Post of Record
I have moved this post to here.
September 29, 2011 - Posted by Dan Hughes | Uncategorized
2 Comments »
Leave a Reply Cancel reply
-
Recent Posts
Blogroll
Recent Comments
- Dan Hughes on Climate is not the Average of Weather
- 4kx3 on Climate is not the Average of Weather
- Dan Hughes: Background, to Camp NRTS, and Beyond – Olde Camp NRTS on Fluid Systems Mechanically Coupled Through a Wall
- Dan Hughes: Background, to Camp NRTS, and Beyond – Olde Camp NRTS on Implicit Function Theory: Single Fluid System Calculations
- Dan Hughes: Background, to Camp NRTS, and Beyond – Olde Camp NRTS on Implicit Function Theory Applications; Part 1: Method of Exact Solutions
- Dan Hughes: Background, to Camp NRTS, and Beyond – Olde Camp NRTS on Implicit Function Theory Applications; Part 0
- John Reid on Climate is not the Average of Weather
Categories
Models Methods Software 
I think some of your quotes are from this post.
I just cannot imagine what Easterbrook is thinking. And your record is only partial. Take this quote from Easterbrook: “Climate models need, and currently get, extensive V&V. It’s the kind that’s needed for numerical simulations, as set out in great detail in books like Oberkampf and Roy. It has to be carried out by experts, and that means by the same people building the models. We don’t have any other experts available, as I’ve already argued extensively elsewhere.”
I cannot imagine how to respond (so I didn’t) because the quote isn’t even wrong. It cannot possibly be a scientific statement. It violates the scientific method. So how can I respond? Suppose I said: “This scientific theory that has been written up for publication cannot be peer reviewed because everybody who would be qualified to understand the theory and thus to peer review the paper are listed as co-authors of the paper!” If that wouldn’t peg the B.S. meter, nothing would.
Easterbrook thinks we are spending all this money on the climate models just for the science. He is mistaken. Many/most are spending it for the quality of their predictions. (And quality is subjective to the stakeholders. Such as the people paying the bills.) As has been mentioned repeatedly by someone a lot smarter than me — documenting the requirements and specifications is THE reason for the IV&V. It is so we don’t waste/risk one stakeholder’s money for the benefit of another.
[…] how did you manage to conveniently miss this post. Share this:TwitterFacebookLike this:LikeBe the first to like this post. This entry was posted in […]
Horizon View Therapy
Equine Therapy
Treatment
CDL services
Directions
About Sara
Sunrise
Pingback by Unsupported Claims by Steve | Steve Easterbrook Cimate Scientist | September 30, 2011 |