tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4142988674703954802.post8234637673096473244..comments2024-03-11T04:54:26.827-07:00Comments on THE HOCKEY SCHTICK: New paper tells climate scientists how to fudge the numbers supporting overheated climate modelsUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4142988674703954802.post-16070808325523358972014-05-10T10:28:51.926-07:002014-05-10T10:28:51.926-07:00http://troyca.wordpress.com/2014/05/09/on-forcing-...http://troyca.wordpress.com/2014/05/09/on-forcing-enhancement-efficacy-and-kummer-and-dessler-2014/Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4142988674703954802.post-60598911957418864132014-05-09T23:54:41.260-07:002014-05-09T23:54:41.260-07:00Where is that comment? Do you remember?Where is that comment? Do you remember?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4142988674703954802.post-54586461205879052412014-05-08T20:29:22.653-07:002014-05-08T20:29:22.653-07:00http://www.bishop-hill.net/blog/2014/5/8/dessler-r...http://www.bishop-hill.net/blog/2014/5/8/dessler-rebuts.htmlWill Nitschkehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08719275181739516175noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4142988674703954802.post-12991367623983401412014-05-08T20:28:26.538-07:002014-05-08T20:28:26.538-07:00Thanks very interesting is this a comment from WUW...Thanks very interesting is this a comment from WUWT or some other source?MShttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06714540297202434542noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4142988674703954802.post-72306414541000201282014-05-08T20:23:38.641-07:002014-05-08T20:23:38.641-07:00Comment from Nic Lewis who has published research ...Comment from Nic Lewis who has published research on this topic -<br /><br />Kummer & Dessler seem to have performed their basic calculations improperly.<br /><br />They claim that the AR5 forcing time series are referenced to the late 19th century, and therefore deduct from the temperature time series the 1880-1900 average temperature. But the AR5 forcing time series are, as stated in Table 8.6 (which they cite), referenced to 1750. They should therefore have likewise deducted the 1880-1900 average forcing from the forcing time series.<br /><br />Upon making this correction, I calculate that Kummer & Dessler's basic estimate of climate sensitivity should be (taking the median) 1.5 C, not 2.3 C.<br /><br />I dispute their/Shindell's contention that aerosols and ozone have an efficacy substantially above one. But even taking their high case of an efficacy for them of 1.5 would only increase the climate sensitivity median estimate to 1.75 C, not to 3.5 C as they calculate.<br /><br />This appears to be an unscientific attempt to undermine the robust energy budget evidence for climate sensitivity being low. It is appalling that the paper has been accepted for publication by GRL.Will Nitschkehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08719275181739516175noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4142988674703954802.post-6832617525852842102014-05-08T10:23:19.221-07:002014-05-08T10:23:19.221-07:00Forget arguing. I agree. The science is settled....Forget arguing. I agree. The science is settled. Fine. Great.<br /><br />Defund it. All of it. Every Federal dollar.<br /><br />We don't fund settled science.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4142988674703954802.post-28827694688122386042014-05-08T02:41:24.178-07:002014-05-08T02:41:24.178-07:00Anyone who has used computer modeling in any field...Anyone who has used computer modeling in any field knows how easy it is to fudge the results, and how difficult it is to say no when the stakes are high in prestige and money.Frank Waltershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17403044995764984391noreply@blogger.com