Tim Lambert examines one of the specific fraud claims in the CRU code.
- ares i
- Conceptual Design
- global warming
- lunar lander challenge
Kind of uninteresting (verging on pure obfuscation and deceit if portrayed as representative) to focus on that one code error being commented out when there’s so many other code errors which aren’t ^_^
and much more at http://www.di2.nu/blog.htm and many other sites.
Particularly http://www.di2.nu/200911/23a.htm (second link above) makes it very clear that the code is complete garbage totally unfit for any purpose.
*I* didn’t focus on that – someone else did as it was brandied around as a “smoking gun”…
But yeah, I’m certain it’s pretty horrible… a lot of code is, especially science style code which usually starts out by just implementing a some mathematical ideas with the least immediate effort and probably especially modified by being Fortran (I’ve never coded it myself, but I’ve heard horror stories.) It still doesn’t mean it’s wrong.
More money and guys with a clue from a software perspective should be put there. Version control, all open and downloadable etc etc…
It’s something Michael Tobis has argued for years. A quick googling shows something like http://initforthegold.blogspot.com/2008/08/climate-models-is-there-better-way.html
which includes the quote:
“Efforts like PRISM and ESMF are well-intended but fail to move in the right direction. Contemporary software development techniques must be imported from the private sector.”
This is talking about climate models which are of course much more challenging than just past temperature data or reconstructions. But he’s one of the rare guys who know and have experience of both computer science and climate science.
Read the Harry_Read_me file… Harris evidently tried for a while to get things working in a systematic way but found the whole thing was suck a cock up of kludges and fakery and lies (repeated references to data from nonexistent stations in Australia to fake warming there is one such).