Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums
Sign in to follow this  
Keepitsimple

The Oxburgh Report - Who Chose the Eleven?

Recommended Posts

One might find it puzzling that the head of the panel (Lord Oxburgh himself) did not know (or did not reveal) who provided the eleven papers upon which the inquiry was based. Draw your own conclusions:

Who Chose the Eleven? An Answer

The Oxburgh Report stated:

The eleven representative publications that the Panel considered in detail are listed in Appendix B. The papers cover a period of more than twenty years and were selected on the advice of the Royal Society.

This statement has been questioned ever since the publication of the Oxburgh Report. That the Royal Society did not select the papers has been clear for some time.

In Oxburgh’s testimony to the Parliamentary Committee, Oxburgh stated:

Q – Right. Can you tell us how did you choose the 11 publications?

Ox- We didn’t choose the 11 publications. They were basically what… We needed something that would be provide a pretty good introduction to work of the unit as it had evolved over the years. The publications were suggested to us came via the university and by the royal society, I believe. We feel ..let me just emphasize..they were just a start… because all of us were novices in this area, we all felt that they were a very good introduction – we moved on. We looked at other publications… we asked for raw materials, things of that kind. The press made quite a meal out of the choice of publications. For anyone on the panel, this all seems over the top. It didn’t have that significance.

Q – there are two things that arise out of that. It was a small unit. Are you saying that Jones, the subject of the investigation, chose the papers that were to be investigated… and that it wasn’t the panel or royal Society?

Ox – No suggestion Jones chose them,

Q – Where did they come from?

Ox- I believe they came … I suspect that that the […] involved was Professor Liss who was acting head of the unit who’d been brought in from outside the unit…he’s been an chemical oceanographer who is broadly interested in area. he in consultation with people with royal society and maybe others outside the unit who had some familiarity.

Q -So the list did not come from the unit – you’Re absolutely categorical ?

Ox – Well I cant

Q – So the list did not come from CRU?

Ox – I can’t prove a negative. There’s absolutely no indication that it did.

Q – Your publicity said that it came from royal society. The Panel given list before royal society asked.

Ox – I… Not as far as I know. You Might be right but I don’t believe so. No certainly I don’t think that can be true.

In a recent post, I observed that the list of eleven publications was sent out as early as March 4 – well before a perfunctory email from Trevor Davies to Martin Rees and Brian Hoskins of the Royal Society on March 12 saying that Oxburgh wanted to be able to say that the list had been chosen “in consultation with the Royal Society”, even though the list had already been sent out.

I recently noticed that Lisa Williams of the UEA Registrar’s Office was shown as the author of the list version sent to panelists – thereby offering a lead towards solving the authorship of the list, which was accompanied by the statement:

These key publications have been selected because of their pertinence to the specific criticisms which have been levelled against CRU’s research findings as a result of the theft of emails.

Today – after almost six months – the riddle of who prepared the list is resolved.

Lisa Williams wrote:

Dear Mr McIntyre

In response to your recent enquiry I can provide the following information.

I understand that the list of 11 papers for the Oxburgh review was collated by Prof Trevor Davies, in consultation with others. He was also the author of the statement at the bottom of the list.

Yours sincerely,

Lisa Williams

So the list was not selected by the Royal Society after all, but by Trevor Davies, the pro-VC of the University and former director of CRU. In consultation with “others”. Dare one hypothesize that these mysterious “others” will turn out to be Jones and Briffa after all?

Link: http://climateaudit.org/2010/09/16/who-chose-the-eleven-an-answer/#more-12044

Edited by Keepitsimple

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:lol: ... a thread of it's own, Simple ton? A thread of it's own! Was there something wrong with any of the existing climate change related threads - perhaps the dedicated Hackergate thread itself?

of course, since McIntyre's been taking a ton of shots lately over his failed paper with McKitrick (where McKitrick attempts to give some degree of legitimacy to McIntyre by providing a fake co-authorship attachment)... he's back on his favourite Hackergate target attempting to save face with his minions.

what's heelarious here is that sometime after McIntyre was able to scrutinize the list of papers reviewed by the Oxburgh committee, McIntyre went off on a ballistic mission decrying the absence of one particular paper... unfortunately for McIntyre it was an obvious attempt given he didn't raise a concern, any concern, over that "missing paper" within his own public submissions to the inquiries. That's right - McIntyre's fake outrage was revealed for it's puffery, simply because McIntyre didn't see that paper had sufficient failings to include it within his own public discourse/submission. It was simply an easy reach since he could see it wasn't one of the listed (for review) papers.

the list of papers reviewed by the Oxburgh inquiry reflected those that were the profile targets of the denialsphere... reflected the papers being discussed, ad nauseum, by the anally retentive, line-by-line email parsers... the deniers best/loudest purveyors of distortion. And... yes... the papers were provided to the Oxburgh inquiry in concert with the involvement of members of the Royal Society.

suck it up Simple ton... why not spend some of your available time actually making your case against AGW - hey?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:lol: ... a thread of it's own, Simple ton?

suck it up Simple ton...

How does Walso avoid suspension?

Edited by M.Dancer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You mean before he's reported on and dealt with ? I think it's just a waiting game.

probably because his remarks are quite tame compared to other insulting posters...I've been insulted far far worse than waldo manages and I still see those posters here...I dealt with them myself using the ignore feature...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

probably because his remarks are quite tame compared to other insulting posters...I've been insulted far far worse than waldo manages and I still see those posters here...

Definitely. Hell, you and I have gone at it at each other far worse than anything ole Waldo has pulled off. (But I still think you're a good man, Wyly, for the record. :) )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Definitely. Hell, you and I have gone at it at each other far worse than anything ole Waldo has pulled off. (But I still think you're a good man, Wyly, for the record. :) )

Agreed! Wyly is one of those rare delights - someone you can argue with without getting called names for disagreeing. Once in a while he actually changes my mind! :D

I think the three of us could all have a good time over a table of beer!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed! Wyly is one of those rare delights - someone you can argue with without getting called names for disagreeing. Once in a while he actually changes my mind! :D

Well, he was calling me names...but an argument could be made that i started it, so I can't hold it against him.

I think the three of us could all have a good time over a table of beer!

I have no doubt at all! Political differences don't trump everything else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed! Wyly is one of those rare delights - someone you can argue with without getting called names for disagreeing. Once in a while he actually changes my mind! :D

I think the three of us could all have a good time over a table of beer!

Table of beer???

How big's the table?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...