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" <[email protected]> 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 > [email protected] > > > > On Mar 6, 2018, at 6:59 PM, Raul Miller <[email protected]> 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 > > <[email protected]> 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 <[email protected]> > 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 <[email protected]> > 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 < > >>>> [email protected]> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> I asked for feedback on choosing one of 2 topics but received no > reply. > >>>>> > >>>>> From: Cliff Reiter <[email protected]> > >>>>> To: [email protected] > >>>>> 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 [email protected]<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
