Message Font: Serif | Sans-Serif
 
No. of Recommendations: 1
Pretty much what WuLong said. Compare the baselines to what's happening and what we'd expect without AGW, accounting for statistical significance.

Thats the problem, there is none of that available for tornados in IN in Jan. Pucksfool and others just find some weather they consider unusual and then run with it. People on this board generally eat it up.


Off the top of my head, I can't say for sure. But if I recall correctly, the projected warming trends from IPCC4 for the next few decades under business-as-usual were about 0.18 C/decade, with a standard deviation of 0.15 C.

Assuming a normal distribution, independence between subsequent decades, and no change in solar or aerosol forcings, this gives a 90% probability range of +0.11 -- +0.95 C over the next 30 years. So: If the warming is less than 0.11 degrees, and you have a 95% certainty that the models overestimate the forcing.


None of this is clear in the IPCC report, but I like your attempt. Are you saying that the model mean is the projection we should be comparing against?
Print the post  

Announcements

What was Your Dumbest Investment?
Share it with us -- and learn from others' stories of flubs.
When Life Gives You Lemons
We all have had hardships and made poor decisions. The important thing is how we respond and grow. Read the story of a Fool who started from nothing, and looks to gain everything.
Contact Us
Contact Customer Service and other Fool departments here.
Work for Fools?
Winner of the Washingtonian great places to work, and Glassdoor #1 Company to Work For 2015! Have access to all of TMF's online and email products for FREE, and be paid for your contributions to TMF! Click the link and start your Fool career.