519 publications from this institution
Click to increase image sizeClick to decrease image size Additional informationNotes on contributorsGeorge E. BrownResearch Professor of Environmental Science University of Virginia Charlottesville President, The Science & Environmental Policy Project Fairfax, Va. Head, Climate Analysis Section National Center for Atmospheric Research Boulder, Colo. U. S. House of Representatives Washington, D.C.
Past attribution studies of climate change have assumed a null hypothesis of no role of human activities. The challenge, then, is to prove that there is an anthropogenic component. I argue that because global warming is “unequivocal” and ‘very likely’ caused by human activities, the reverse should now be the case. The task, then, could be to prove there is no anthropogenic component to a particular observed change in climate, although a more useful task is to determine what it is. In Bayesian statistics, this change might be thought of as adding a ‘prior’. The benefit of doubt and uncertainties about observations and models are then switched. Moreover, the science community is much too conservative on this issue and too many authors make what are called ‘Type II errors’ whereby they erroneously accept the null hypothesis. Global warming is contributing to a changing incidence of extreme weather because the environment in which all storms form has changed from human activities. WIREs Clim Change 2011, 2:925–930. doi: 10.1002/wcc.142 This article is categorized under: Paleoclimates and Current Trends > Detection and Attribution Climate Models and Modeling > Knowledge Generation with Models
No abstract is provided for this article.