re: #373 Jaerik

Completely with you, but so far you’ve only explained why CRU might be wrong. I already presupposed that CRU’s models and conclusions are invalid as part of the argument. But keep going…

No, I am ONLY telling you about how Hadcrut3 was put together over the years. And guess what, if you look through the history of LGF, you will see that I am not a AGW denier, but I am bothered about the sloppy methods in regards to Information Technology and they way, in this case, CRU has handled the data processing aspects of all this.

Everyone talks about peer-reviewed science, well guess what, any large company that would peer-review CRU’s programming and data base construction techniques would give it THUMBS DOWN.