[ekianjo]

> has a whole pile of claims to his name I would expect a far better researched piece of work.

they did much more work than the random person who believes evrything they see on TV. that should be saluted, not derided.

[jacquesm]

It's the quality of the work that is problematic. I'm not of the participation prize generation.

[ekianjo]

Doing raw data visualization and being very careful about not making conclusive comments seems like a proper way to step in the subject without pretending to know more than anyone else. Also he didnt cherry pick what would have been the most convenient ones to make a point.

Compare that with typical media science reporting which is often much worse and misleading at best when not grossly wrong.

Quality work starts with data exploration and data mining. I see this article as an invitation to check the actual data thats available, if anything.

[jacquesm]

> I see this article as an invitation to check the actual data thats available

It isn't. The only thing it does is stir the pot and give the climate change deniers another straw to try to cling to.