On 1/05/08 8:44, in article , "0BZN0"
wrote:

"Every year they recalibrate their computer model and put in the
observed temperature. So, as they go along, the curve that trails behind
is perfect. It's like predicting the morning's weather at six-o'clock in
the evening.." Dr. Don J. Easterbrook, Professor Emeritus Geology,
Western Washington University

I don't find on Easterbrook's publication list
http://www.ac.wwu.edu/~dbunny/pubs.htm

any mention of computer modeling on his part.

So the question is whether he is in a professional position to
criticize modeling in this area. If he is, he will have published
his criticism in a peer review journal.

I will not that his last paper on this list

Easterbrook, D.J., 2005, Causes and effects of abrupt, global, climate
changes and global warming: Geological Society of America, Abstracts with
Program,

This is the only "paper" mentioned on his list which has to do with global
warming.

This was published in the abstracts of a meeting. Normally such abstracts
are not critically reviewed so the mere fact of it being listed in the
program does not give it the same "stamp of approval" as a published
article.

Some societies allow almost anything in the program's abstracts. The
American Physical Society (I was a member in my pre-retirement days) was
historically quite permissive in this regard to the point that nuts
got their stuff into the program (although not invited to give a talk!)
..
These days, papers are in three categories.

1) Those invited to give a long talk as special symposiums at a general
meeting

2) Those allowed to give short talks (15 minutes)

3) Those presenting only posters.

Promotion committees at Universities rate a person's overall reputation on
the basis not only of papers published but how many they present invited
papers or invited to other Universities to give a long talk.

I don't find sufficient information to judge Easterbrook's standing
on the global warming issue. But the evidence is not there that he
has a particular impact.