A comment worth pulling out and highlighting (even if it is somewhat critical of me). Mickey Glantz, whose ideas about climate science and policy and politics I greatly respect, takes me to task for airing Jim Hansen’s draft ENSO paper:
You know that Hansen’s paper was just a draft…. Anyone could (and some did) jump on a bandwagon that was still parked in the barn.
So was it appropriate to air this thing in public, given that Hansen himself was clear that it was just a draft, subject to revision? Or is Mickey right? On balance, I think these discussions are most useful and interesting in full view. But it’s a close call. Comments and discussion encouraged.