Professional Documents
Culture Documents
1200426564
1200426564
uk>
To: mann@psu.edu
Subject: Re: Edouard Bard
Date: Tue Jan 15 14:49:24 2008
Cc: gschmidt@giss.nasa.gov
Mike,
Good triumphs over bad - eventually!
It does take a long time though!
Maybe Ray P. wants to do something. He is more up to speed
on all this - and reads French!
Cheers
Phil
At 14:33 15/01/2008, Michael Mann wrote:
Phil,
thanks for sending on, I've sent to Ray P. The Passoti piece is remarkably
bad for a
Science "news" piece, it would be worth discussing this w/ the editor, Donald
Kennedy
who is quite reasonable, and probably a bit embarrassed by this.
My french isn't great, but I could see there was something also about the
Moberg
reconstructions, Courtilot obviously trying to use that to arge that the
recent warming
isn't anomalous (even though the Moberg recon actually supports that it is).
I'll need to read over all of this and try to digest when I have a chance
later today.
Keep up the good fight, the attacks are getting more and more desparate as the
contrarians are increasingly losing the battle (both scientifically, and in
the public
sphere). one thing I've learned is that the best way to deal w/ these attacks
is just to
go on doing good science, something I learned from Ben...
talk to you later,
mike
Well, the Phil Jones wrote:
Gavin, Mike,
Jean,
Will you be going to the EGU in Vienna this April?
This disagreement with Courtillot seems to be getting out of hand.
Edouard isn't having a great time at the moment.
The data Courtillot used is not on the CRU web site. We did produce it,
but for a paper Keith worked on in 2002. Courtillot's global is CRU data, but
not the globe - it is land north of 20N and April to September only!
The French Academy is looking a bit of a laughing stock! I did meet
Courtillot in March last year - he was courteous, but he should read the
literature!
Cheers
Phil
Hello Phil,
These are indeed the papers submitted to EPSL. Courtillot has control on other
journals
and I'm sure he will manage to publish them somewhere else ...
As you can read below, Courtillot accused me publicly of scientific misconduct
in a
written message sent in copy to the president of the Academy of Science, to
the
president of the CNRS and to the Director of the Cabinet of the Ministry of
Higher
Education and Research. According to Courtillot, my misconduct is that I have
acted as a
hacker, introducing a "note added in proof" in my EPSL paper without the
editor and the
publisher even knowing it !
Courtillot even requested the organization this week of a secret meeting at
the Academy
in order to expose the case (yes, you've read it correctly, this is officially
called
"un comit� secret"). I am not a member of the Academy and nobody is there to
defend my
case. Hence, I was obliged to write this long email to explain my position to
some
academicians.
I'm not really planning for sending soon something to Science as my next week
will be
hectic with this "inquisition" committee against me and the impact of the
"droit de
r�ponse" in newspaper(s). I am sure that Courtillot will even use Pasotti's
poor paper
against me during the audit of the case at the Academy. As I am the main
author for the
Comment, sending a rebuttal to Science may even be counterproductive. Do you
plan to
send something to Science about the fact that the Figure misrepresent Tglobe ?
I'm quite depressed because this is taking a lot of my time and energy.
Everybody at
home is mad at me, children and wife, because I spend hours and days in the
lab writing
and checking emails and answering phone calls.
Best wishes, Edouard
[7]http://www.academie-
sciences.fr/conferences/seances_publiques/html/debat_13_03_07.htm
[8]http://www.canalacademie.com/Modelisation-du-climat-et-role-du.html
ou mes publications, notamment ce 'Commentaire' Bard & Delaygue (2008 EPSL).
Sur cette
affaire, je n'ai accept� de faire aucun commentaire dans la presse et j'ai
refus� toutes
les demandes d'interview par les media audiovisuels. M�me si je ne le voulais
pas, je
suis maintenant forc� de sortir de ma r�serve et de me d�fendre publiquement
contre les
accusations de M. Courtillot.
La "note added in proof" dont vous parle M. Courtillot a �t� soumise
normalement pour
approbation au r�dacteur d'EPSL (editor en anglais), M. Rob van de Hilst du
MIT, comme
le demande classiquement l'�diteur Elsevier (publisher) lorsqu'il envoie les
�preuves
d'un article � son auteur. Vous trouverez ci-dessous la copie de mon dernier
�change �
ce sujet avec M. van der Hilst qui explique clairement que je n'ai absolument
rien � me
reprocher. M. van der Hilst �crit lui-m�me "INDEED, YOU DID THE RIGHT THING IN
ASKING MY
APPROVAL.". Le fait que ma "note added in proof" ait �t� incluse dans la
version sous
presse de notre Commentaire est simplement d� � une erreur technique de
l'�diteur
Elsevier. Il est �videmment IMPOSSIBLE pour un auteur de modifier lui-m�me
quoi que ce
soit sur le site web d'Elsevier !
La meilleure preuve que cette fameuse note a �t� CRUCIALE pour clarifier
l'origine des
donn�es utilis�es par M. Courtillot est que justement le r�dacteur, M. van der
Hilst, a
finalement d�cid� de la publier in extenso pour expliquer aux lecteurs son
importance
(sa note �ditoriale compl�te est copi�e plus bas). M. van der Hilst �crit
ainsi "Bard
and Delaygue noticed inconsistencies in the citation of data sources in
Courtillot et
al. (2008). and Courtillot et al. (2007)..." "instead of global, annual means
they are
seasonal estimates from land regions north of 20�N. With access to the
correct data
files readers can form their own opinion on the analysis of and conclusions by
Courtillot et al. (2007)."
Il aura donc fallu une ann�e (voire plus, depuis Le Mou�l et al. 2005 EPSL) et
de
nombreux courriers et publications, pour que l'on sache enfin quelles sont les
temp�ratures repr�sent�es par Courtillot et al. (2007) et Le Mou�l et al.
(2005). La
r�alit� est que la courbe de temp�rature utilis�e par Courtillot & Le Mou�l
provient
d'un calcul de moyenne r�gionale et saisonni�re (Briffa et al. JGR 2001) fond�
sur les
s�ries de temp�ratures de Jones et al. (1999 Rev. Geophys.). Le fichier cit�
par
Courtillot et al. (2007) n'est donc pas un de ceux distribu�s par M. Philip D.
Jones
(University of East Anglia & Hadley Center), ni m�me tir� directement de
l'article de
Jones et al. (1999). La citation correcte aurait d� �tre l'article de Briffa
et al.
(2001) dont Jones est coauteur. Ceci �tant dit, le probl�me CRUCIAL est qu'il
ne s'agit
pas de moyenne annuelle mondiale (Tglobe) comme l'ont �crit Courtillot et al.
(2007) et
Le Mou�l et al. (2005), mais en fait de donn�es r�gionales ET saisonni�res
(latitudes
>20�N ET seulement sur les continents ET seulement pendant la saison chaude
d'Avril �
Septembre). Les courbes de la temp�rature moyenne annuelle mondiale (de MM.
Phil Jones
d'UEA ou de Jim Hansen de la NASA) ne pr�sentent pas de corr�lation marqu�e
avec
l'�clairement solaire et les indices g�omagn�tiques, en particulier au niveau
des ann�es
70 (voir la Figure 1 de notre Commentaire publi� par EPSL qui repr�sente la
VERITABLE
courbe de temp�rature globale distribu�e par M. Phil Jones).
Pour ce qui concerne les donn�es d'irradiance solaire totale, les lecteurs
d'EPSL sont
maintenant pleinement inform�s du fait que les donn�es utilis�es par
Courtillot et al.
(2007) et Le Mou�l et al. (2005) NE sont PAS des donn�es d'irradiance totale
(Solanki
2002), mais seulement de la petite composante ultraviolette (Tobiska 2001).
Dans leur R�ponse publi�e par EPSL, M. Courtillot et ses coll�gues
accompagnent la
nouvelle citation d'une note tr�s surprenante (page 2, colonne 1): "(Tobiska,
2001;
note that in Le Mou�l et al., (2005), this data set was erroneously attributed
to
Solanki, 2002, although resulting changes are negligible)". Dans leurs deux
articles Le
Mou�l et al. (2005) et Courtillot et al. (2007) auraient donc fait la m�me
erreur de
citation (Solanki 2002 au lieu de Tobiska 2001). Le probl�me est que
justement les
changements qui en r�sultent NE sont PAS du tout n�gligeables. Si Courtillot
et al.
(2007) et Le Mou�l et al. (2005) avaient effectivement utilis� Solanki (2002),
ils
auraient in�vitablement repr�sent� la courbe d'irradiance S(t) sur tout le 20e
si�cle
car leur figure est focalis�e sur tout ce si�cle et que l'analyse de Solanki
(2002)
porte pr�cis�ment sur TOUT le 20e si�cle. Pour que l'utilisation de la courbe
de Solanki
n'entra�ne que des changements n�gligeables, comme ils l'�crivent, il faudrait
que ces
auteurs tronquent d�lib�r�ment la courbe de Solanki pour n'en montrer que la
moiti� (les
derniers 50 ans). C'est une accusation grave que je ne fais bien �videmment
pas. Par
cons�quent, l'utilisation de la courbe de Solanki (2002) devant �tre faite
pour tout le
20e si�cle, ceci entra�ne des changements importants comme les lecteurs de
notre
Commentaire peuvent le constater (voir la Figure 1 qui repr�sente la VERITABLE
courbe
d'irradiance solaire totale distribu�e par M. S. Solanki pour TOUT le 20e
si�cle). En
particulier, il appara�t clairement que les deux courbes g�omagn�tiques ESK et
SIT
propos�es par Courtillot et al. (2007) et Le Mou�l et al. (2005) sont en
DESACCORD
FLAGRANT vers les ann�es 70 avec les VERITABLES courbes de la temp�rature
moyenne
annuelle mondiale et de l'irradiance solaire totale (dans notre Commentaire,
nous
soulignons au passage que l'index g�omagn�tique AA est en bien meilleur
accord, fait
connu et publi� depuis dix ans, e.g. Cliver et al. 1998 GRL).
Monsieur Courtillot n'apporte aucune r�ponse � ces nombreux probl�mes. Par
ailleurs, il
est navrant de constater que dans ses conf�rences publiques r�centes (voir
celle donn�e
lors du 125e anniversaire de l'ESPCI avec fichier powerpoint disponible sur le
site web
[9]http://www.espci.fr/actu/espci125/pgm0011.htm ), M. Courtillot continue
encore de
montrer le m�me diagramme erron�, avec une courbe de temp�rature "Tglobe" qui
n'est pas
une courbe de moyenne annuelle mondiale de la temp�rature et une courbe "S(t)"
qui n'est
pas une courbe d'irradiance solaire totale. De plus, M. Courtillot montre
encore cette
courbe sur 50 ans seulement, alors m�me qu'il a pleinement connaissance de
travaux qui
donnent l'irradiance sur le tout le 20e si�cle (Solanki 2002, article qu'il a
lui-m�me
cit� depuis 2005).
Je vous prie de croire, Chers Coll�gues, � l'assurance de mes sentiments
respectueux et
d�vou�s.
Edouard Bard
----------------------------------------------
Edouard BARD
Professeur au Coll�ge de France
Chaire de l'�volution du climat et de l'oc�an
Directeur adjoint du CEREGE, UMR-6635
Le Trocad�ro, Europole de l'Arbois BP80
13545 Aix-en-Provence cdx 4
Tel 04 42 50 74 18, 04 42 50 74 20 (secr.)
Fax 04 42 50 74 21, email [10]bard@cerege.fr
[11]http://www.college-de-france.fr/default/EN/all/evo_cli/
----------------------------------------------
**************************************************
**************************************************
**************************************************
>In principle, after approval of a 'comment' the other party is given the
opportunity
to respond, and approval of the 'reply' closes the process. To avoid
going-back-and-forth, in my view the material should not appear on line until
after
approval of the corrected proofs.
I agree.
>In this case you added material to the 'comment' after seeing the 'reply',
and without
my consent.
I disagree with your accusation. I did NOT try to add anything and hide it
from you.
Indeed, I immediately sent an email to you in order to propose our 'note added
in
proof'. I did this because I knew very well that such a note could not be
published
without your consent (during 4 years I also served EPSL). Indeed, the Elsevier
message
accompanying the uncorrected proofs is very clear on this issue "Significant
changes to
the article as accepted for publication will only be considered at this stage
with
permission from the Editor." This was exactly the purpose of my email to you.
>In my view the sole purpose of your addition is - or, at least, should be -
> to help clarify an important issue for the readers.
>(NB I am sure you realize that your 'note added in proof' could be perceived
by readers
as an accusation that Courtillot et al are not honest about the source of the
data, in
particulare related to the Tglobe file, and that would be quite a serious
matter.)
**************************************************
Editorial Note
The paper entitled "Are there connections between the Earth's magnetic field
and
climate?" published in Earth and Planetary Science Letters (Courtillot et al.,
2007)
triggered a "comment" (Bard and Delaygue, 2008) and a "reply" (Courtillot et
al, 2008).
These publications, and EPSL's handling of the "comment" and "reply"
(hereinafter C08),
have received significant attention in electronic and printed news media.
In a "comment-reply" exchange, standard editorial policy gives the responder
the last
word and requires that the "comment" is not changed once accepted by the
Editor and
replied to by the authors whose work is being criticized. In this case, Bard
and
Delaygue noticed inconsistencies in the citation of data sources in C08 and
Courtillot
et al. (2007) after the (accepted) "comment" and "reply" had appeared online
(but before
they received galley proofs). They pointed this out in a "Note added in
Proof" to their
"comment". Being against EPSL's policy this modification was disapproved (and
removed). However, properly reporting data is an essential aspect of
scientific
communication in that it enables independent evaluations of the analysis
presented by
authors. Therefore, Courtillot et al. were asked to clarify (in C08) the
source of the
data used.
For full disclosure, the note by Bard and Delaygue is reproduced here:
"In their Response to our Comment, Courtillot et al. state that for the total
irradiance
curve S(t) they had used the SOLAR2000 model product by Tobiska (2001) instead
of the
century-long record by Solanki (2002) cited in their original paper
(Courtillot et al.
2007). However, the SOLAR2000 model is restricted to the UV component and
their total
solar irradiance is severely flawed as pointed out by Lean (2002). For the
global
temperature Tglobe curve cited from Jones et al. (1999) in Courtillot et al.
(2007),
these authors now state in their response that they had used the following
data file:
monthly_land_and_ocean_90S_90N_df_1901-2001mean_dat.txt. We were unable to
find this
file even by contacting its putative author who specifically stated to us that
it is not
one of his files (Dr. Philip D. Jones, written communication dated Oct. 23,
2007)."
In response, Courtillot et al. (2007) provided two modifications (in italics)
in C08:
"The solar irradiance daily time series we used is that from the SOLAR2000
research
grade model upgraded to v1.23A (file Five_cycle_v1_23a.txt dated 23 April
2003) which
covers the time period from 14 February 1947 to 31 May 2002 (Tobiska, 2001;
note that in
Le Mou�l et al, 2005, this data set was erroneously attributed to Solanki,
2002,
although resulting changes are negligible)." and
"The temperature series we actually used is obtained from Briffa et al. (2001)
-
specifically, column 7 of
[30]ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/paleo/treering/reconstructions/n_hem_temp/brif
fa200
1jgr3.txt , that is, years 1871 to 1997 - which is, originally, from Jones et
al (1999)
as quoted. All we did was to average it over an 11yr sliding window."
The ftp link shows that the temperatures used are indeed from Jones and co-
workers, but
instead of global, annual means they are seasonal estimates from land regions
north of
20�N. With access to the correct data files readers can form their own
opinion on the
analysis of and conclusions by Courtillot et al. (2007).
Robert D. van der Hilst
Editor for Earth and Planetary Science Letters
Bard, E., and Delaygue, G., 'Comment on "Are there connections between the
Earth's
magnetic field and climate?" by V. Courtillot, Y. Gallet, J.-L. Le Mou�l, F.
Fluteau, A.
Genevey', Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 265, 302-307, 2008
Courtillot, V., Gallet, Y., Le Mou�l, J.-L., Fluteau, F., and Genevey, A., Are
there
connections between the Earth's magnetic field and climate?, Earth Planet.
Sci. Lett.,
253, 328-339, 2007
Courtillot, V., Gallet, Y., Le Mou�l, J.-L., Fluteau, F., and Genevey, A.,
'Response to
comment on "Are there connections between Earth's magnetic field and climate"
by Bard,
E., and Delaygue, G., Earth Planet. Sci. Lett., 265, 302-307, 2008
--
----------------------------------------------
Edouard BARD
Professeur au Coll�ge de France
Chaire de l'�volution du climat et de l'oc�an
Directeur adjoint du CEREGE, UMR-6635
Le Trocad�ro, Europole de l'Arbois BP80
13545 Aix-en-Provence cdx 4
Tel 04 42 50 74 18, 04 42 50 74 20 (secr.)
Fax 04 42 50 74 21, email [31]bard@cerege.fr
[32]http://www.college-de-france.fr/default/EN/all/evo_cli/
----------------------------------------------
--
----------------------------------------------
Edouard BARD
Professeur au Coll�ge de France
Chaire de l'�volution du climat et de l'oc�an
Directeur adjoint du CEREGE, UMR-6635
Le Trocad�ro, Europole de l'Arbois BP80
13545 Aix-en-Provence cdx 4
Tel 04 42 50 74 18, 04 42 50 74 20 (secr.)
Fax 04 42 50 74 21, email [33]bard@cerege.fr
[34]http://www.college-de-france.fr/default/EN/all/evo_cli/
----------------------------------------------
--
--
Michael E. Mann
Associate Professor
Director, Earth System Science Center (ESSC)
[41]http://www.met.psu.edu/dept/faculty/mann.htm
Prof. Phil Jones
Climatic Research Unit Telephone +44 (0) 1603 592090
School of Environmental Sciences Fax +44 (0) 1603 507784
University of East Anglia
Norwich Email p.jones@uea.ac.uk
NR4 7TJ
UK
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
References
1. mailto:jean.jouzel@lsce.ipsl.fr
2. http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr/
3. mailto:p.jones@uea.ac.uk
4. mailto:bard@cerege.fr
5. mailto:bard@cerege.fr
6. mailto:bard@cerege.fr
7. http://www.academie-
sciences.fr/conferences/seances_publiques/html/debat_13_03_07.htm
8. http://www.canalacademie.com/Modelisation-du-climat-et-role-du.html
9. http://www.espci.fr/actu/espci125/pgm0011.htm
10. mailto:bard@cerege.fr
11. http://www.college-de-france.fr/default/EN/all/evo_cli/
12. mailto:courtil@ipgp.jussieu.fr
13. mailto:lemouel@ipgp.jussieu.fr
14. mailto:fluteau@ipgp.jussieu.fr
15. mailto:gallet@ipgp.jussieu.fr
16. mailto:zerbib@ipgp.jussieu.fr
17. mailto:dyon@ipgp.jussieu.fr
18. mailto:catherine.brechignac@lac.u-psud.fr
19. mailto:catherine.brechignac@cnrs-dir.fr
20. mailto:J.Hoffmann@ibmc.u-strasbg.fr
21. mailto:jules.hoffmann@academie-sciences.fr
22. mailto:laurentjoffrin@yahoo.fr
23. mailto:smarchand@lefigaro.fr
24. mailto:pgillet@geologie.ens-lyon.fr
25. mailto:philippe.gillet@recherche.gouv.fr
26. mailto:hilst@MIT.EDU
27. mailto:bard@cerege.fr
28. mailto:hilst@MIT.EDU
29. mailto:bard@cerege.fr
30.
ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/paleo/treering/reconstructions/n_hem_temp/briffa20
01jgr3.txt
31. mailto:bard@cerege.fr
32. http://www.college-de-france.fr/default/EN/all/evo_cli/
33. mailto:bard@cerege.fr
34. http://www.college-de-france.fr/default/EN/all/evo_cli/
35. mailto:p.jones@uea.ac.uk
36. mailto:jean.jouzel@lsce.ipsl.fr
37. mailto:jzipsl@ipsl.jussieu.fr
38. mailto:jean.jouzel@lsce.ipsl.fr
39. mailto:p.jones@uea.ac.uk
40. mailto:mann@psu.edu
41. http://www.met.psu.edu/dept/faculty/mann.htm