|Details1:||CCNet 96/2005 - 20 July 2005 |
WHEN SCIENCE AND DEMOCRACY COLLIDE: CLIMATE RESEARCHER REFUSES TO DISCLOSE REQUESTED DATA
Dr. Mann offered a strong rebuttal of the Canadians' 2003 journal article,
explaining that it didn't correctly apply his techniques. In doing so,
however, he revealed details of his data and mathematical methods that
hadn't appeared in his original paper. When Messrs. McIntyre and McKitrick
pointed this out to Nature, the journal that first published the hockey-stick
graph, Dr. Mann and his two co-authors had to publish a partial correction.
In it, they acknowledged one wrong date and the use of some tree-ring data
that hadn't been cited in the original paper, and they offered some new
details of the statistical methods. The correction, however, stated that
"none of these errors affect our previously published results." Mr. McIntyre
thinks there are more errors but says his audit is limited because he still
doesn't know the exact computer code Dr. Mann used to generate the graph.
Dr. Mann refuses to release it. "Giving them the algorithm would be giving
in to the intimidation tactics that these people are engaged in," he says.
--Antonio Regalado, The Wall Street Journal, 14 February 2005
According to The Wall Street Journal, you have declined to release the exact
computer code you used to generate your results. (a) Is this correct? (b)
What policy on sharing research and methods do you follow? (c) What is the
source of that policy? (d) Provide this exact computer code used to generate
--Joe Barton and Ed Whitfield, The Committee on Energy and Commerce,
U.S. House of Representatives, 23 June 2005
I have made available all of the research data that I am required to under United States policy as set by the National Science Foundation.
In accordance with the rules promulgated by the Foundation and supported
by the Foundation's General Counsel, I maintain the right to decline to
release any computer codes, which are my intellectual property.
--Michael E. Mann, The Pennsylvania State University, 15 July 2005
I am quite sure that policy-makers have long assumed that no paleoclimate
scientist whose work was being used for climate policy would be taking
narrow technical stands on title to source code. I am sure that they, like
me, would have assumed that studies on topics of such importance would
have the broadest possible disclosure and closest possible examination.
It really doesn't matter whether NSF has the tools and is not using them
or whether NSF lacks the tools. In either case, the situation is surely
unacceptable from a public point of view.
--Steve McIntyre, 19 July 2005
CCNet is a scholarly electronic network. To subscribe/unsubscribe, please contact the editor
Benny Peiser (firstname.lastname@example.org) - http://www.staff.livjm.ac.uk/spsbpeis/. Information
circulated on this network is for scholarly and educational use only. The attached
information may not be copied or reproduced for any other purposes without prior permission
of the copyright holders. DISCLAIMER: The opinions, beliefs and viewpoints expressed in the
articles and texts and in other CCNet contributions do not necessarily reflect the opinions,
beliefs and viewpoints of the editor.