Many Links Broken
To my tens of thousands of readers.
I have discovered that all links to posts and documents internal to this site are broken. I had to move the site from its previous server to the present location and the URLs to site-internal locations all point to the previous server. URLs to external servers still work, so long as those servers are still up and running.
I’ve also noticed that funny characters have popped up in the text again as they did when the original site had problems.
I have a day job now and don’t have time to fix these problems.
If a post has a URL that links to a previous post you’ll have to track down the previous post and open it directly.
Al Gore Predicts 1500 meter Sea Level Rise
Take a look at the cover of Al Gore’s recent book below the fold:
CRU Hack Info Dump
I’ve looked at some of the info in the CRU data dump and have concluded that the situation is much worse that I have previously envisioned..
All results, each and every number, to be used to set public policy must be Independently Reviewed and Verified. This is the world-wide operating standard for all other decisions, without exception, that have a potential to effect the health and safety of the public.
The climate change community remains the sole exception to this standard. The very organizations that continue to insist that it be exempt from this requirement have now been shown to have fatally flawed the very system that they propose be used.
Maybe we’ll see a Carbon Regulatory Agency developed and implemented by some progressive governments.
Validation is a Process
AOLBGCM validation is an ongoing process.
Can’t ever do too much of it.
Tom P. does not meet RealClimate’s Bona Fides Requirements
I made this comment at Climate Audit. I’ll repeat it here:
The degree of inconsistency that RC exhibits becomes more astounding every day.
How many times have we been told that replication does not require that all the original material be readily available. Indeed, we have been repeatedly lectured that true replication is not obtained if only the original material is used. Yet, Tom P. could not have carried out his rapid-response function if Steve had not made all the material available.
By RC’s usual standards, Tom P.’s results could have been considered true replication only if he had started from a clean piece of paper, gone out in the field and gathered up some tree rings, properly selected the data to be used for analyses, developed the analysis methods, produced the coding for the solution of the methods, and then carried out the analysis. ( I’ll let Tom P. skip the Verification and Validation procedures as Climate Science does not do these. )
More and more, it seems to me that RC’s views are shaped by what is convenient in contrast to what they say is the correct approach.
By the usual RC standards, RC cannot accept Tom P.’s analyses and conclusions.
NASA's Gavin Schmidt and Penn State's Michael Mann are Liars
Climate Science . . . The Science of Personal Destruction
In the RealClimate post linked above appears this statement:
“So along comes Steve McIntyre, self-styled slayer of hockey sticks, who declares without any evidence whatsoever that Briffa didn’t just reprocess the data from the Russians, but instead supposedly picked through it to give him the signal he wanted. These allegations have been made without any evidence whatsoever.”
These statements are false. And they are known to be a false by those you made the statements. The statements are lies and the persons who made the statements are liars. If Gavin Schmidt and Michael Mann cannot point to where Steve McIntyre has made these statements, Gavin and Michael are liars.
By this action Schmidt, Mann, and RealClimate have taken the next step and moved to a higher level of promoting dis-information. That is, while always refusing to correct mis-information stated by commenters, and even RealClimate in-line responses, Schmidt and Mann purposefully lie. The purpose being to jump-start the peanut gallery’s, aided by RealClimate, usual attacks on persons while ignoring the technical issues. The Science of Personal Destruction; invented at RealClimate.
A post and 176 Responses ( and counting ) and not a single error on the part of Steve McIntyre has been identified. Not a single error !! This is reflective of the way RealClimate has of diverting attention from the real issues. In effect, the entire post hinges on becoming discussions of nothing that the subject of the post has said or done. Yet another naked strawman post. Additionally, the comments, with supporting responses from RealClimate, rapidly deteriorate to nothing more than de-meaning, unfounded attacks on people; shooting the messenger and ignoring the message.
To paraphrase, RealClimate continues to take absolutely no responsibility for the ridiculous fantasies and exaggerations that their supporters broadcast, apparently being happy to bask in their acclaim rather than correct any of the misrepresentations they have engendered.
RealClimate, having been unable to point to any technical errors, have continued the Climate Science policy of the Science of Personal Destruction.
They must continue to feed the small-minded, foul-mouthed labelers such as tamino and dhogaza. It’s interesting to me that those who chose to label with the most extreme and debasing labels chose also to remain anonymous. The, mostly non-scientists, peanut gallery at RealClimate seems to revel in this race to the bottom, cheering on tamino and dhogaza at every opportunity.
NASA’s Gavin Schmidt and Penn State’s Michael Mann are liars.
Gavin Schmidt and Michael Mann lied in the subject post, therefore everything they have written is suspected of being lies.
Climate Science . . . The Science of Personal Destruction
Independent Verification and Peer Review
Steve McIntyre has discovered and presented yet another problem with a long-term temperature reconstruction: Yamal: A “Divergence” Problem. While Steve has named his blog ClimateAudit, in my opinion his work is in fact Independent Verification.
The old, and rapidly becoming tedious, “Peer Review Publication is Required” nonsense has already appeared in the comments. Ironically, it seems that no one who raises this issue is aware that Steve is in fact discovering problems in peer-reviewed publications.
A very short summary of a major problem area relative to this olde rant follows.
Tip Jar
John A is the site admin (CTO) and Webmaster for this blog, and all of auditblogs.com. After several requests by me he has added his Tip Jar over there to the left.
Please consider dropping a few coins to help with covering his costs and time.
Thanks.
New V&V Book by Pat Roache
I received the following e-mail from Pat Roache regarding his new book about Verification and Validation. He has also made arrangements for reduced prices on two others of his books.
I am pleased to announce the publication of
“Fundamentals of Verification and Validation” by Patrick J. Roache.
Copyright 2009, ISBN 978-0-93478-12-7. 476 pages, subject index.
The book is the successor to my 1998 book “Verification and Validation in Computational Science and Engineering.” About 1/3 of the material is new, including a new Chapter 11 describing the Total Validation Uncertainty approach of ASME ANSI Standard V&V 20 (2009).
The attached file outlines the new features of the book. A complete Table of Contents, including designators for new and modified Sections, will be found on the website.
The price is the same as the 1998 book, U.S. $85.00 (but shipping charges have increased). The book is available directly from our fulfillment house, BookMasters, by email order to
orders@BookMasters.com
or from Amazon.com at the following.
The orders to BookMasters tend to ship faster since they do not run out of stock. Also, wholesale orders can be placed by contacting BookMasters at orders@BookMasters.com.
I would appreciate it if you would forward this email to any of your colleagues who might be interested.
Thanks for your consideration.
Respectfully,
Patrick Roache
p.s.
If anyone is interested, the 1998 V&V book is on clearance sale for 1/2 price at US $42.50. Available from orders@BookMasters.com or from Amazon at
Likewise, the book “Fundamentals of Computational Fluid Dynamics” is on clearance sale for 1/2 price at US $37.50. Available from orders@BookMasters.com or from Amazon at
V&V and NNSA Advanced Strategic Computing at LANL
[Updated September 26]
I think the name of the program originally known as the Advanced Strategic Computing Initiative ( ASCI ) is now known as Advanced Simulation & Computing ( ASC ).
[Updated August 26]
I have uploaded an excellent summary, developed by Los Alamos, of the ASC V&V Program at LANL. It is here.
A couple of quotes.
Confidence in simulation extrapolation comes via confidence in physics & numerics models, not calibration to experimental data.
Having “good agreement” between calculations and observations is not sufficient to establish scientifically credible predictive capability.
More and more it seems that the Climate Change Community remains the only holdout among all compute-intensive enterprises relative to application of rigorous, independent V&V to computer software.
Update
Continue reading
Models Methods Software 
