Twitter
- RT @BlairKing_ca: This is a classic example of a climate thought leader showing how completely ignorant he is about what it will take to tr… 1 day ago
Search
Denizens
Recent comments
- Ragnaar on Week in review – science edition
- Julie Bell on The latest travesty in ‘consensus enforcement’
- Willard on The latest travesty in ‘consensus enforcement’
- Blacklist by Nature follows defamation by BioScience: journals reject ethics of science | Watts Up With That? on The latest travesty in ‘consensus enforcement’
- Willard on The latest travesty in ‘consensus enforcement’
- Ragnaar on The latest travesty in ‘consensus enforcement’
- Brian R Catt on Geothermal ocean warming discussion thread
- Quondam on The latest travesty in ‘consensus enforcement’
- Robert I. Ellison on Child prophets and proselytizers of climate catastrophe
- matthewrmarler on The latest travesty in ‘consensus enforcement’
-
Recent Posts
- The latest travesty in ‘consensus enforcement’
- Week in review – science edition
- Climate Change and Land: discussion thread
- Child prophets and proselytizers of climate catastrophe
- Week in review – science edition
- Geothermal ocean warming discussion thread
- Week in review – science edition
- Climate scientists’ pre-traumatic stress syndrome
- Week in review – science edition
- Truth(?) in testimony and convincing policy makers
- Hearing on climate change and natural disasters: Today
- Hearing on climate change & extreme weather
- Climate science’s ‘masking bias’ problem
- Climate scientists’ motivated reasoning
- Week in review – science edition
Categories
Blogroll
- A chemist in Langley
- AndThenTheresPhysics
- Arctic Sea Ice Blog
- Bill Hooke
- Cliff Mass
- Climate Audit
- Clive Best
- Cultural Cognition
- Ed Hawkins
- HeterodoxAcademy
- Isaac Held
- Nick Stokes
- Paul Homewood
- Pragmatic Environmentalist
- Science of Doom
- SciMed Skeptic
- Trust, yet verify
- Watts Up With That?
- WoodForTrees
Archives
Meta
Search Results for: Overconfidence in IPCC's detection and attribution. Part
Overconfidence in IPCC’s detection and attribution. Part IV
by Judith Curry Last October, I introduced this topic in Part I and followed up with Part II and Part III, which formed an early draft of an argument I was using in a paper entitled “Climate Science and the Uncertainty … Continue reading
Posted in Attribution
Overconfidence in IPCC’s detection and attribution. Part II
by Judith Curry The focus of this series on detection and attribution is the following statement in the IPCC AR4:
Posted in Attribution
Uncertainty and the IPCC AR5
by Judith Curry I am starting to see some encouraging signs that people (including the IPCC) are paying more attention to the uncertainty issue as it relates to climate change. Nature has an editorial on this issue that summarizes the … Continue reading
Posted in IPCC, Uncertainty
Overconfidence in IPCC’s detection and attribution: Part III
by Judith Curry The focus of this series on detection and attribution is the following statement in the IPCC AR4:
Posted in Attribution
Overconfidence in IPCC’s detection and attribution: Part I
by Judith Curry Arguably the most important conclusion of IPCC AR4 is the following statement:
Posted in Attribution
The 50-50 argument
by Judith Curry Pick one: a) Warming since 1950 is predominantly (more than 50%) caused by humans. b) Warming since 1950 is predominantly caused by natural processes.
Posted in Attribution, Uncategorized
Climate model simulations of the AMO
by Judith Curry What are the implications of climate model deficiencies in simulating multi-decadal natural internal variability for IPCC’s climate change detection and attribution arguments?
Posted in Attribution, climate models
