Agree re using stats to improve models. No problem with that. And that's what is going on with climate models.
Re your claim
" hypothesis is that the rate of change of temperature over the test period is not (statistically) significantly different from a zero rate"
If you start with an understanding of the greenhouse effect;
And if you look at the extent to which we have modified the natural levels of greenhouse gasses;
and you understand the physics of that;
Then there is no credible way that you can claim to expect a zero rate of change of temperature.
Re your claim of hubris
If you read the IPCC reports and other science, the acknowledged uncertainty in climate sensitivity and a range of other factors is there. There's no hubris.
But if you want to claim that stats proves that there is a credible likelihood that there is no greenhouse effect and the rate of temperature change is not significantly different from the zero rate then, I'd say, that's your hubris right there.
- Forums
- Science & Medicine
- The pause that was and then was not!
Agree re using stats to improve models. No problem with that....
- There are more pages in this discussion • 73 more messages in this thread...
You’re viewing a single post only. To view the entire thread just sign in or Join Now (FREE)
Featured News
Featured News
The Watchlist
LU7
LITHIUM UNIVERSE LIMITED
Alex Hanly, CEO
Alex Hanly
CEO
SPONSORED BY The Market Online