But there were no data
then on attribution, and there are no data now.
Not exact matches
In a joint statement released
on Monday July 18, the pair said: «We are not certain that this is a correct
attribution to President Rawlings but if it is,
then we feel terribly upset about it because the facts are to the contrary.
It occurred to me
then that a more desirable way to read the notes would be to tap the screen and see the note in a balloon
on the same screen, and this thought naturally led to my wish that the novel I was writing, with a note for every sentence, would be ideally published as an interactive digital book, with easy access to the
attributions.
Resorting the people
on that list, first sorting out the scientists that have some expertise
on detection and
attribution from the others,
then into red, white, green based upon where they stand relative to IPCC's
attribution statement.
That's what's important about being able to remove the majority of the independent factors contributing to fluctuations —
then one can isolate
on the residual response and work
on those to get an
attribution.
If we assume that the LIA was caused mostly by naturally forced variability,
then we have several periods in the 20th century of cooling and warming associated with modest unforced variability: The AMO's effect
on GMST (0.25 degC peak to trough) isn't big enough to invalidate the IPCC's
attribution statement.
When I think of
attribution on this issue I consider it whether or not the additional heat was caused by additional CO2, and
then whether that additional CO2 was caused by humans.
It had occured to me that a statement saying most warming is anthro with a high degree of certainty is more user friendly for policy
then one that narrows in
on the higher end of anthro
attribution but with the need to explain the sources of the greater uncertainties.
But if we let this dysfunction undermine discussion
on attribution,
then we are stifling the scientific discourse.
Implication,
then, becomes necessary (unless you'd rather the consensus be based only
on attribution studies... in which case we get to stop nitpicking and move
on to more serious topics, because your pinhole poking project won't have anything to work with).
If the anthro component is not greater than 50 %,
then the likelihood of there actually being a problem is greatly reduced vs. the current range of
attribution (75 % -200 %, depending
on the method and period).
If your Google Adwords paid search account, is straightforward enough to be the online equivalent of that (what if you are just bidding mostly
on branded terms only),
then evaluating and updating your
attribution model may not be a big focus for you.