The deviation since 1960 doesn't automatically mean that the records are wrong before 1960, as the instrumental records validate a large chunk of the pre 1960 period tree ring proxy data as correct within a given error bar. Noone knows the reasons why the tree ring proxy data is wrong "recently", but it is entirely possible that the cause is something like "more recent rings on trees take time to dry out" or something like that. It would be interesting to find out the cause.
And no one knows if they were wrong in the past in a similar way; that is the danger of chasing correlations without a firm grasp of the physical mechanisms (which provide model structure and make extrapolation beyond the calibration region somewhat safe).
It is also fairly likely that it is in this section:
As a warmish rather than hot chick, I think, in general, that the smarter the man the more he values intelligence. Or that's what I keep telling myself, anyway.
ah economic expertise is in practice not based on predictive record, so it is not even engineering, let alone science. traditonally it has been been a field for lackies. so i am not impressed with an economics nobel. pooh, it is not quite even a real nobel.
However, I think most people understand the difference between an HR manager, accountant and lawyer, and they would have different job titles even if they were all in an administration dept. It's unlikely they would all be called 'administration guy' and be expected to deal with the same queries, unless it's a really, really small company, in which case it's fair enough and everyone is expected to be versatile. I don't think IT is given the same respect/insight, so I think the article author's point stands.
Of course they'll have different job titles - just as I assume our "IT guy" is going to have some kind of official job title like "Senior Network Administrator" - but that doesn't really matter. We're talking about somebody who doesn't want to be called an "IT guy" even though he works in the "IT Department."
HR is responsible for human resources... Accounting is responsible for money... Legal is responsible for all the legal mumbo-jumbo...
So, where does payroll fit into things? Is that HR or Accounting?
How about whoever it is that handles things like the hiring and firing procedures... Does that fall under Legal, or HR?
I'm sure you've got people working in HR who have skillsets that more closely resemble folks in Accounting or Legal... Or you've got people who have duties that fall somewhere between the departmental lines... But you've still got to stick them on an organizational chart somewhere.
So you get guys in HR who don't know the first thing about hiring or firing people... Who went to years and years of school to learn all kinds of neat accounting stuff... But they're still in HR, whether they like it or not. And they'll still be introduced as "Joe from HR" - even if they don't like the association with the people who fire you. And maybe they'll be asked about some benefit package during lunch, and they won't be able to answer, because they don't know anything about benefits.
How does that differ from someone in IT who went to school for years and years to learn programming and has nothing to do with actually fixing a broken PC?
It may very well be that your average human being doesn't understand the intricacies of IT work... May not understand the subtle differences between a DBA and a network administrator (they're both administrators, right?) But that doesn't really have much to do with organizational charts.
If your company has an IT department, and you work in it, you're an IT guy. Just as you're an HR guy if you work in the HR department, and you're a Sales guy if you work in the Sales department.
"Even if you're on the right track, you'll get run over if you just sit there." -- Will Rogers