/ Comments
_
MegaAbstauberSeo - 2012-10-21 22:33:23
_
I think that is one of the most important information for me. And i am happy reading your article. But should observation on few basic things, The web site style is perfect, the articles is in reality nice : D. Just right process, cheers
Kevin - 2012-09-21 18:22:28
_
You (and Curry) have a point, but I'm not sure it's the correct point. Yes, I except that good software V&V practices will become a part of climate modelling as used for policy making, just as we see in the nuclear industry.Will it make climate models more correct? Probably somewhat, at great expense. Still, I remember Steve Easterbrook finding that the informal QA methods used in climatology already produce remarkably high quality code.And of course we all know that the real issues with climate modelling quality are in representing the physics, rather than formal code correctness. This is optimizing the trees for the forest, and probably a very subopimal use of resources if overall quality is the objective.Yet, I have no doubt we are going there. It's politically inevitable. But let's be explicit: it's about creating the appearance of rigor. As such, it is just another (small) aspect of scientists having to get much better at public relations. What you have written about a lot, Michael.
