So I have a new policy when evaluating CV’s of candidates for jobs, or when I’m reading a paper as a referee. If the paper is about a new statistical method or machine learning algorithm and there is no software available for that method – I simply mentally cross it off the CV. If I’m reading a data analysis and their isn’t code that reproduces their analysis – I mentally cross it off. In my mind, new methods/analyses without software are just vapor ware. Now, you’d definitely have to cross a few papers off my CV, based on this principle. I do that. But I’m trying really hard going forward to make sure nothing gets crossed off.
Let’s not use the unfortunate existence of people who wish climate science harm to make climate science a laggard in openness and reproducibility.