I smell poo. …
Originally posted by Climate Audit:
Apr 16, 2010
Steve McIntyre has followed up on the intriguing question of who selected the eleven papers for the Oxburgh panel to assess.
Oxburgh didn’t disclose how they selected their supposedly “representative” and “fair sample”. “Fair sample” and “representative” are statistical terms – terms were used in a report coauthored by a very senior professional statistician in a context where statistics are very much at issue. So I presume that the Royal Society took some care to ensure that the eleven publications actually were “representative” and a “fair sample” – and not ones that were pre-selected by UEA, rather than the Royal Society.
Interestingly, I telephoned the Royal Society yesterday, to ask who exactly it was had selected the eleven papers. Readers may remember that I had speculated whether the Royal Society Climate Change Advisory Group (which includes Phil Jones among its members) had been involved.
The press officer was very helpful, and agreed to find out for me, and I indeed got a very swift response…
…which consisted of this:
We should all be grateful to Lord Oxburgh and his expert colleagues for a thorough report offering an authoritative assessment of the CRU's research and making clear recommendations. Climate science currently attracts enormous public interest. It is therefore crucial that research sustains the highest standards of rigour and openness.
Martin Rees, President of the Royal Society
Not exactly responsive, would you say? I'll try again today.