Reply #16: I disagree. Open source code allows you to verify there are not flaws in the calculation. [View All]

As I have posted in other threads everything should be open. From raw data (if it is analog, paper, records, etc) then it should be scanned, the compiled data, the source code, the compiled programs, the algorithms, the proofs to support those algorithms, the assumptions, the output, the projections.

EVERY SINGLE THING SHOULD BE PUBLICLY AVAILABLE.

Open source has been a huge success in the software world because no matter how smart you are you can make mistakes, either careless mistakes that are missed, or mistakes in methodology.

The sooner the IPCC and other Climate Change organizations realize this the more effective they will be.

While if I have the data and algorithm I could write my own code to do the calculations but what happens if the results don't match.
Is it because their results are falsified?
Is it because their results are based on flawed code?
Is it because I misunderstood the methodology/algorithm?
Is it because I made a mistake in my code?

Having the input and the output and being told "trust us the code is good" is not going to improve public support. It is possible the methodology is sound and the code if flawed.