Sentences with phrase «tamino took»

Two examples leap to mind, alongside this stuff: WUWT posting the Daily Mail «u-turn by Prof Jones» story (though he was careful not to actually endorse that story, I note) and this bit of genius that Tamino took apart, where Watts had a guest who, unknowingly it seems, because they were so incompetent, took GISS data and turned it upside down.

Tamino took the temperatures since 1997 and plotted them, and also placed over them a line representing the statistical trend:

Not exact matches

Indeed, she characterized her actions by «so I am taking a few moments to clarify the weaknesses in Tamino's review»

Of course, that is the part of the record we know best, but since the proxys follow the instrumental curve in the validation period we have some confidence in them, and since, as Tamino points out, the more proxys we add the more confident we can be, and we can even take a bunch out and get more or less the same behavior, why yes, there is a problem.

I think we need Tamino to do a statistical analysis of how quickly Judith Curry has a new post on her blog, after Gavin and company do a take down of something she has just written on there, compared with how often she posts on her blog generally... Judging by the comments on both her blog and Real Climate, it appears she had a new post up only three hours after Gavin posted his take down of her!

Thank you Tamino for your superb take - down of another truth - slayer.

Nat» l Geo should be taken with a few grains of salt, but while the website you reference (incorrectly, as tamino points out) for the 7000 ppm figure may have some interesting information on West Virginia fossils, given that it's apparently put together by an engineer for the WV Office of Miner's Safety, it might best be accompanied by a bucket - full if you're reading it for information on climate change.

It's therefor rather amusing that, having given up on the older strategies, focusing either on the invocation of various explanatory «forcings» or else, as in a blatantly misleading post by Tamino, questioning the logic behind the evidence for a pause, the latest efforts have taken the form of attempts to actually alter the data itself.

These are valuable contributions, and open some doors for interesting new science (although on first skim I thought the AMO paper was a good example of this, Tamino's take - down of it has changed my mind).

One more link for Phil — tamino's excellent (as usual) take down of the OZ version of a supposed warming «pause»:

J. Bob, you really should take this discussion over to Tamino's blog, since he is a professional statistician specializing in time series analysis.

If you want to be taken seriously, you will have to rectify that & address the totality of the data, as Tamino did.

Tamino's commenters certainly aren't shy about taking their cue from his slur:

Tamino holds fast to the GCMs, that the discrepancy between observation and the scenarios at this time is due to shorter - term natural variations not taken care of by the long - term view of the GCMs.

But if Vaughan or Tamino or whoever else wants to take it on, fine by me.

(the website address of where each participant saw the survey to take part and clicked on a link from, for example the websites, Deltoid, Tamino, Hot Topic, etc)

Well it does because Tamino's solar and ENSO adjusted graph — and that other guy's — clearly show no flattening when those two are taken into account.

I would have more respect for OpenMind if Tamino weren't wrong so often, or didn't take such offense when people pointed out his errors.

Of course, Tamino's point is that even if we take this approach, we still do not find a single 0.05 value.

A great place to see these things taken down is Tamino's, where is is often called Mathturbation.

Tamino seems to have been willing to take up some of them; perhaps Revkin as well.

-LSB-...] weeds over this particular study, please take a look at Steve McIntyre's analyses over at his Climate Audit site and Tamino's take over at his Open Mind -LSB-...]

(Tamino responded by simply taking down his whole archive of posts, to the loss of all of us).

Tamino, I strongly support your suggestion that RC and legitimate AGW researchers and science spokespersons take on the challenge of doing an authoritative documentary for global distribution.

None taken, I've been insulted by experts everywhere from Tamino to Deltoid; as for feedback from clouds I think I said clouds were a moderator [sic] and this can be contrary as my night example shows; that is, clouds at night warm whereas clouds at day cool; as for Professor Pinker, my friend Steve Short summed up her findings and cloud feedback thus:

I suggest that you take Tamino seriously when he runs the data and says it is declining at 36,000 km2 per year, and is statistically significant.