Comments on “Erroneous Model Field Representations in Multiple Pseudoproxy Studies: Corrections and Implications”

Smerdon et al. report two errors in the climate model grid data used in previous pseudoproxy-based climate reconstruction experiments that do not impact the main conclusions of those works. The errors did not occur in subsequent works and therefore have no impact on the results presented therein. Re...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of climate 2013-05, Vol.26 (10), p.3482-3484
Main Authors: Rutherford, Scott D., Mann, Michael E., Wahl, Eugene, Ammann, Caspar
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Calibration
Climate models
Climate proxies
Climate system
Climatology
CORRESPONDENCE
Geodetic position
Global climate models
Modeling
Proxy reporting
Proxy statements
Statistical variance
Studies
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Smerdon et al. report two errors in the climate model grid data used in previous pseudoproxy-based climate reconstruction experiments that do not impact the main conclusions of those works. The errors did not occur in subsequent works and therefore have no impact on the results presented therein. Results presented here for the Climate System Model (CSM) using multiple pseudoproxy noise realizations show that the quantitative differences between the incorrect and corrected results are within the expected variability of the noise realizations. It should also be made clear that the climate reconstruction method used in Smerdon et al. to illustrate the nature of the errors, the Regularized Expectation Maximization method with Ridge Regression (RegEM-Ridge), is known to produce climate reconstructions with considerable variance loss and has been superseded by RegEM-TTLS (TTLS indicates truncated total least squares).
ISSN:0894-8755
1520-0442
DOI:10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00065.1