Well, here we are three days after the release of the US National Academy of Science report on controversial surface temperature reconstructions and there's not one mention of it on www.climatescience.org.nz, the site set up by a group of local global warming sceptics to "audit" climate science research.

This is probably the biggest single review of these reconstructions to date, and the local watchdogs have gone to sleep!

Now I can appreciate it may take some time to produce a substantive response, but it's not even mentioned in the news section "From the news - in the media and on the internet, here and overseas".

Come on Augie, tell us the weather.

Anyway, here's the full report and the short report. And, here's an excerpt:

Based on the analyses presented in the original papers by Mann et al. and this newer supporting evidence, the committee finds it plausible that the Northern Hemisphere was warmer during the last few decades of the 20th century than during any comparable period over the preceding millennium.

Mann doesn't get it all his own way, especially when he tries to get really granular about the 1990s and 1998 in particular, but his basic thesis stands.

Update 8.20 27/6: Well the site's been updated a couple of times but there's still no mention of the NAS report. Instead we get a paper on why liberals fear global warming more than conservatives:

After all, if the science is as conclusive as Al Gore, Time, Newsweek, The New York Times and virtually every other spokesman of the Left says it is, conservatives are just as likely to be scorched and drowned and otherwise done in by global warming as liberals will. So why aren't non-leftists nearly as exercised as leftists are? Do conservatives handle heat better? Are libertarians better swimmers? Do religious people love their children less?

The spirit of scientific enquiry is alive and well at ClimateScience. If you want some commentary your better off going to RealClimate, for the orthodox view, or ClimateAudit, for a sceptical view.