Wednesday, May 9, 2012

4061.txt

date: Tue, 04 Jan 2005 11:57:12 +0000
from: Tim Osborn <t.osbornatXYZxyz.ac.uk>
subject: Rutherford et al. [2004]
to: Phil Jones <p.jones@uea.ac.uk>,k.briffa@uea.ac.uk

<x-flowed>
Phil & Keith - I guess we just wait and see how things pan out over the
Rutherford et al paper, though I was concerned that Mike was using this
paper as a vehicle for publishing points first against Esper et al. and at
a later stage also against McIntyre and McItrick - points that would be
made better elsewhere. I'm uncomfortable about Rutherford et al. being
made the main "rebuttal" of M&M - and it's disappointing that Mike never
told me he'd withdrawn his formal response from Climatic Change (I've
removed our web comment now, since no formal response seems to be on the
horizon). The Wahl and Ammam paper should help here I guess. - Tim

Dr Timothy J Osborn
Climatic Research Unit
School of Environmental Sciences, University of East Anglia
Norwich NR4 7TJ, UK

e-mail: t.osbornatXYZxyz.ac.uk
phone: +44 1603 592089
fax: +44 1603 507784
web: http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/~timo/
sunclock: http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/~timo/sunclock.htm

</x-flowed>

No comments:

Post a Comment