ÃÛÌÒÁµÈË

Add new comment

I like the science part, the problem is, I, like most ordinary people, have not seen the data, so I cannot tell you what I believe. The ignorant need to be educated, and confidence in the integrity of the data reclaimed. I see youtube videos of adjusted data (fake?) vs raw with no explanation as to the adjustment. A full chain-of-explanation needs to be provided, and i worry that the ease of using computer guys to create/adjust data is not being appropriately reviewed by climate science and sensor engineering people, and peer reviewed by other related science disciplines. Government, policy, industry, Climategate, competing interests just add to the confusion (I can never believe a politician who tries to talk about science, or claims to have invented the internet). Bias needs to be removed from the research as Nobel author D Kahneman in 'Thinking Fast and Slow' indicates -he has "yet to meet a successful scientist who lacks the ability to exaggerate" - to do this we need good quality data, and a good amount of it, and processes to filter bias.

I think a well-vetted systems-level view needs to be implemented that recognizes the earth is a very very large and complicated system, lots of inputs involved, always more to be known, inclusive of various science disciplines, adding to it new technologies as they go online. I saw on C-SPAN NASA pitching funding requests for Spaceweather, certainly this has to be a positive thing and only shows there is always more to learn.

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.

Comment HTML

  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.