Search Results for: Stocker

Another IPCC Demand for Secrecy

Unfortunately, IPCC seems far more concerned about secrecy than in requiring its contributors to archive data. I received another request to remove discussion of IPCC draft reports. On this issue, David Appell and I are in full agreement – see David Appell’s collection of ZOD chapters here. (Jan 30 Update – see below.)

Neukom and the Steig Over/Under

Earlier this year, I reported on the refusal of Raphael Neukom, an associate of IPCC confidentiality advocate and WG1 Co-Chair Thomas Stocker at the University of Bern, to archive data used in a then recent multiproxy study, Neukom et al 2011 (Clim Dyn). In his refusal letter, Neukom stated that Most of the non-publicly available […]

New Light on Jones’ Document Deletion Enterprise

David Holland, in a guest post at Bishop Hill, shows that Climategate 2.0 has provided more context on Phil Jones’ efforts to organize the deletion of documents.

Another Trick from the U of East Anglia

Volume II of the Report of the UK Science and Technology Committee – here – contains supplementary answers by the University of East Anglia that have thus far not attracted commentary. The University’s answer to a question about the July 2009 FOI requests was untruthful in important respects.

What to do with the IPCC?

Update:  Feb 13, 2010 NY Times letter to the editor by Paul Epstein deserves a quotation here: That fossil fuel industry-financed forces are continuing their campaign to undermine the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and its chief scientists should not distract us from what we know about our climate. Two physical findings stand […]

AR 4 Chapter 6 – "In Press" and "Accepted" Articles

I examined the “In Press” and “Accepted” citations in IPCC AR4 Second Draft Chapter 6 to verify whether Wahl and Ammann 200x had received unusual and special treatment. It definitely did; it’s surprising how much so. There was also a very interesting tendency for IPCC Authors to bend the rules in their own favor.

AR4: "Now-Classic" Results on Cloud Uncertainty are "Unsettling"

AR4 (chapter 1 on the History of Climate Science) contains the remarkable statement: The strong effect of cloud processes on climate model sensitivities to greenhouse gases was emphasized further through a now-classic set of General Circulation Model (GCM) experiments, carried out by Senior and Mitchell (1993). They produced global average surface temperature changes (due to […]

Inconvenient Graphic

We’ve all become rather used to graphs looking like the one that I’ve drawn below (other than the horizontal blue line that I will explain later). This, together with the corresponding graph of CO2 levels, is almost certainly same as Gore’s graphic on page 66 of Inconvenient Truth. I’ll bet dollars-to-doughnuts that some variation of […]