Comments on: Cohn and Lins [GRL 2005]

By: The IPCC SREX: the report is finally out.

The IPCC SREX: the report is finally out. — Sun, 06 May 2012 12:47:40 +0000

[...] and here), and I wonder whether this notion seems to be a bit difficult to grasp for some scholars (here and here). It is a new way of looking at the data, and I notice that even the SRES report (p. 125) [...]

By: The IPCC SREX: the report is finally out. – - ScienceNewsX - Science News AggregatorScienceNewsX – Science News Aggregator

Thu, 29 Mar 2012 14:24:32 +0000

By: The IPCC SREX: the report is finally out. | Climate Science — My Link Blog

Thu, 29 Mar 2012 11:36:32 +0000

By: Demetris Koutsoyannis « Climate Audit

Demetris Koutsoyannis « Climate Audit — Mon, 30 May 2011 21:28:55 +0000

[...] discussed Rasmus together with Cohn and Lins in a number of recent posts, commencing here . Rasmus argued that consideration of statistical persistence "pitched" statistics against [...]

By: UC

UC — Wed, 11 Oct 2006 19:32:32 +0000

That Benestad paper (2003) is quite interesting

A null hypothesis assumes a homogeneous (no change in observation practice or instrumentation) and stationary (no long term trend) series, i.e. a series consisting of independent and identically distributed (iid) random variables (von Storch & Zwiers 1999, Raqab 2001).

I’ve seen this somewhere else, stationary=i.i.d, where does this come from?? From those references?

Over northern Europe, the month-to-month and year-to-year correlations are low, hence each series can be treated as consisting of independent realizations.

…

A cooling during 1940–1960 in many of the series may affect the observed number of record events.

Climate science is amazingly confusing. (sorry for bringing old post up, searched for Scafetta, and guessed beforehand that Steve mentions him/her somewhere in this blog)

By: Willis Eschenbach

Willis Eschenbach — Fri, 24 Mar 2006 02:45:28 +0000

Last post got munched, I used the “less than” symbol … wrong. Here’s the full post:

Finally got around to reading “Naturally Trendy”. It’s amazing. They show that with the type of “d” values found in temperature datasets (~0.3 – 0.4), the (p less than 5%) trend levels are exceeded, not 5% of the time as we’d expect, but some 30% – 40% of the time … I had not realized it was that bad.

The paper also shows that the annual NH temperature trend of the last 150 years is not statistically significant (p = ~ 7%) Zowie, I didn’t expect that.

Ummm …

By: Willis Eschenbach

Willis Eschenbach — Fri, 24 Mar 2006 02:40:45 +0000

Finally got around to reading “Naturally Trendy”. It’s amazing. They show that with the type of “d” values found in temperature datasets (~0.3 – 0.4), the p not statistically significant (p = ~ 7%) Zowie, I didn’t expect that.

Ummm …

By: Everyday thoughts

Everyday thoughts — Sat, 14 Jan 2006 07:48:35 +0000

A tale of hypothesis testing ''€" expanding on Hans Von Storch and the Mexican Hat

By: Common Sense Technology »Blog Archive » Trade bad for Kyoto Protocol

Common Sense Technology »Blog Archive » Trade bad for Kyoto Protocol — Tue, 20 Dec 2005 16:56:37 +0000

[...] My view is that Kyoto has always been a political and economic treaty having little – maybe even nothing – to do with the environment. This report confirms what was obvious on the surface although bureaucrats and climatologists did not see this one coming (economics being outside their field). Regardless, there is a really interesting online discussion of statistics, physics, economics models, hydraulics models, GCMs, etc, here and good questions on the former here.) Trackback · • • • [...]

By: Steve McIntyre

Steve McIntyre — Tue, 20 Dec 2005 15:32:44 +0000

TCO – I see that Rasmus has told you that GCMs do a “reasonable” job of replicating the autocorrelation structure of temperature and temperature proxies. Ask for a reference – I’m unaware of specific evidence that they do (but I’m not conversant with much GCM literature). Pelletier cited Manabe and Stouffer as showing that continental gridpoints had “flat spectra up to time scales of about 100 years in contrast to observation”.