BLOGMOCRACY IN ACTION!
Here is Walter’s essay, in it’s entirety* (not in it’s entirety because walter would rather let the lgf crowd tear him down than anyone actually READ what he seemed to have worked so hard on):
Charles has given me permission to examine some of the programming code and data that has been used by Climate Research Unit at East Anglia University for their climate modeling. My information comes from material that was “hacked” from the CRU servers in Britain and released to the public. This material included program code, databases, private emails and documents. Charles indicated that I could use anything I deemed necessary to make my case.
re: #723 Charles
OK, then go ahead and post whatever you think makes your case. I seriously doubt that you’re going to be able to show an “inaccuracy,” which is what you claimed. And quibbling over quick and dirty methods used to parse a flat file is not the same thing as demonstrating that the code produced inaccurate results.
[snip]
re: #731 Charles
And for your part, you have to prove that a section of code actually produced inaccurate or mistaken results. Not simply that it could have done so. Because that’s what you claimed.
As Charles said “I seriously doubt that you’re going to be able to show an “inaccuracy,” Charles may be right. I wasn’t at CRU, I didn’t see the actual data from the time it was generated till the time it appeared in a report or paper (or disappeared), no more than Charles actually saw William Shakespeare pen any of his plays. In the same way Charles could use the historical records to prove Shakespeare did create all of those wonderful plays, I am going to use the historical record of the programmer who was responsible for maintaining, modifying and correcting the legacy programs at CRU who can
show us the inaccuracies he found. Meet Mr. Ian “Harry” Harris.
(end comment 1)
