You're literally ignoring what Bates said later & the conclusions of the MITRE Committee.
-
-
Replying to @priscian @NikolovScience and
You mean this?pic.twitter.com/Jx6QUWqZNa
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @rln_nelson @NikolovScience and
Bates: "The issue here is not an issue of tampering with data, but rather really of timing of a release of a paper that had not properly disclosed everything it was."
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @priscian @rln_nelson and
No, because the issue is about Michael Mann using a statistical method that mines the data to produce a hockey stick graph no matter what data is used. including random number sets.
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
-
Replying to @priscian @ladyspat1 and
A skeptical claim is that if you use Mann's process you get the hockey stick no matter the data, which has allegedly been demonstrated. I am skeptical of the skeptical claim on this one.
8 replies 2 retweets 8 likes -
Replying to @ScottAdamsSays @ladyspat1 and
The original hockey-stick result has been affirmed now literally 50 times in the literature, often without using Mann's methodology or data, and using such diverse proxies as boreholes, stalagmites, and glaciers.
3 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @priscian @ScottAdamsSays and
You cannot validate the Mann methodology and/or data by NOT reproducing Mann's methodology and data. That statement of yours was sheer nonsensical and non-scientific double speak.
2 replies 0 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @ladyspat1 @ScottAdamsSays and
Not interested in your non-scientific opinion.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @priscian @ScottAdamsSays and
Of course you are in denial of the scientific method. Mann's methodology produces hockey stick graphs when using random numbers. To cannot affirm a methodology by not using the methodology. Getting the same results as a methodology using random numbers infers equal invalidity.
2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes
I have heard that claim and consider it deeply unlikely to be true.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.