climate statistics, Tag

News 16 Jun, 2020 Climate Statistics 101: See the Slide Show AOC Tried, and Failed, to Censor This is an embedded Microsoft Office presentation, powered by Office...

Even a fully deterministic system is fully unpredictable at climatic timescales when there is persistence. From a Demetris Koutsoyiannis presentation.

You know all that money we have been spending on developing economic models of the effects of climate change? Well apparently it has mostly been wasted...

GWPF have release a very interesting report about stochastic modelling by Terence Mills, professor of applied statistics and econometrics at Loughborough University...

The eminent statistician (and occasional BH reader) Radford Neal has been writing a series of posts on global temperature data at his blog. There are three so far:

The floods in Cumbria are obviously attracting a lot of attention this morning. A couple of things are exercising my mind.

Doug Keenan has posted a note at the bottom of the notice about his £100,000 challenge, indicating that he has reissued the 1000 data series. This was apparently because it was pointed out to him that the challenge...

Climatologists often claim that they are able to detect the global warming signal in the temperature records. If they are right then they are going to be having a very happy Christmas indeed, because Doug Keenan is offering...

Greenpeace have been doing some rather odd FOI work in recent months. It seems they have decided to investigate the series of parliamentary questions that Lord Donoughue put to to DECC ministers about the Met Office's statistical...

I have a lot of time for David Spiegelhalter, the Cambridge University statistician who has become something of a go-to guy for the media on matters statistical...

Tamsin Edwards has posted some more details about the Climate by Numbers show at the start of next month. Of particular interest is the official blurb for the show:

Michael Lavine, a statistician from the University of Massachusetts Amherst has performed a very polite savaging of Naomi Oreskes over at Stats.org. Here's an excerpt:

Many scientists on the whole seem to have been suitably cautious about alleged record-breaking temperatures, taking care to place the new data in the context of the error bars...

The Chemist in Langley has another post on type 1 and type 2 errors, which is just as good as his last one. I found this quote particularly perspicacious:

Naomi Oreskes' article in the New York Times the other day, in which she called for use of 90% rather than 95% confidence intervals, seems to be generating quite a lot of interest.