Re: OT: interesting global warming quote found elsewhwere

bill.sloman@xxxxxxxx wrote:
On Aug 12, 2:23 am, Joerg <notthisjoerg...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
bill.slo...@xxxxxxxx wrote:
On Aug 11, 6:26 am, Joerg <notthisjoerg...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
bill.slo...@xxxxxxxx wrote:
On Aug 9, 7:20 am, Joerg <notthisjoerg...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
bill.slo...@xxxxxxxx wrote:
On Aug 7, 2:27 am, James Arthur <bogusabd...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
bill.slo...@xxxxxxxx wrote:
On Aug 6, 7:21 am, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelati...@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
James Arthur wrote:
Joerg wrote:
Eeyore wrote:
Joerg wrote:
bill.slo...@xxxxxxxx wrote:
Joerg > wrote:
bill.slo...@xxxxxxxx wrote:
<snip>
That the logical fallay of the excluded middle. Normal peer-review
doesn't involve going through somebody's raw dara.
If conclusions are doubtful normal peer review _has to_ involve raw
data. Else it's not a valuable review.
Not in the universe I live in. That would be a very abnormal peer
review.
Then we do live in different universes.

Not to mention the hubris of holding one's proprietary interest above
that of the entire planet.
That's Exxon-Mobil's position. Mann's reservations are trivial in
comparision.
If you want to publish, you must reveal.
If only that were true.
It is true. Else they won't take you seriously.
Don't be silly. The level of revelation that MCIntyre was after was
very unusual. Most people in science who are taken seriously have
never revealed their raw data and would be incredulous if anybody
asked for it.
Then I would not take them seriously anymore. Which happened in this case.
That's your choice. You haven't made a career in science and can make
any kind of idiosyncratic choice you like, no matter how foolish.
I do have an academic education and have published. But even that, or
what kind of title someone holds, does not entitle that person to
celebrity status and immunity from being questioned. A refusal to share
data upon request is highly suspect. IMHO and that of many others.

Mann wasn't a celebrity. He'd done his work - not as well as he should
have done, but he wasn't aware of that at the time - written it up,
submitted it to an academic journal and taken it through the peer
review process.

Some years later McIntyre comes after him wanting access to the raw
data for a paper that he'd written years before. Why should Mann have
dropped what he was doing at the time to do the time-consuming work
that would have been required to satisfy McIntyre's curiousity?


For the sake of his own professional reputation, I'd say.


Failing to comply with that kind of request doesn't signal that
someone thinks that they are a celebrity and immune from review; it
just signals that they are a busy doing something else that should be
useful to their career (which digging out and repackaging already
published data certainly wouldn't be).


Having to dig stuff out would somehow leave the impression that the data wasn't very organized. If a client asks me for the whole set of data to see how I arrived at a conclusion I just email it all as attachments or in case of a large set I set up an FTP area for them on my server and toss them the keys. Once a client from way back when wanted to check EMI results on a prototype I measured many years before. They were mighty impressed when they had all that on their PC early next morning.


Mann's responded as anybody else would to an impertinent request - it
is exactly the response you got to your equally impertinent request
for sea-level data from the authors that you approached.


Impertinent? Yeah, that's the kind of arrogant attitude that can wreck credibility. Not in my wildest dreams would I ever say that to another scientist.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

"gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam.
Use another domain or send PM.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Dpreveiw figures a way to LOVE Canon even more
    ... | The beauty of the RAW format is that you can adjust all of these ... the advantages of raw files. ... This is a _review_ we talk about. ... Mom ...
    (rec.photo.digital.slr-systems)
  • Re: OT: interesting global warming quote found elsewhwere
    ... If conclusions are doubtful normal peer review _has to_ involve raw ... Else it's not a valuable review. ... Senator Inhofe, in his capacity as the senior member of ...
    (sci.electronics.design)
  • Re: Olympus shafts Dpreview!
    ... I'm not convinced any review on dpreview would be a fair review. ... only Canon fanboi's don't see it). ... Image sharpness / demosaicing (JPEG vs. RAW) ...
    (rec.photo.digital.slr-systems)
  • Re: OT: interesting global warming quote found elsewhwere
    ... doesn't involve going through somebody's raw dara. ... Else it's not a valuable review. ... celebrity status and immunity from being questioned. ... Mann's responded as anybody else would to an impertinent request - it ...
    (sci.electronics.design)
  • Re: Quantum Mechanics: established fact?
    ... lot of quandries regarding the universe. ... to review pretty much all our current laws of physics. ... function perfectly in all manner of situations on Earth we have no reason to ... between two locations on Earth and that you can still see the Doppler effect ...
    (sci.physics)
Loading