by Judith Curry
I could use some help pulling together some graphs for a talk I am giving next week.
by Judith Curry
I could use some help pulling together some graphs for a talk I am giving next week.
Posted in Attribution
by Judith Curry
The National Academies has published a new report: Attribution of extreme weather events in the context of climate change.
Posted in Attribution, Extreme events
by Judith Curry
It has been claimed that the early-2000s global warming slowdown or hiatus, characterized by a reduced rate of global surface warming, has been overstated, lacks sound scientific basis, or is unsupported by observations. The evidence presented here contradicts these claims. – Fyfe et al.
Posted in Attribution
by Larry Kummer, from the Fabius Maximus website.
Many factors have frozen the public policy debate on climate change, but none more important than the disinterest of both sides in tests that might provide better evidence — and perhaps restart the discussion. Even worse, too little thought has been given to the criteria for validating climate science theories (aka their paradigm) and the models build upon them.
Posted in Attribution, Scientific method
by Judith Curry
[O]ur results suggest that the recent record temperature years are are roughly 600 to 130,000 times more likely to have occurred under conditions of anthropogenic than in its absence. – Mann et al.
Posted in Attribution, climate models
by Sergey Kravtsov, Marcia Wyatt, Judith Curry and Anastasios Tsonis
A discussion of two recent papers: Steinman et al. (2015) and Kravtsov et al. (2015)
Posted in Attribution
Posted in Attribution, Communication, Policy
Judith Curry’s recent critical assessment of “L4”, as I’ll call Shaun Lovejoy’s October 20 EOS article, raised the following points:
Posted in Attribution
by Judith Curry
The scientific debate is now over; the moment of closure has arrived. – Shaun Lovejoy
Posted in Attribution, Sensitivity & feedbacks
by Judith Curry
Doubt and Certainty in Climate Science is an important new book that everyone should read. And its free.
Posted in Attribution, Uncertainty
Posted in Attribution, Data and observations
We argue for a redesign of climate change mitigation policies to be ‘anti-fragile’ with respect to scientific uncertainty. – Otto et al.
Posted in Attribution, Policy
by Judith Curry
Jim Hansen’s new paper, and his PR strategy, are raising a whole host of issues that are arguably a backfire for his objectives.
Posted in Attribution
by Judith Curry
The conclusion is that the oscillatory mode (mostly due to the AMO) is significantly more important than the monotonic mode (mostly due to increasing atmospheric CO2) in explaining the 1980–2000 U.S. temperature increase. – Bruce Kurtz
Posted in Attribution
by Judith Curry
The Washington Post has this dramatic headline: Global warming is now slowing down the circulation of the ocean with potentially dire consequences.
Posted in Attribution, Polar regions
by Judith Curry
Two new papers were published last week of relevance to the hiatus.
Posted in Attribution
by Judith Curry
Seeking once again to clarify the problems in communicating the IPCC climate change attribution statements.
Posted in Attribution, Communication, IPCC
by Judith Curry
So, what’s going on in the world of research on the climate dynamics of clouds?
Posted in Attribution
by Matt Skaggs
For years, climate scientists have followed reasoning that goes from climate model simulations to expert opinion, declaring that to be sufficient. But that is not how attribution works.
Posted in Attribution
by Judith Curry
New research suggests that the upper layer of the ocean has warmed more than had been thought previously while the deeper ocean has cooled rather than warmed in recent years.
Posted in Attribution
by Judith Curry
I have just returned from my engagement at the National Press Club, sponsored by the Marshall Institute Roundtable.
Posted in Adaptation, Attribution, Policy
by Judith Curry
UPDATE: comments on McKitrick’s paper
With 39 explanations and counting, and some climate scientists now arguing that it might last yet another decade, the IPCC has sidelined itself in irrelevance until it has something serious to say about the pause and has reflected on whether its alarmism is justified, given its reliance on computer models that predicted temperature rises that have not occurred. – Rupert Darwall
Posted in Attribution, Data and observations