Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Brumar89 who wrote (925629)	3/11/2016 11:03:20 AM
From: TideGlider	1 Recommendation Recommended By Brumar89 Respond to of 1576663

Nature is adaptable and opportunistic.

To: Brumar89 who wrote (925629)	3/11/2016 2:25:01 PM
From: Brumar89	1 Recommendation Recommended By FJB Respond to of 1576663

Why You Don’t Adjust Data Posted on March 11, 2016 by stevengoddard All large data sets contain measurement or calculation errors. Unless there is some specific reason to believe the data is skewed due to an external trend (like UHI) people normally assume the errors are random and expect them to cancel out. Many fields of science and engineering depend on this principle, including nuclear weapons design. For example, there is just as likely to be missing temperature data in January as July, so making up fake temperatures for missing dates serves no purpose and only corrupts the data. When climate scientists start making adjustments, confirmation bias sets in. They look for problems which cause mismatches vs. their theory, and ignore problems which would work against their theory if corrected. Suppose there are 20 things wrong with a data set, and scientists correct only the 10 problems which reduce warming. Even on the odd chance that the 10 corrections were done legitimately, they have completely corrupted the data set. And you end up with a mess like this.