Comments on: Inconsistent With? One Answer http://cstpr.colorado.edu/prometheus/?p=4412 Wed, 29 Jul 2009 22:36:51 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: Timo http://cstpr.colorado.edu/prometheus/?p=4412&cpage=1#comment-9887 Timo Mon, 12 May 2008 07:55:15 +0000 http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/prometheusreborn/?p=4412#comment-9887 Gavin Schmidt already commented. http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2008/05/global-cooling-wanna-bet/langswitch_lang/sp post 158 "With all due respect to the authors, they do not appear know very much about either TAR or AR4. Looking at the statistics of local temperature and precipitation is useful but picking just a few long records and comparing to the nearest individual grid cells is not sensible. The differences in topography an local micro-climates are probably large and will make a big difference. A better approach would have been to look at aggregated statistics over larger areas. This has in fact been done though - for instance Blender and Fraedrich (2003), and there was a recent paper that looked the AR4 models (in GRL maybe? - I can’t quickly find the reference). The most curious aspect of this paper’s reception in the blogosphere is that the authors use the surface station records which in all other circumstances the cheer squad would be condemning as being horribly contaminated. Just saying. - gavin Gavin Schmidt already commented.

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2008/05/global-cooling-wanna-bet/langswitch_lang/sp
post 158

“With all due respect to the authors, they do not appear know very much about either TAR or AR4. Looking at the statistics of local temperature and precipitation is useful but picking just a few long records and comparing to the nearest individual grid cells is not sensible. The differences in topography an local micro-climates are probably large and will make a big difference. A better approach would have been to look at aggregated statistics over larger areas. This has in fact been done though – for instance Blender and Fraedrich (2003), and there was a recent paper that looked the AR4 models (in GRL maybe? – I can’t quickly find the reference). The most curious aspect of this paper’s reception in the blogosphere is that the authors use the surface station records which in all other circumstances the cheer squad would be condemning as being horribly contaminated. Just saying. – gavin

]]>