Here’s a nice comment on the Fortran.
Yes, I used to code in Fortran—and I *never* read or wrote stuff even 1/10th this bad.
Climate Research Unit FORTRAN code backs up claims of fraud and corruption
Neal from Climate Audit writes:
“People are talking about the emails being smoking guns but I find the remarks in the code and the code more of a smoking gun. The code is so hacked around to give predetermined results that it shows the bias of the coder. In other words make the code ignore inconvenient data to show what I want it to show. The code after a quick scan is quite a mess. Anyone with any pride would be to ashamed of to let it out public viewing. As examples [of] bias take a look at the following remarks from the MANN code files:”
function mkp2correlation,indts,depts,remts,t,filter=filter,refperiod=refperiod,$
datathresh=datathresh
;
; THIS WORKS WITH REMTS BEING A 2D ARRAY (nseries,ntime) OF MULTIPLE TIMESERIES
; WHOSE INFLUENCE IS TO BE REMOVED. UNFORTUNATELY THE IDL5.4 p_correlate
; FAILS WITH >1 SERIES TO HOLD CONSTANT, SO I HAVE TO REMOVE THEIR INFLUENCE
; FROM BOTH INDTS AND DEPTS USING MULTIPLE LINEAR REGRESSION AND THEN USE THE
; USUAL correlate FUNCTION ON THE RESIDUALS.
;
pro maps12,yrstart,doinfill=doinfill
;
; Plots 24 yearly maps of calibrated (PCR-infilled or not) MXD reconstructions
; of growing season temperatures. Uses corrected MXD but shouldnt usually
; plot past 1960 because these will be artificially adjusted to look closer to
; the real temperatures.
;
“Spin that, spin it to the moon if you want. Ill believe programmer notes over the word of somebody who stands to gain from suggesting theres nothing untowards about it.
Either the data tells the story of nature or it does not. Data that has been artificially adjusted to look closer to the real temperatures is false data, yielding a false result.”
-Anthony Watts, Meteorologist
Cheers!
(Though "trick. . . to hide" is pretty d*amning, too.)