"Climategate" code
in [Cobol]
|
From: Richard on 26 Nov 2009 12:48 On Nov 27, 4:03 am, "HeyBub" <hey...(a)NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote: > Pete Dashwood wrote: > > HeyBub wrote: > >> As you may know, thousands of sooper-secret documents were copied > >> from the East Anglia climate research center and published on the > >> web. The documents demonstrate the perfidy and hubris of the scientists > >> leading the global-warming sect. > > >> But that's only part of the story behind climate data being fudged: > > >> "One programmer highlighted the error of relying on computer code > >> that, if it generates an error message, continues as if nothing > >> untoward ever occurred. Another debugged the code by pointing out why > >> the output of a calculation that should always generate a positive > >> number was incorrectly generating a negative one. A third concluded: > >> 'I feel for this guy. He's obviously spent years trying to get data > >> from undocumented and completely messy sources.' " > > >> Comments inserted into the source code include such wowsers as: > >> "APPLY ARTIFICIAL CORRECTION." > > >> [Pardon the all-caps - the original code is in FORTRAN] > > >>http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/11/24/taking_liberties/entry5761180.... > > >> They should have done the whole business in COBOL. > > > Had they done so, would the planet be any less warm? :-) > > > (It is a glorious 28 degrees as I write this; Summer is definitely > > coming in at last...) > > No, the planet wouldn't be less warm, unless you count the excitability of > the "Global Warming" alarmists. > > You may be interested in a report from just this week about how the Kiwi > meteorological crew (National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research) > has been fudging, tweaking, manipulating, massaging, adjusting, and > otherwise goosing the data. > > After feeding the raw temperature data into the abyss of their computer > programs, a clear warming trend of horrific proportions emerges, encouraging > everyone to move inland. > > On the other hand, somebody graphed the raw temperature readings (going back > to 1850 or so) and found NO warming trends. > > In other words, raw temperature data for 150 years show no warming (or > cooling) trend. After processing these data through NiWA's magnificent > computer program, we're all gonna die. > > http://hot-topic.co.nz/nz-sceptics-lie-about-temp-records-try-to-smea... Did you actually read that article ? or even the title ?
From: HeyBub on 26 Nov 2009 17:08 SkippyPB wrote: > > It is incredulous people like you that keep the term "Clean Coal" in > our lexicon. > > Regards, Huh? I never said anything about coal, clean or otherwise. Still, coal is cheap, abundant, and using it is a lot cleaner than it was during the industrial revolution era in England. Over half the electricity generated in the U.S. comes from coal and the benefits from so doing far outweigh any downside. And, as long as we're casting aspersions, it's the twits from places like NiWA who think we can run this planet off of sunbeams. If you doubt their Luddite tendencies, why is it we've NEVER heard alternative arguments regarding Global Warming (tm)? * Global Warming is good (more people die from cold than heat, longer growing seasons, etc.) * No reference to treating the symptom rather than the cause (i.e., dumping SO2 into the atmosphere to cool it). But, as it turns out, there IS NO global warming - or at least not enough to be measurable - so the exercise is moot.
From: Pete Dashwood on 26 Nov 2009 21:44 HeyBub wrote: > Pete Dashwood wrote: >> HeyBub wrote: >>> As you may know, thousands of sooper-secret documents were copied >>> from the East Anglia climate research center and published on the >>> web. The documents demonstrate the perfidy and hubris of the >>> scientists leading the global-warming sect. >>> >>> But that's only part of the story behind climate data being fudged: >>> >>> "One programmer highlighted the error of relying on computer code >>> that, if it generates an error message, continues as if nothing >>> untoward ever occurred. Another debugged the code by pointing out >>> why the output of a calculation that should always generate a >>> positive number was incorrectly generating a negative one. A third >>> concluded: 'I feel for this guy. He's obviously spent years trying >>> to get data from undocumented and completely messy sources.' " >>> >>> Comments inserted into the source code include such wowsers as: >>> "APPLY ARTIFICIAL CORRECTION." >>> >>> [Pardon the all-caps - the original code is in FORTRAN] >>> >>> http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/11/24/taking_liberties/entry5761180.shtml >>> >>> They should have done the whole business in COBOL. >> >> Had they done so, would the planet be any less warm? :-) >> >> (It is a glorious 28 degrees as I write this; Summer is definitely >> coming in at last...) >> > > No, the planet wouldn't be less warm, unless you count the > excitability of the "Global Warming" alarmists. > > > You may be interested in a report from just this week about how the > Kiwi meteorological crew (National Institute of Water and Atmospheric > Research) has been fudging, tweaking, manipulating, massaging, > adjusting, and otherwise goosing the data. Yeah, that sounds like us; people here are pretty sensitive to Environmental issues. I can imagine some of our Scientists getting a bit carried away... Personally, I'm on the fence with Global Warming. I enjoy the sunshine...but I realise it is dangerous now. When I was a kid we ran around semi or fully naked most of the Sumer and looked like Maoris at the end of it. Now our kids can't do that and there are intensive campaigns to ensure that everyone uses suitable sunblock and covers up... I don't know whether we are causing Global Warming or not, but I do know we have knocked a hole in the ozone layer that used to protect us. At the moment there are some huge ice floes heading our way from Antarctica and this is a worry. Not because they represent a danger, (maybe to small boats... but people are already chartering vessels to go and sightsee...),but because they are SO huge as to be exceptional and the worry is that the Antartic ice shelf may be getting seriously destroyed just like its Northern counterpart... > > After feeding the raw temperature data into the abyss of their > computer programs, a clear warming trend of horrific proportions > emerges, encouraging everyone to move inland. Not me. I love the coast. I don't know any of my neighbours who are considering moving either, so perhaps "everyone" is not persuaded? > > On the other hand, somebody graphed the raw temperature readings > (going back to 1850 or so) and found NO warming trends. > Maybe they get a more complete picture nowadays? > In other words, raw temperature data for 150 years show no warming (or > cooling) trend. After processing these data through NiWA's magnificent > computer program, we're all gonna die. I shouldn't think it will affect Texas, Jerry... :-) I read the link you posted and I also read the response ferom NiWA ( http://www.niwa.co.nz/news-and-publications/news/all/niwa-confirms-temperature-rise) I was born and grew up in Wellington (until age 13) and am very familiar with the difference between Thorndon (right at the waterside) and Kelburn (on an exposed hill above the city and accessible by a delightful cable car which we thoroughly enjoyed riding when kids.) NiWA claim that there is a difference of .8C between the two sites (I thought it would be more; Wellington, like Chicago, is famous as a "windy city" and Kelburn is very exposed...) NiWa adjusted this and to me, it seems like a fair adjustment. I don't think we're any more immune from people havng a personal agenda than anywhere else in the world, but this seems to be a storm in a teacup to me. I don't need NiWA to tell me things are warming up; all I have to do is open a window... It's 27 degrees and glorious... hang on a minute... it's early Summer (usually peaks around Jan-Feb)... Gee, I guess it's normal....:-) If the program was written here then I respect it. Certainly the data may have been fudged but I doubt that the code has been. Kiwis are pretty serious about technology, as well as the environment. Knowledge and skill are a rising export industry. I reckon it's time for a caipirinho... :-) Pete. -- "I used to write COBOL...now I can do anything."
From: Richard on 26 Nov 2009 22:34 On Nov 27, 3:44 pm, "Pete Dashwood" <dashw...(a)removethis.enternet.co.nz> wrote: > HeyBub wrote: > > Pete Dashwood wrote: > >> HeyBub wrote: > >>> As you may know, thousands of sooper-secret documents were copied > >>> from the East Anglia climate research center and published on the > >>> web. The documents demonstrate the perfidy and hubris of the > >>> scientists leading the global-warming sect. > > >>> But that's only part of the story behind climate data being fudged: > > >>> "One programmer highlighted the error of relying on computer code > >>> that, if it generates an error message, continues as if nothing > >>> untoward ever occurred. Another debugged the code by pointing out > >>> why the output of a calculation that should always generate a > >>> positive number was incorrectly generating a negative one. A third > >>> concluded: 'I feel for this guy. He's obviously spent years trying > >>> to get data from undocumented and completely messy sources.' " > > >>> Comments inserted into the source code include such wowsers as: > >>> "APPLY ARTIFICIAL CORRECTION." > > >>> [Pardon the all-caps - the original code is in FORTRAN] > > >>>http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/11/24/taking_liberties/entry5761180.... > > >>> They should have done the whole business in COBOL. > > >> Had they done so, would the planet be any less warm? :-) > > >> (It is a glorious 28 degrees as I write this; Summer is definitely > >> coming in at last...) > > > No, the planet wouldn't be less warm, unless you count the > > excitability of the "Global Warming" alarmists. > > > You may be interested in a report from just this week about how the > > Kiwi meteorological crew (National Institute of Water and Atmospheric > > Research) has been fudging, tweaking, manipulating, massaging, > > adjusting, and otherwise goosing the data. > > Yeah, that sounds like us; people here are pretty sensitive to Environmental > issues. I can imagine some of our Scientists getting a bit carried away.... > > Personally, I'm on the fence with Global Warming. I enjoy the sunshine...but > I realise it is dangerous now. When I was a kid we ran around semi or fully > naked most of the Sumer and looked like Maoris at the end of it. Now our > kids can't do that and there are intensive campaigns to ensure that everyone > uses suitable sunblock and covers up... > > I don't know whether we are causing Global Warming or not, but I do know we > have knocked a hole in the ozone layer that used to protect us. > > At the moment there are some huge ice floes heading our way from Antarctica > and this is a worry. Not because they represent a danger, (maybe to small > boats... but people are already chartering vessels to go and > sightsee...),but because they are SO huge as to be exceptional and the worry > is that the Antartic ice shelf may be getting seriously destroyed just like > its Northern counterpart... > > > > > After feeding the raw temperature data into the abyss of their > > computer programs, a clear warming trend of horrific proportions > > emerges, encouraging everyone to move inland. > > Not me. I love the coast. I don't know any of my neighbours who are > considering moving either, so perhaps "everyone" is not persuaded? > > > On the other hand, somebody graphed the raw temperature readings > > (going back to 1850 or so) and found NO warming trends. > > Maybe they get a more complete picture nowadays? > > > In other words, raw temperature data for 150 years show no warming (or > > cooling) trend. After processing these data through NiWA's magnificent > > computer program, we're all gonna die. > > I shouldn't think it will affect Texas, Jerry... :-) No, but it will affect Florida, Louisiana and several others. > I read the link you posted and I also read the response ferom NiWA (http://www.niwa.co.nz/news-and-publications/news/all/niwa-confirms-te...) > > I was born and grew up in Wellington (until age 13) and am very familiar > with the difference between Thorndon (right at the waterside) and Kelburn > (on an exposed hill above the city and accessible by a delightful cable car > which we thoroughly enjoyed riding when kids.) NiWA claim that there is a > difference of .8C between the two sites (I thought it would be more; > Wellington, like Chicago, is famous as a "windy city" and Kelburn is very > exposed...) NiWa adjusted this and to me, it seems like a fair adjustment.. It is nothing to do with whether it is more or less 'warmer' or 'windier' but simply that the difference in height causes an adiabatic difference. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adiabatic_lapse_rate Those that 'graphed the raw rates' and did not take into account the change of location were clueless about how weather measurements work, picked only readings (in this case unadjusted raw ones) which supported their manifesto and ignore everything which does not support that. > > I don't think we're any more immune from people havng a personal agenda than > anywhere else in the world, but this seems to be a storm in a teacup to me. > I don't need NiWA to tell me things are warming up; all I have to do is open > a window... > > It's 27 degrees and glorious... hang on a minute... it's early Summer > (usually peaks around Jan-Feb)... Gee, I guess it's normal....:-) > 'Global Warming' is not just the temperatures get slightly warmer but that there is more energy in the weather systems. For example the recent floods in England exceed all previous records in that area. Similarly in NZ we have been getting "100 year floods" far more frequently. > If the program was written here then I respect it. Certainly the data may > have been fudged but I doubt that the code has been. The data was not 'fudged' the adjustments are required by the change of location, specifically height above sea level. > Kiwis are pretty serious about technology, as well as the environment. > Knowledge and skill are a rising export industry. > > I reckon it's time for a caipirinho... :-) > > Pete. > > -- > "I used to write COBOL...now I can do anything."
From: HeyBub on 27 Nov 2009 15:48
Pete Dashwood wrote: > >> In other words, raw temperature data for 150 years show no warming >> (or cooling) trend. After processing these data through NiWA's >> magnificent computer program, we're all gonna die. > > I shouldn't think it will affect Texas, Jerry... :-) > > I read the link you posted and I also read the response ferom NiWA ( > http://www.niwa.co.nz/news-and-publications/news/all/niwa-confirms-temperature-rise) Giggle. The first sentence of their rebuttal reads: "NIWA's analysis of measured temperatures uses internationally accepted techniques..." They just don't understand. The 'internationally accepted techniques' include fraud, repression, and other modalities that are simply unacceptable in a civilized society, much less a scientific one. The ONLY example they gave in their rebuttal is a correction to temperature data for ONE station as it was moved inland (and upland) to account for height (0.8�C). Why didn't they simply discontinue the use of the old station and start a new data point for the new station? Because that wouldn't give them an opportunity to add a 'fudge factor' to the new readings, perhaps? Conversely, there are temperature reading stations in the U.S. there were originally in the middle of a cornfield. Now the station is in the middle of a shopping center parking lot and surrounded, for miles in every direction, by concrete and asphalt. Common sense would tell you that the temperature readings should be fudged DOWNWARD to account for the urban heat-reservoir. Is this the case? What do you think? > NiWa adjusted this and to me, it seems like a fair adjustment. "Adjusting" data is almost NEVER fair. The data are what they are. > > I don't think we're any more immune from people havng a personal > agenda than anywhere else in the world, but this seems to be a storm > in a teacup to me. I don't need NiWA to tell me things are warming > up; all I have to do is open a window... It's not. 2009 is shaping up to be the coldest year since 1995. > If the program was written here then I respect it. Certainly the > data may have been fudged but I doubt that the code has been. Agreed. Some think it was the data that were massaged - no one has commented on the code. The programs used for climate predition at East Anglia, however, are seemingly a mess and cannot be deciphered. Apparently as long as the programs in East Anglia generated the expected graphs they were deemed to be working okay. |