Here is the post. The Met Office are, naturally, trying to play down the significance of this, but statistics is a branch of mathematics and even if they claim that other evidence is more important, the Met Office must accept the mathematical calculations in an objective way. The fact is that the statistical model they have chosen to use is up to one thousand times less reliable than a random model. How can that be a scientific choice?
No comments:
Post a Comment
Climate Science welcomes your views/messages.