Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
![]() |
|
sci.geo.meteorology (Meteorology) (sci.geo.meteorology) For the discussion of meteorology and related topics. |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Tue, 06 Apr 2010 14:51:01 -0500, josephus wrote:
Marvin the Martian wrote: On Fri, 02 Apr 2010 20:29:11 -0700, Rob Dekker wrote: "Marvin the wrote in message ... On Tue, 30 Mar 2010 07:52:54 -0500, josephus wrote: so peer review is fake and justifys your mudslinging. Actually, we know from the CRU e-mails that peer review in "climate science" was outright intentional fraud committed by many conspirators. Really ? international fraud was committed ? I must have missed the memo. Having your head up your ass must be really encumber your mobility. The e-mails shows how: 1) The "Climate Scientist" conspired and used "peer review" to prevent opposing views that exposed their lies from being published. 2) How they conspired to use "tricks" to "hide the decline". 3) How they fudged the data. 4) The list goes on. Really, flat out telling bald faced lies is really ugly. I can't believe you're so damned stupid as to really believe your own lies. If you can't address the facts, don't act like a mindless idiot who repeats whatever he is told by his masters. except the programs dont show that. they show a non proffesional programmer dealing with dirty and insane data. it happens to everybody that deals with raw data. most raw data is noisy and has artifacts in it. it is a pain to program. to my mind, the fact that the programs are innocent and the critics are using code that is not part of the main work. the code that I looked at was processing the PROXIES. and that confounds the idea that they were faking the science. I have temperature data and I dont see any data like that in the set. so the statement that they were cooking the data is just not borne out. the data was dirty and required extensive processing. what I want is somebody to point me to the algorithim for the TREERING PROXIES. Don't we all. Join the club. Maybe you could file a FOIA request. I understand they may be taking those a bit more seriously nowadays. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
SciAm turning skeptical? | sci.geo.meteorology (Meteorology) | |||
Huffington Post CENSORS Skeptical Aticle | sci.geo.meteorology (Meteorology) | |||
Ping Ken Cook at Copley [OT] | uk.sci.weather (UK Weather) | |||
Captain Cook helps understand earth's magnetic field,article link | sci.geo.meteorology (Meteorology) | |||
OT Ready Steady Cook | uk.sci.weather (UK Weather) |