Sunday, March 18, 2012


cc:,, Tom Crowley <>,,, Malcolm Hughes <>
date: Thu, 21 Mar 2002 16:39:06 -0500
from: "Michael E. Mann" <>
subject: Esper et al paper

Dear Ed,
I'm really sorry I couldn't be more supportive of the final version of the manuscript. I
fully expected to be able to be more positive in my assessment. I was frankly very
disappointed when I saw the final version--it is overwhelmingly different from the version
you shared with us originally. Sadly, it seems to have suffered, and not benefited, from
the review process--a very odd scenario. I fault the reviewers as much (in fact more) that
I fault you for this. There are some really basic problems that they didn't seem to catch.
I hope neither you nor your co-authors take this personally.
I'm trying to be as diplomatic as I can be in my discussions w/ reporters, etc. but I
really wish you hadn't sprung this on us w/ no warning of the dramatic changes that were
made. I'm forced to be somewhat critical, because the flaws in some of your conclusions
need to be pointed out, or they will be exploited by those w/ alterior motives. You
certainly must have foreseen this, as must have the reviewers. I'm very disappointed, very
disappointed indeed.
I'm sharing my comments w/ Keith, Phil, Tim, Tom, Ray, and Malcolm. I am resisting the
temptation to write a letter of response to Science, although my better judgement dictates
that I should...

Professor Michael E. Mann
Department of Environmental Sciences, Clark Hall
University of Virginia
Charlottesville, VA 22903
e-mail: Phone: (434) 924-7770 FAX: (434) 982-2137
Attachment Converted: "c:\eudora\attach\treerings-comments.doc"

No comments:

Post a Comment