Recent Comments
Willard on Doomsday scenarios The Very Reverend Je… on Doomsday scenarios izen on Doomsday scenarios Mal Adapted on Doomsday scenarios Steven Mosher on Doomsday scenarios Steven Mosher on Doomsday scenarios Mal Adapted on Doomsday scenarios Willard on Doomsday scenarios Mal Adapted on Doomsday scenarios The Data Adjustment… on What does the Vostok ice core… 
Rachel Squirrel- A new Doctor Who and speed tourism July 16, 2017
- Rabett Run
- Keeping Up With the Times Part I July 19, 2017
- HotWhopper
- Variable Variability
- How to talk about climate doomsday scenarios July 19, 2017
- RealClimate
- The climate has always changed. What do you conclude? July 20, 2017
- Stoat
- The management apologise for more inconvenience July 16, 2017
- Open Mind
- Can Albert/Alberto Parker/Boretti Handle the Math? July 20, 2017
- Climate denial crock of the week
- New, and Old, Explainers on Temp Adjustments July 20, 2017
- robertscribbler
- Moyhu
- NOAA global surface temperature down just 0.01°C July 20, 2017
- uknowispeaksense
- An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.
- Real Sceptic
- Why We Became Scientists: Dunderhead April 1, 2017
- Musings on Quantitative Palaeoecology
- James’s Empty Blog
- Bishop's Castle Tandem Triathlon July 7, 2017
- Isaac Held’s Blog
- 73. Tuning to the global mean temperature record November 28, 2016
- More than just data
- Mallemaroking
- The bathymetry in front of iceberg A68 July 18, 2017
Monthly Archives: June 2014
How science really works!
I thought I might just post this TED talk by Naomi Oreskes (H/T Andy Skuce, Critical Angle). It’s a good talk about consensus, the appeal to authority, and how we counter manufactured doubt, but what I liked was how it … Continue reading
Posted in Climate change, Science
Tagged Andy Skuce, Appeal to authority, Consensus, Hypotheses, hypothesis, Naomi Oreskes, science
200 Comments
Communicating climate science
I notice that the University College London (UCL) Policy Commission on Communicating Climate Science’s report called Time For Change, hasn’t gone down very well with many people. I think it is a genuine attempt to try and do something positive, … Continue reading
Posted in Climate change, Global warming, IPCC, Science
Tagged climate science, climate scientists, Communicating Climate Science, IPCC, Time For Change?, UCL
52 Comments
Are feedbacks operating?
I’ve been pondering today if being anonymous means that others think it’s okay to be rude and unpleasant, or if they are simply rude and unpleasant. I’m tending towards the latter and have seen nothing to convince me otherwise. A … Continue reading
Defending the consensus, again!
I find myself defending the consensus project again, and it’s getting both rather tedious and rather confusing. In particular, because some of those who are critical of the consensus project appear to completely accept that the scientific consensus associated with … Continue reading
Recovering from the LIA?
I can’t remember if I’ve written about this before, but since I haven’t written a post for a few days and would prefer to address something physicsy (rather than something controversial), I thought I might address the issue of us … Continue reading
Can we trust climate models?
I got into another slightly silly discussion yesterday about climate models, which I tried to resolve by directing the other person to a new paper by Julia Hargreaves and James Annan called Can we trust climate models?. This is a … Continue reading
Climate cultists
Since I was one of those who responded to Judith Curry promoting Steven Hayward’s recent article on, what he calls, Climate Cultists, I thought I might write a few thoughts about this. My response to Judith may make it seems … Continue reading
