Comment on Assessing climate model software quality by Steven Mosher
Oreskes did peer review. How weird is that
View ArticleComment on Assessing climate model software quality by Steven Mosher
Have you even looked at input parameters. I guess not.
View ArticleComment on Assessing climate model software quality by Steven Mosher
yes. I have seen some sensitivity analysis run. But a full parameter test grid is not feasible due to runtimes. The approach is to run fractional factorials and create an emulation. then run the...
View ArticleComment on Week in review 4/13/12 by Captain Kangaroo
Here is some quire elegant data – http://s1114.photobucket.com/albums/k538/Chief_Hydrologist/?action=view¤t=Wong2006figure7.gif – comparing ocean heat storage and TOA power flux from ERBS....
View ArticleComment on Assessing climate model software quality by Philip Lee
DocMartyn quoted me in an unfair way – giving only part in the statements: while leaving off the full quote: “Second, it is a mistake in modeling is to expect computer models to reveal new knowledge....
View ArticleComment on Psychological(?) effects of global warming by Erica
Timg56 Do you have some references on this Ozone Hole stuff?
View ArticleComment on Assessing climate model software quality by Philip Lee
My opening paragraph just posted was truncated — it should have been: [DocMartyn quoted me in an unfair way – giving only part in the statements: “Second, it is a mistake in modeling is to expect...
View ArticleComment on Week in review 4/13/12 by Erica
I’ve become convinced that many of the editors of the high impact journals are inclined to cast opinion pieces” What was that bit by a Climate-gater about ‘redefining peer review’ again ? The whole...
View ArticleComment on Lindzen et al.: response and parry by Bart R
John S. | April 16, 2012 at 9:50 pm | One is amazed by what you believe you can deduce about a stranger on the Internet, when you so disparage readings ‘mainly from the Internet’. Alas, that you use so...
View ArticleComment on Assessing climate model software quality by Jim2
Subpar usability or bad coding practices aren’t bugs, bugs WILL cause bad output. A project to improve usability or ease maintenance of the code would be an enhancement. A project to fix what truly are...
View ArticleComment on UQ by David Wojick
The ORNL statement seems to imply that the Liang et al approach will not work for climate type models, to which I agree. Liang et al are looking at relatively simple mechanics models that are applied...
View ArticleComment on Assessing climate model software quality by Steve Milesworthy
A lot of warming (compared with the temperature record) estimated to within a few-tenths of a degree, sustained for over 30 years and observationally supported by detailed analysis of oceans, the...
View ArticleComment on UQ by Bernie Schreiver
The attention of <i>Climate etc.</i> readers is directed to the <a href="http://www.nafems.org/tech/" rel="nofollow">National Agency for Finite Element Methods and Standards</a>...
View ArticleComment on Assessing climate model software quality by Jim2
Last time I checked, not one of Hansen’s three scenarios were tracking the global atmospheric temperature.
View ArticleComment on Letter to the dragon slayers by Pete Ridley
I assume from Dougy’s earlier comments (e.g. 16th February at 4:52 pm) that when he talked about “ .. taking any legal action against perpetrators of this criminal hoax .. ” (ref. 16th April at 8:36...
View ArticleComment on UQ by Jim2
So, Bernie. What does the skilled simulationist have to do to obtain good results. Can you give some specific scenarios and what would be done to the simulation to obtain “more accurate” predictions?
View ArticleComment on UQ by jbmckim
I don’t think there’s anything in David’s post to improve on. That is exactly the problem I have with the Climate Science community’s approach to modeling. They seem generally to give it weight that is...
View ArticleComment on UQ by robin
I think it would be good to first define the level of software required. Not all software needs to be bulletproof, and there are a lot of competing requirements beyond quality – time to build, cost,...
View ArticleComment on UQ by David Wojick
I agree that getting the math and science right is far more important than getting the code right. But in the case of climate this is not a matter of training, rather it is a matter of science. The...
View ArticleComment on UQ by jbmckim
I’m having trouble disagreeing with anyone today. This is usually not my problem I was the lead architect and one of the engineers on an AI project about 15 years ago. The software eventually was quite...
View Article