Sentences with phrase «von storch»

It includes loads of odd references, and open attacks on various scientists and scientific bodies (Hans von Storch they don't like too much, either).

Finally, wouldn't you agree (analytically) that the presence of a unit root in the GISS series in fact invalidates the conclusions of Zorita, Stocker and von Storch (2008)?

The earliest version is the one at von Storch's website here.

Given that the Boehlert letter is referred to in the document, both von Storch and us independently looked at the letter and used it for guidance in interpreting the committee's task.

In H. von Storch and A. Navarra (eds.)

Somebody arguing that Cook et al over represents the «consensus» in that Bray and von Storch show the consensus of actual scientists (as opposed to papers) to be 83.5 % has an arguable case.

Or lavishly remunerated covert operative «Hans von Storch» of the Potemkin - peer - reviewed Potemkin journal «Annals of Geophysics» and winner of the Potemkin prize «the IMSC Achievement Award» awarded by the Potemkin judges of the totally bogus «International Meetings on Statistical Climatology», who described Mann's hockey stick as «rubbish».

According to the lead author, Hans von Storch, the planet should be warming much more than it has been — and no one has been able to answer why «climate change seems to be taking a break.»

And indeed, public spirited as he is, Mashey should have asked Esper etal, Moberg, von Storch, Cubasch and above all Mike Mann to join in a general complaint to GMU, as all these and others as well McI and McK are summarised at various points in the Wegman report.

But if one worries too much about «circular reasoning» there is a very simple technique to avoid it, proposed ten years ago in this very important paper: H. von Storch, Misuses of statistical analysis in climate research.

This is not just the NAS study, it's consistent with the results from Bray and von Storch, no great advocates of the consensus.

Zorita and von Storch (2005) and von Storch et al. (2004) carried out such an exercise using temperature output from the ECHO - G climate model.

(Those resigning included Hans von Storch.)

The possibility of abrupt shifts concealed in the uncertainty band was pointed out by von Storch et al. (2004), but their conclusion that the graph was faulty overall was refuted by Wahl et al. (2006).

It is very unlikely, however, that any bias would be as large as the factor of two suggested by von Storch et al. (2004) with regard to the reconstruction by Mann et al. (1998), as discussed by Burger and Cubash (2005) and Wahl et al. (2006).

Freddy, you claim that MBH98 has fatal flaws, but how do you square your opinion with that of von Storch, who claimed that the type of analysis made no difference to the final results, or the Mann, et al. 2008 paper, in which no PCA was done?

In an interview last year with the newspaper Der Spiegel, the well - known German climatologist Hans von Storch said «If things continue as they have been, in five years, at the latest, we will need to acknowledge that something is fundamentally wrong with our climate models.»

The simplest is to assume that the pseudo-proxies depend on local temperature (which is known in the model world, of course), plus some non-climatic noise (this is the approach taken by von Storch et al.).

The results from the von Storch et al emulation demonstrate that this is not so for their methodology and that it is clear that their emulations would fail verfication tests.

In the lower panel, the von Storch et al emulations are shown as a function of the non-climatic «noise» that is added.

This come from a long tradition of papers (and drafts) where people have tried to assess the state of the «scientific consensus» (Oreskes, Brown et al, Bray and von Storch, Doran and Zimmerman etc.).

Hans von Storch, a lead author for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and James Risbey of CSIRO made the effort to attend but the leaders of mainstream climate science turned down the gig, including NASA's Gavin Schmidt.

A partial reduction «in the assumed model sensitivity to radiative forcing,» would at least be a correction in the right direction, as Hans von Storch schools us on the matter (i.e., itwould reproduce the recent global warming slow down while still satisfying... other major constraints.).

When Hans von Storch showed the Boehlert questions in a PPT slide, it caused great consternation for the panel — many of whom had never seen the Boehlert questions — and they had a hard time deciding whether they would entertain von Storch's presentation on these matters.

When Hans von Storch writes, ``... we find that the continued warming stagnation over fifteen years, from 1998 -2012, is no longer consistent with model projections even at the 2 % confidence level» (see, Ibid.)

~ Hans von Storch

As it happens, for a completely unrelated reason I have recently collected at Omniclimate quotes and links to statements by Mike Hulme, John Beddington, Vicky Pope, Myles Allen, Hans von Storch, Robert Watson, Lord Oxburgh, Oxburgh's Scientific Assessment Panel, panel member Prof Michael Kelly, Sir Muir Russell and his Independent Climate Change E-mails Review, plus of course the InterAcademy Council.

The issue of why none of the mainstreamers showed up (closest was von Storch) was an obvious topic of discussion at the Workshop.

Hans von Storch observed that, «model overestimation of the global warming in the period 1998 - 2012 could be partially corrected by a reduction in the assumed model sensitivity to radiative forcing.»

Dr. von Storch, who was not involved in overseeing the paper, resigned last week, saying he disagreed with the peer - review policies.

A survey of over 400 German, American and Canadian climate researchers conducted by Dennis Bray of the Meteorologisches Institut der Universitat Hamburg and Hans von Storch of GKSS Forschungszentrum and reported in the United Nations Climate Change Bulletin, for example, found that only 10 % of the researchers surveyed «strongly agreed» with the statement «We can say for certain that global warming is a process already underway.»

Minor quibble, it's not von Storch, but Eduardo Zorita who had something to say.

If the simulations project future changes in line with the trends already observed, von Storch has more confidence in them.

Even your hero von Storch agreed with that, IIRC.]

After seeing the critique, Climate Research editor - in - chief Hans von Storch decided he had to make changes in the journal's editorial process.

However, these studies still show late twentieth century warming to be unprecedented, says von Storch.

Tags: critique, documentary, film, Freeman Dyson, Hans von Storch, Marijn Poels, Piers Corbyn, review, The uncertainty has settled Posted in Antarctica, Climate science, English, Global Temperature, Media, Skeptics 14 Comments»

«You need to be very circumspect about the added value of downscaling to regional impacts,» agrees Hans von Storch, a climate modeller at the GKSS Institute for Coastal Research in Geesthacht, Germany, who has recently contributed to a regional climate assessment of the Hamburg metropolitan region.

Hans von Storch accurately describes our current knowledge about climate change: We know that the earth has warmed and we can't explain this warming without considering the human - induced increase in greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.

It was certainly not the first de Freitas - endorsed paper to pass weak editorial processes at Climate Research, but when incoming Editor - in - Chief Hans von Storch suggested the paper should not have been published, he endeavored to fix editorial processes to prevent such problems.

But when journal colleagues refused to go along, von Storch announced his resignation.

The publisher did not agree, so von Storch and other editors resigned.

Conversely I am delighted at the efforts of people like Judith Curry and Hans von Storch to try to bring some sanity into an increasingly bizarre situtaion.

Steve: In your penultimate paragraph there are what I believe you intended to be links to papers by Fyfe and von Storch, but all I see in both cases is the word «here» with no associated link.

But publisher Otto Kinne blocked the move, saying that while he favored publication of the editorial, Dr. von Storch's proposals were still opposed by some of the other editors.

After hearing from Sen. Jeffords, Dr. von Storch says he decided to speed an editorial into print criticizing publication of the paper.

Dr. von Storch's resignation was publicly disclosed Tuesday by Sen. James Jeffords (I., Vt.), a critic of the administration's environmental policies, during a hearing of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee called by its chairman, Sen. James Inhofe (R., Okla.).

«They submitted a flawed paper,» said Hans von Storch, editor - in - chief of the journal, Climate Research.

We are basically saying the same thing except I provided a link to CA which links to Hans von Storch's PowerPoint.

Bishop Hill (August 13, 2009 11:09 AM) mentions Hans von Storch but doesn't provide a link.