In the microprocessor business, companies employ teams nearly as large as the design teams, whose job it is to find things wrong with the design. It is catastrophic to the company to have a flawed microprocessor make it into consumer hands, so companies devote huge resources to making sure it doesn’t happen. Verification engineers are rewarded for finding as many bugs as possible.
Government climate science has no analogy. They don’t want serious people examining their work, because it is complete crap and is deliberately broken. Instead, they have pal review and FOIA avoidance to streamline getting junk science into the hands of journalists and politicians.
Sorry, OT – but remember the Pentium bug? I still have one of those laying around somewhere.
The Pentium fdiv bug changed the industry. No one every wanted that kind of publicity again,
I wonder if they will become collectors items?
Government Motors also had no such verification engineers. They saved $0.57 per switch and deaths resulted. Not the only time Obama covered up deaths. Team Obama also penalized Toyota fraudulently.
It is not just with computers.
One of the moves made by the international companies was firing up “ISO” and “Just-in-time” where you ‘Trusted’ your supplier to send you the stuff you purchased on time and in spec. Accountants LOVE ISO because it gets rid of the incoming inspection department and minimizes warehousing of inventory…. Until thing go wrong and it costs the company millions…
Within QC circles this is the classic tale of the pitfalls of ISO.
If you have ever looked at the head of a bolt it is plain, with three hash marks or with five. A bolt with five is much stronger. The Chinese figured out that a bolt with five hash marks sold for quite a bit more so that is what they designed into their molds (but not the strength.) A purchasing agent is always looking for deals and will but the cheapest that ‘matches spec’
Luckily Q/C types are suspicious by nature, so one guy on his own initiative at an airline company decided to have a few incoming bolts tested. OOPS! Those “Grade 8” bolts were less than 1/3 the required strength. Think of the number of bolts in an airplane….
http://www.k-tbolt.com/bolt_chart.html
I have gone through the same routine about incoming inspection but couldn’t convince upper management to foot the bill until AFTER the million dollar disaster struck. These stories of course never make it into common knowledge.
The chart show grade 5 with three radial lines and grade 8 with six.
The reason is irrelevant; regardless of the reason, the only conclusion to be drawn from the active prohibition of criticism is that climate “science” is, by definition, not science.
RE: climate “science” is, by definition, not science.
From now on, the proper term is “Climate séance”
🙂
🙂
When you make peer review of scientific findings the valve to public funding, the floodgates to corruption are open.
From my professional experience, I would say ANONYMOUS peer review is the culprit. “Who watches the watchers?”
The original 1k DRAM was also a bit of a disaster in the early days. I remember one old hand extolling the virtues of core memory. As a result of this issue I was in gainful employment.