[PapaBear3625]

An interesting observation from wattsupwiththat.com ClimateGate thread (which, as a software developer who has spent time looking at that file and the code, I totally agree with):

The debate about the contents of the HARRY_READ_ME.txt and the validity of the programming and modelling techniques is something only experts and argue over.

However, what the lay person only needs to know this about the programming (which they can verify for themselves from the HARRY_READ_ME.txt file), this file is a THREE YEAR journal of a CRU programmer describing everything he tried with the data and models in an attempt to REPRODUCE existing results CRU had published. Comments in the file make it clear that “HARRY” tried FOR THREE YEARS (2006-2009)to recreate CRU’s published results AND FAILED.

Do you all see the REAL significance of this because it is absolutely fatal to the credibility of anything CRU has produced.

What we have here is a documented THREE year effort by a CRU programmer, who had access to all the data, access to all the code, access to all the people who developed the code and the models and still HE could still NOT duplicate CRU’s OWN results. If he can’t it simply means the CRU’s results cannot be reproduced even by themselves and so there is no point anyone else even trying — CRU themselves have proven it’s a waste of time and so they themselves have proven their own results are plain rubbish. That means any “peer reviewed” document CRU produced along with any other papers that cited the CRU papers are based on data the CRU themselves can’t verify.

Besides, the absolutly sorry state of affairs in the data handling and software managment the HARRY_READ_ME.txt reveals, the utter and total mess of CRU data and software this document reveals is WHY CRU has not released its data and model software.

Given the CRU is one of the most, if not the most cited sources of climate data — upon which trillions of dollars of economic policy is being set, the importance of what the HARRY_READ_ME.txt file reveals becomes scary.

A very nice layman’s summary of some of the issues in the HARRY_READ_ME.txt can be found here

http://www.devilskitchen.me.uk/2009/11/data-horribilis-harryreadmetxt-file.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheDevilsKitchen+%28The+Devil%27s+Kit

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Thanks....Now this is BIG:

****************************

a THREE YEAR journal of a CRU programmer describing everything he tried with the data and models in an attempt to REPRODUCE existing results CRU had published.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Let's make that last reference a HOT LINK (my terminology ):

Data horribilia: the HARRY_READ_ME.txt file

***********************************EXCERPT INTRO************************

Posted by Devil's Kitchen at 11/23/2009 03:56:00 AM

With the CRU emails having been examined, it seems that some people—mainly techies—are really starting to dig into the data files. These files are, as far as we can tell, temperature data, modelling results and other such useful files, i.e. these are the files produced and worked on by the CRU teams, as well as considerable amounts of information on—and code from—the actual computer modelling programmes themselves.

In other words, these are the guts of CRU's actual computer models—the data, the code and the applications.

And they are, by all accounts, a total bloody mess.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

I've been looking thru the thread at the Devil's Kitchen....and this comment I think is very interesting...and could give some ideas...got me thinking:

See link at post #12:

********************************EXCERPT****************************

 Thortung The Terrible said...

The whole idea of configuration management and change control would appear to be an alien concept to these clowns.

I manage embedded software engineering projects for safety critical systems. As the results of this research are going to be used to direct policy to the tune of billions of pounds, I would expect in their shoes to have to comply with similar high standards, as used in the aviation, rail, automotive and similar applicatons.

I would certainly expect to see a full documentation trail from requirements through to formal test with traceability and would expect to see a documented set of procedures for how they develop code and manage change, V&V etc.

Where these idiots to be subject to a TickIT audit as we plebs in industry are, they would probably hit a hold point (critical non-conformity) within seconds.

Given this total lack of a disciplined and professional approach, I can't see how anyone could even begin to trust the results at all, let alone use them as a basis for £billions of taxation policy.

11/23/2009 11:09:00 AM  

[o_zarkman44]

This represents FRAUD of the most extreme degree. This fraud is bigger than Enron and Bernie Madoff combined PLUS every other fraud perpetrated since the beginning of recorded time.

In America, FRAUDS GO TO PRISON. CASE CLOSED.

This fraud has mislead the expenditure of hundreds of BILLIONS OF DOLLARS. And we seek restitution. PLUS PRISON.