Buy
Books
Click images for more details
Currently discussing
-
Dec 20 - julie
on
Established Fiction Ghostwriters Contribution To Fiction Writing -
Dec 6 - sexdollpartner
on
Established Fiction Ghostwriters Contribution To Fiction Writing
Links
A few sites I've stumbled across recently....
-
Science blogs
-
Political blogs
-
Other blogs
Subscribe
Bishop Hill
Copyright © 2006-2013, Bishop Hill All rights reserved.
Reader Comments (10)
Theme for this comment thread: Be Nice.
Well if you say so. Good afternoon y'all.
Manipulative, even rather stupid-- yes. Only "alarming" for those who once or ever put their trust in official pronunciamentos emanating from such as CRU or Railroad Bill Pachauri's idiotic UN IPCC.
As always Bish, find it interesting that you posted this under FOI?
Well done Josh, if CCF does what it says on the tin we may find that the code is not alarming, but the data that goes into the code? Until we have an agreed source of RAW data the code any code is somewhat immaterial. I would like to see competition between the "global temperature product manufacturers" not a consensual "we all do it differently but get the same result". This can only be claimed if they all start with the same RAW data, same number and locations.
[BH adds: think of FoI as covering the general areas of openness]
It is the data that is the problem, not so much the code.
Using brightness as a proxy for rural causes problems in the data.
the below is a part of the post. Worth reading in total.
--------------------------------------
http://clearclimatecode.org/just-440-stations/
GMcKee Says:
August 18th, 2010 at 9:03 pm
Assuming that neighbours are used in doing the step 2 UHI adjustment, I did a marginal distribution on the number of neighbours. The tail extends to almost two hundred. I decided to start with three sites with the smallest number of neighbors.
The second site turned up with only three neighbours is Abadan. I was surprized to learn that one Abadan neighbor is Baghdad. Checking v2.inv, according to “Just 440 stations”, Baghdad is close enough (495 km) and has a low enough night brightness to qualify as a “rural site for UHI adjustment”.
I have extended this analysis to learn that Baghdad was “cited” 26 times as a “neighbour” during step 2. Looking for other non-airport sites with over 500,000 in population and low night brightness yields in addition, Nanchang, Los Gatos, Wroclaw, and Izmir. Below, is a small CSV table summarizing how many times each has been “cited” as a neighbor.
As the theme is 'be nice'. It would 'be nice' if we had raw data. Code could follow once that had been looked at to see how it could be handled and which would 'be nice' for all involved or interested.
What we need is a Climate Data Foundation... C.D.F.
Anyone knowing a little military slang will recognise the other meaning of "CDF" is also applicable :)
Pete,
What a wonderful suggestion: - use some commonsense!
Building robust data sets should be the objective.
Openess and transparency should be the ideal.
Scepticism should be the norm.
As things stand all CCF will do is confirm GIGO.
After two positive blog posts and a Josh cartoon how much nicer does BH want to make it for Mr. Barnes? And of course why? For someone who has displayed a certain lack of humility in his public utterances.
BEN: You lucky, lucky bastard.
BRIAN: What?
BEN: Proper little jailer's pet, aren't we?
.
BEN: They must think you're Lord God Almighty.
BRIAN: What will they do to me?
BEN: Oh, you'll probably get away with crucifixion.
BRIAN: Crucifixion?!
BEN: Yeah, first offence.
BRIAN: Get away with crucifixion?! It's--
BEN: Best thing the Romans ever did for us.
Terrific race, the Romans. Terrific.