Unfortunately earth events can't be rerun for reproducible tests. There are
many causes for climate change. No one really has a handle on it. Perhaps
the real climate change deniers are those who claim we can stop climate
change.

On Mar 6, 2018 6:37 PM, "Donna Y" <dy...@sympatico.ca> wrote:

> Raul
>
> Thanks for the links to the articles that discuss the scope of the problem
> of no one being motivated or funded to carry out replication experiments.
>
> Jose
>
> Thanks for the cartoon—I am way off in right field with the mathematician.
>
> The results of a single study do not establish scientific
> facts—Established theories are well tested and supported by interlocking
> evidence from a wide variety of sources.
>
> I am concerned by the climate change deniers who inherit their methods
> from religious fundamentalists who deny evolution.
>
> Donna Y
> dy...@sympatico.ca
>
>
> > On Mar 6, 2018, at 6:59 PM, Raul Miller <rauldmil...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I have heard a variety of disagreements, both with that premise, and
> > with attempts at experiments.
> >
> > (Including, since you brought up climate change, an attempt (by a
> > reputable MIT graduate) to reproduce Hans Hug's data (funding for lab
> > costs was there, and interns to do the legwork were available, but
> > because there was a possibility that experimental results could
> > conflict with current climate change models, lab access was denied).
> > See http://www.john-daly.com/forcing/hug-barrett.htm and
> > http://www.john-daly.com/artifact.htm for writeups on what he was
> > trying to reproduce.)
> >
> > Anyways, yeah, it's easy to find people to disagree with almost anything.
> >
> > Nevertheless, there's actually been quite a bit of notice attracted to
> > this issue:
> >
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replication_crisis
> >
> > https://www.nature.com/news/1-500-scientists-lift-the-lid-
> on-reproducibility-1.19970
> >
> > So I guess I don't feel I need to place a lot of stock in people who
> > simply "disagree". Much better to show the relevant work, in my
> > opinion. (And, in some cases, the necessary work has been done. So
> > it's not like I'm asking for the impossible.)
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > --
> > Raul
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 6:05 PM, Jose Mario Quintana
> > <jose.mario.quint...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> <  One weakness of the academic publishing system has been that it never
> >> cared much about reproducible scientific results. Hopefully that
> >>
> >> I suspect some scientists (or "scientists" depending on one's point of
> >> view), for example, those working on Climate Change (Global Warming) and
> >> related matters, might disagree with the premise.
> >>
> >> On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 6:55 PM, Raul Miller <rauldmil...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> That's an interesting question...
> >>>
> >>> One weakness of the academic publishing system has been that it never
> >>> cared much about reproducible scientific results. Hopefully that
> >>> segment of academia can muster some way of supporting efforts to
> >>> support / refute such work. This will be difficult because of
> >>> communication issues - it's all too easy to refute something different
> >>> from the original. But, also, because of human social issues - people
> >>> do not like dealing with failures.
> >>>
> >>> But, also, not everything is science.
> >>>
> >>> So I expect things to fragment somewhat - there's the political
> >>> patronage side of things, the engineering practicality side of things,
> >>> the scientific reproducibility and extension work side of things,
> >>> there's the artistic merit side of things, there's the historical
> >>> perspectives side of things, there's the health benefit side of
> >>> things, there's the accounting verification side of things, and so
> >>> on...
> >>>
> >>> People who can tie into widespread support will tend to do well
> >>> regardless (think: football, for example). Others... well, I think
> >>> it's going to depend somewhat on the discipline.
> >>>
> >>> I don't think the peer review system is going to just go away, but I
> >>> think it's going to be seeing some different competition...
> >>>
> >>> Working code (github contributions, perhaps) might be one example of
> >>> this. But computerized platforms tend to come and go far more quickly
> >>> than the printed page.
> >>>
> >>> Mostly, I guess... anything involving people tends to need concerted
> >>> effort to deal with.
> >>>
> >>> This was probably not a useful answer.
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Raul
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 6:11 PM, Ian Clark <earthspo...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>>> I've given up writing for Vector. (That's a terrible thing to say for
> >>>> someone still loosely attached to the Vector committee.)
> >>>>
> >>>> Why write a letter on vellum with a quill pen when you can pick up the
> >>>> phone?
> >>>>
> >>>> Of course, if I still had an academic reputation to defend, funding
> >>> sources
> >>>> to keep sweet, administrators to browbeat, pretty students to wow, I'd
> >>>> think differently. My shelf full of journals would be like the
> diploma on
> >>>> the wall. But the old systems are withering away.
> >>>>
> >>>> Yet academics continue to need accreditation, good peer-reviews,
> >>>> publications for their CV (in case they get hounded out of their
> school).
> >>>> What's to replace the old systems? Facebook Likes?
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 6:00 PM, 'Pascal Jasmin' via Programming <
> >>>> programm...@jsoftware.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> I asked for feedback on choosing one of 2 topics but received no
> reply.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>      From: Cliff Reiter <reit...@lafayette.edu>
> >>>>> To: programm...@jsoftware.com
> >>>>> Sent: Monday, March 5, 2018 10:54 AM
> >>>>> Subject: Re: [Jprogramming] RV: JoJ 2018
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Dear J forum,
> >>>>> Writing for the Journal of J or Vector is different from writing for
> the
> >>>>> Jforums or Wiki. All those venues are a valuable resource for us who
> >>>>> work with J. I encourage us to supply all those forums with
> material. I
> >>>>> submitted a paper to Vector a few months ago:
> >>>>> http://archive.vector.org.uk/art10501760
> >>>>> and I noted that they too didn't have an issue in 2017.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I plan to submit an article to JoJ in a month or so. I would rather
> not
> >>>>> be the only article in an issue. Anyone else game to submit
> notes/papers
> >>>>> to the journals most relevant to J? I would love to see our journals
> >>>>> have the some of the awesome energy that the forums have!
> >>>>> Best, Cliff
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On 1/15/2018 7:25 AM, mikel paternain wrote:
> >>>>>> Hi everybody
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> We have not received any contributions to publish in 2017.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> JoJ was born to collect works on J.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Send contributions to i...@journalofj.com<http://
> >>>>> webmail.journalofj.com/imp/message.php?mailbox=INBOX.
> Enviados&index=17#
> >>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Thanks in advance
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> JoJ
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> ----------
> >>>>>> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/
> >>> forums.htm
> >>>>>
> >>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------
> >>>>> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/
> forums.htm
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------
> >>>>> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/
> forums.htm
> >>>>>
> >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------
> >>>> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/
> forums.htm
> >>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
> >>>
> >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm

Reply via email to