False, she's lying.<quoted text>
Elizabeth Muller, Richard Muller’s daughter and executive director of the BEST study, reported earlier on the Andrew Revkin’s New York Times blog Dot Earth that the team is working through the review process:
“All of the articles have been submitted to journals, and we have received substantial journal peer reviews. None of the reviews have indicated any mistakes in the papers; they have instead been primarily suggestions for additions, further citations of the literature. One review had no complaints about the content of the paper, but suggested delaying the publication until the long background paper, describing our methods in detail, was actually published.”
Responding to an inquiry from Nature, Elizabeth Muller confirmed that McKitrick reviewed the urban heat island paper and that the paper was technically rejected the first time around.“McKitrick did indeed suggest useful changes to the paper, many of which we made, but our basic results do not depend on these issues,” she wrote.“JGR has a method of technically rejecting a journal while encouraging the authors to revise the paper and re-submit. Apparently they do this to give the authors more time to make changes (otherwise, authors have only about a month to make revisions).” Muller declined to release information about the timing of the peer review process.
"On March 8 2012 I was asked by JGR to review a revised version of the Wickham et al. paper. I submitted my review at the end of March. The authors had made very few changes and had not addressed any of the methodological problems, so I recommended the paper not be published. I do not know what the journal's decision was, but it is 4 months later and I can find no evidence on the BEST website that this or any other BEST project paper has been accepted for publication.[Update July 30: JGR told me "This paper was REJECTED and the editor recommended that the author resubmit it as a new paper."]