SiGraybeard has the rundown on an interesting article. The Climate Change Hoax is Worse Than You Thought.
The article is supported by a fairly large PDF, so although I will look at it eventually, that won’t happen for a while. But there seem to be some problems.
In my prior experience, climate modelers:
- did not know to distinguish between accuracy and precision.
- did not understand that … a ±15 C temperature uncertainty is not a physical temperature.
- confronted standard error propagation as a foreign concept.
- did not understand the significance or impact of a calibration experiment.
- did not understand the concept of instrumental or model resolution or that it has empirical limits
- did not understand physical error analysis at all.
I’ve said before that they didn’t seem to understand gauge reliability or repeatability and if you think you have a problem you can’t just “edit the data after the fact” to best support the conclusion you want to reach. You do in fact have to toss out the suspect data, and fix the gauge.
Anyway, it will be some time before I get to the source material…