Comments On Silverman's Evaluation Of The Kern River Program

Authors

  • Paul J. Smith South Dakota School of Mines and Technology, Rapid City, SD, USA

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.54782/jwm.v41i1.186

Abstract

 am skeptical about Silverman's (2008) approach of taking point estimates of a seeding effect (in this case, from the Kern River program) at face value, as in the interpretation of his Fig.1, and viewing a variation in those estimates with increasing length of record as an indication of a time trend in the seeding effect. A point estimate is just that: An estimate. There is a 10% chance that the "true value" of the effect does not even lay within the 90% confidence interval. I question whether small variations of the point estimate, within a confidence interval that does not substantially narrow with increasing sample size (no plot of the variation of the confidence intervals appears in Silverman 2008, but see Fig. 3 of Silverman 2007 for an example), indicate anything other than simple statistical variations of the point estimate.

Downloads

Issue

Section

Technical Notes and Correspondence

How to Cite

Comments On Silverman’s Evaluation Of The Kern River Program. (2009). The Journal of Weather Modification, 41(1), 161-162. https://doi.org/10.54782/jwm.v41i1.186