Welcome to the Gallery – a place where you'll find hope and strength through the healing power of art and the universal reach of technology –
a place where you can
Connect, Create, and Thrive!
Interested in partnering with us?
Click here to find out how!
Displaying (4) Comments | Comment on this piece | Report objectionable art
Regarding the stepwise mhoetd of reconstruction, :First off, after a 7 years you'd think that he [McIntyre] would be aware that the reconstructions are done in a step-wise fashion i.e. you use as much information as is available as far back as you can. Back to 1500 you use everything that goes back that far, back to 1400 a little less etc. So a proper no-dendro/no-Tijl reconstruction will not just be made with what is available in 1000AD.Now :Hereâs where I think the difference lies. Mannâs graphics all show the results of spliced reconstructions rather than what you get with proxies going back to AD1000. The provenance of the network used in Mannâs November 2009 revision of a figure in his SI isnât described as clearly as it might be. My interpretation of the figure is that the network includes 71 Luterbacher gridded European series which use instrumental temperature data. [Emphasis added]In this , McIntyre first refuses to explain what he meant, while snidely implying that his exposition is much clearer than Mann's original article:scientist Posted Jul 30, 2010 at 8:00 PM * Splicing or mixing?** the whole thing is a reconstruction, no? What do you mean by the term in plural? Do you mean proxies? Some sort of intermediate results (by grid square)?Really hard for me to follow your explanation and Iâve followed this thing for a while. It sounds like youâre talking to yourself, not explaining a concept to the readers.Steve: If you find my explanations unhelpful, you can always consult the original article. Then under further prodding, McIntyre makes clear that he does understand the stepwise reconstruction mhoetd (and continues to gratuitously insult the questioner, while indulging in self-puffery):scientist Posted Jul 30, 2010 at 10:03 PM A. Someone elseâs writing does not excuse yours.B. Editorial demands make papers easier to read than stream of consciousness, same-day-published blog posts.C. Clear writing is clear thinking. In science, engineering, business, military, etc.D. You donât even have a citation for the âoriginal articleâ.Steve: there is a link to Mannâs website. Mann does stepwise reconstructions. âSplicingâ of reconstructions means splicing of the stepwise reconstructions. In any given blog post, Iâm afraid that I donât necessarily re-define terms and, to that extent, some familiarity with the mhoetds is often presumed on the part of readers. I try to write clearly, but unfortunately I donât have time to recap things in each blog post. There are other excellent climate blogs if you want articles on a more popular level. Or other posts at this blog may interest you.So did McIntyre really think that the no dendro figure was unclear? Or was this just an excuse to show a reconstruction that is less of a hockey stick , even though it in no way corresponded to Mann's mhoetdology?Let's see how unclear (revised or otherwise) was. The legend clearly shows that the various sub-networks are compared to the original (i.e. full stepwise ) CPS reconstruction : original NH CPSNH CPS minus 7NH CPS w/o tree ringsNH CPS minus 7 w/o tree ringsInstrumental RecordSo there's no reason to think any of these networks used anything other than the original stepwise reconstruction mhoetd, nor that they would exclude any other proxies than those explicitly stated.Not only that, but on (referred to by McIntyre) we even find:The previously posted version of the figure had an error due to incorrect application of the procedure described in the paper for updating the network in each century increment. In the newly corrected figure, we have added the result for NH CPS without both tree-rings *and* the 7 potential problem series. [Emphasis added]And on top of all that, descends from 1000 while Mann's rises, so it doesn't even match in the 1000-1100 step!Incompetence, dishonesty, or both? You decide.
By: | Aug 12, 2014 | Report Comment
Just cause it's simple doesn't mean it's not super hlefpul.
By: | Mar 25, 2013 | Report Comment
This is getting a bit more sibejctuve, but I much prefer the Zune Marketplace. The interface is colorful, has more flair, and some cool features like Mixview' that let you quickly see related albums, songs, or other users related to what you're listening to. Clicking on one of those will center on that item, and another set of neighbors will come into view, allowing you to navigate around exploring by similar artists, songs, or users. Speaking of users, the Zune Social is also great fun, letting you find others with shared tastes and becoming friends with them. You then can listen to a playlist created based on an amalgamation of what all your friends are listening to, which is also enjoyable. Those concerned with privacy will be relieved to know you can prevent the public from seeing your personal listening habits if you so choose.
By: | Jun 17, 2012 | Report Comment
This piece was cgeont, well-written, and pithy.
By: | Dec 13, 2011 | Report Comment
Wheel of Life
jay
There are 10 pieces of art in this thread