Marcel Crok asked me to comment on the peer-reviewed paper “Tide gauge location and the measurement of global sea level rise” Beenstock (yes) and others in the journal Environmental and Ecological Statistics. […]
Phrases like “100 year rainfalls” or floods or whatever for whatever period of time are awful. They convey an improper idea of uncertainty. The phrase “X year event” is based on inverting […]
Kevin “Travesty” Trenberth had a peer-reviewed article in Science entitled, “Has there been a hiatus? Internal climate variability masks climate-warming trends.” First, the word “hiatus” is wrong. Using it assumes what it […]
Read Part I Part II What we’re after is a score that calculates how close a prediction is to its eventual observation when the prediction is a probability. Now there are no […]
The good news is that Yours Truly’s prognosticative skills are sharper than ever. Of course this is only a relative blip in happiness. The ultimate Good News we celebrated yesterday. The bad […]
Read Part I, Part II Part III This brings us to the second reason for measuring model goodness. Or rather an incorrect implementation of it. A lot of folks announce how well […]
Part I of III All probability (which is to say, statistical) models have a predictive sense; indeed, they are only really useful in that sense. We don’t need models to tell us […]
The rebuttal to the criticism of our original peer-reviewed climate model paper “Why models run hot” has been published in Science Bulletin. It is also peer-reviewed, and therefore it must be correct. […]
Recent Comments