Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by mrpg on Saturday February 11 2017, @05:28PM   Printer-friendly
from the the-truth-shall-prevail dept.

A follow-up to this story: NOAA Whistleblower: Climate Data Was Manipulated, the Computers Used "Suffered a Complete Failure"

Top Republicans on the House science committee claim a former National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration scientist “confirmed” that his NOAA colleagues “manipulated” climate data for a 2015 study. But that scientist denies that he accused NOAA of manipulating data.

Rep. Lamar Smith, the chairman of the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, and two subcommittee chairmen issued a Feb. 5 press release — “Former NOAA Scientist Confirms Colleagues Manipulated Climate Records” — as part of an ongoing dispute over the validity of a paper published in the journal Science in June 2015 by NOAA scientists.

[...] But in interviews with the Associated Press and E&E, an online energy and environmental news outlet, Bates said he had not accused his colleagues of data manipulation.

Bates told the AP on Feb. 6 that there was “no data tampering, no data changing, nothing malicious” involved with his colleagues’ study. “It’s not trumped up data in any way shape or form,” he said.

Rather, Bates claimed Karl and his group hadn’t followed NOAA protocol in “the way data was handled, documented and stored, raising issues of transparency and availability,” the AP reported.

No Data Manipulation at NOAA


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 11 2017, @07:31PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 11 2017, @07:31PM (#465857)

    generally fails to meet the accepted standards of science

    It looks to me like the problem is the "standards" of what has been passing for science (not just climate research, but all around). It seems a software guy recognized something was wrong with how the data was being dealt with, but then got told by the researchers "no, this is normal behavior, this is how science works in practice". He then became unsure of his own sanity.

    It is unsurprising that an intelligent person untrained in modern research "methods" would think this way. The mind does naturally reject the NHST + p-hacking "analysis" as irrational, which is why it can only persist as a mindless ritual.[1]
    [1] http://library.mpib-berlin.mpg.de/ft/gg/GG_Mindless_2004.pdf [mpib-berlin.mpg.de]