It won't be news to most of my readership, but it is worth noting that the one thing that seems to be certain about climate change is that the 2007 IPCC report understated things. Sigh.
Sharon
- Log in to post comments
More like this
An unlikely trio has just made available the results of their quasi-scientific survey of climatologists, who were asked how much they agreed with the latest report from the IPCC. It makes for fascinating reading, even if its response rate of less than 10 % is a bit disappointing. Despite attempts…
As with In It for the Gold, Eli Rabbet's Rabbet Run is another quality blog that can't be just marked as read. So I have no other option but to settle down for a bit of focused reading and catch up on Eli's latest 19 posts!
(Eli, if you are reading this, you might want to update my entry in your…
About once a day, someone tells me that human caused climate change is not real because this or that thing in the latest report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) contradicts something I, or some other scientists or science writer, has said.
I've noticed an uptick in references…
1.5 m sea level rise this century, that is. Nature sez the "estimate released today says that it could be as as much as 1.5 metres (4.9 feet) by the end of this century". Their source seems to be Reuters, and we'll pause briefly to condemn the oh-so-typical inflation of the worst case from the…
That's in line with what I saw 2000 - 2003 on the U.S. Coast Guard Icebreaker HEALY. In 2000 there was a one mile diameter polynya at the North Pole. In 2001 with a continuous icebreaking capability of 5 feet ice thickness we got to the Pole unassisted on 05 September. Scientists on the ship who have been going to the Arctic every year since graduate school in the International Geophysical year in 1958 told me they have seen steady reduction of sea ice since then.
I wrote about the underestimation bias back then, 2007: tinyurl.com/43754wg
It's still something the climate community has not dealt with; but I think provably, mathematically, one can show that the top to bottom scientific process as currently used in the climate area WILL, reliably, produce underestimates of changes.
We need a statistician to point it out, I guess.
Man. it doesn't stop. Some seriously bad scary ice news today;
green.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/09/28/arctic-shelves-have-lost-half-their-size-in-six-years/