Letters to the Editor
-
So much for peer reviewed science.
"Why should we still listen to James Hansen after he was caught fudging his data for the hottest years on record? How come none of the thousands of top climate scientists bothered to check Hansen's numbers the errors were discovered by some so called crackpot denier in his basement? So much for peer reviewed science."
James Hansen did not fudge his data. There were some errors; maybe the guy who found them was in his basement, but he is not really a denier. The errors are small, small enough so that the change in the results is not statistically significant. That is, the statement "year x was the hottest on record, but now year y is the hottest", does not mean much because year x and year y are so close in temperature that we do not really know which was hottest because of errors inherent in the measurements themselves. So anyone claiming "wow, this is the hottest year on record" was not really making a meaningful statement to begin with.