems , from a
     necessarily cursory and indirect examination of MM work by Mann, that MM have made
     serious errors in their analysis that likely completely negate their results (they
     reconstruct anomalous warmth in the 15th century AD, in direct contradiction of the Mann
     et al work) . The reason I feel you may be interested in doing a news item on this issue
     is that the MM work has also , already been cited in the US Senate , in a blatant
     attempt to influence the political debate ,when clearly the work has not been subject to
     any independent scientific scrutiny .
     Myself , Tim Osborn and Phil Jones (all at this Unit) are submitting a comment on this
     to CLIMLIST  (and will post a copy of Mann et al reply), where the MM work has also been
     widely circulated .
     If you or your colleagues think this is a suitable subject for a news item , I suggest
     you contact Mike Mann directly
     Michael Mann
     Office: (434) 924-7770
     Cell: (434) 825-3969
     mann@virginia.edu
     Our interest in this affair is from the standpoint of preserving the integrity of the
     scientific process - we are independent observers of the Mann work on Northern
     Hemisphere temperatures  , see eg
     Our Science perspectives piece on Esper et al.
     [1]http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/summary/295/5563/2227?ijkey=6U4G9GwPALryA&keyty
     pe=ref&siteid=sci

     However , in this case we worry that a bad precedent is being set , when a paper
     (seemingly badly refereed ? ) so much at odds with other work , is so widely and quickly
     spun, when the authors , or independent researchers have no opportunity to examine, or
     answer the controversial conclusions.
     The issue may also come at you from another angle; Fred Singer , who I believe is
     actively organising a greenhouse skeptic lobby in Washington , has declared his
     intention to demand , from Nature, an official retraction of the original Mann et al
     1998 paper, justified by the publication of the MM work. Such a request is patent
     nonsense.
     yours sincerely
     Professor Keith R. Briffa
     Dr. Timothy J. Osborn
     Professor Philip D.Jones

     Climatic Research Unit
     University of East Anglia
     Norwich, NR4 7TJ, U.K.

     Phone: +44-1603-593909
     Fax: +44-1603-507784

   --
   Professor Keith Briffa,
   Climatic Research Unit
   University of East Anglia
   Norwich, NR4 7TJ, U.K.

   Phone: +44-1603-593909
   Fax: +44-1603-507784
   [2]http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/people/briffa[3]/

