Good for the Goose, not for the Gander

Neverending Audit finds evidence provided by Michael Mann, of non-reproducibility, non-cooperation, and statistical error from Wegman et al.

Update: This was hashed out at the time, sort of, at CA. Except for the part about Wegman being wrong.

4 thoughts on “Good for the Goose, not for the Gander

  1. JohnMashey says:

    Oh, the zingers are piling up…I'd heaard about Ritson, hadn't seen the comments, had them on the list to track down.

  2. willard says:

    Thanks for the attribution, but I think the hat tip belongs to Eli Rabbett. Quite frankly, I don't know what to make of all this. The only observations that I am willing to share for now are these. Wegman does not look a pure maths thing. Physical decisions seems to come to play. So portraying the Wegman report in all its mathematical purity seems a bit farfetched.The other observation is that it is quite strange that the mathematical issue relies on this report only.From these two observations I contend that it's worth a dig. If it's only a math thing, this will have to be played out once and for all. If it's only a math thing, this won't get us farer than other math things. Which is never very far reaching.

  3. Martin says:

    Salon had a good story about this, way back when.Good to see this not being forgotten.

  4. EliRabett says:

    If you read to the bottom of McIntyre's post (thanks for pointing it out), he basically shifts ground from statistic to weighting of the bristlecone pines which is kind of typical of his modus operendi

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s