328
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
SW: →NRC report: Add North citation
In 2006, following a request from the U.S. Congress, the National Research Council issued a report entitled [http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=11676&page=R1 "Surface Temperature Reconstructions for the Last 2,000 Years"] (NRC). In a "Supplementary Information" section, the ISPM contends: "The National Research Council recommended that proxies sensitive to precipitation be avoided in temperature reconstructions and, in particular, that strip-bark bristlecones and foxtails be avoided." [ISPM 3.2a].
However, this would appear to be an imprecise summary of the NRC recommendations. The NRC stated that "[U]sing proxies sensitive to hydrologic variables ... should be done only if the proxy–temperature relationship has climatologic justification." (NRC, p. 116-7) It should be clarified as well that the NRC did not recommend against the use bristlecones and foxtails as proxies, but rather stated that "'''strip-bark samples'''" of these proxies should be avoided [emphasus emphasis added].
The ISPM goes on: "However, none of the IPCC reconstructions for the past millennium observe the National Research Council recommendations."There is no citation or detail given for this assertion, but it is important to note that this finding is not contained in the NRC report itself (which did review all of the reconstructions cited in the IPCC). Indeed, in a live online discussion of the "hockey-stick" controversy, Gerald North, chairman of the NRC report panel stated: "I feel certain that the most recent studies by Cook, d'Arrigo and others do take this [strip-bark problem] into account." [http://chronicle.com/live/2006/09/hockey_stick/]
==External links==
