[hinckley buzzard]

I have a little trouble believing a berzerkly radical can head up a "nonpartisan nonpolitical" anything. He may be sincere but there are good reasons to believe he is sincerely wrong. In any case, we shall see. As always the true battle will be over the error values of the data.

[max americana]

>>”We are an independent, non-political, non-partisan group.<<

Yeah, right. Any sane conservative knows that it’s a scam and won’t waste their time proving something that never existed in the first place. Which leaves the “other” political spectrum..

[muawiyah]

Muller claims to be a statistician ~ which is good. There are entirely too many self-described climatologists out there who really have only the slightest understanding of statistics who invent too much BS for whatever they produce.

That's what you find the public detecting the most of ~ the disconnect between real statistical analysis and the claims made for the data.

Of interest ~ I started out as a Math major ages back and spent a good deal of the last 50 years fiddling around with statistical methodologies. Not that I could be all that productive any more in that field but even I recognized that there were serious questions about the AGW data sets quite early on. For example, there were only three climatological sites in Republic of Congo. One day the staff were working happily collecting temperatures and humidity readings and along came a group of rebel soldiers who saw these nice plump guys and killed them, then dressed them out, cooked and ate them.

I began disputing ALL of the weather station data in Africa based on that event. We had an early website where a United Nations weather guy was a member. We went back and forth on the reliability of data coming from stations where the data collectors were so readily eaten.

He had no good answers for it.