So why are they suddenly
confident in this attribution of blame?
Not exact matches
Not being able to address the
attribution of change
in the early 20th century to my mind precludes any highly
confident attribution of change
in the late 20th century.
I refer to this generally
in my draft «uncertainty monster» paper (will resume working on the revisions to that paper once my proposal is submitted) as a significant reason
in support of my thesis that the «very likely» statement
in the IPCC
attribution statement is over
confident
This is probably why the IPCC
attribution since 1950 has become even more
confident in AR5.
These are changes that scientists can be
confident of, the authors say, and so should be the basis for
attribution studies — rather than looking at changes to circulation patterns
in the atmosphere.
I.e. lots of scientists highly
confident in IPCC
attribution without publishing
in this area or even reading the primary literature.
... there are a number of reasons why future
attribution might appear to be more
confident than
in the past.