Quote
Originally posted by: DonDiego
DonDiego just loves extremely likely conclusions and strong language. He eagerly awaits the details supporting it.
Originally posted by: DonDiego
DonDiego just loves extremely likely conclusions and strong language. He eagerly awaits the details supporting it.
We all have our little delights. For me, its listening to radio broadcasters pretend like they have more insight into this topic than NASA scientists.
The IPCC report summary released today
Oh, incidentally, the strong language and likely conclusions of the report are not products of alarmist propoganda but rather derived from the level of scientific consensus in the world wide group of conspiracy theorists...oops, I mean climate scientists. Sorry, Freudian slip. Here, you can see how the group defines its language in the report:
"The degree of certainty in key findings in this assessment is based on the author teams’
evaluations of underlying scientific understanding and is expressed as a qualitative level of
confidence (from very low to very high) and, when possible, probabilistically with a quantified
likelihood (from exceptionally unlikely to virtually certain). Confidence in the validity of a finding is
based on the type, amount, quality, and consistency of evidence (e.g., data, mechanistic
understanding, theory, models, expert judgment) and the degree of agreement1. Probabilistic
estimates of quantified measures of uncertainty in a finding are based on statistical analysis of
observations or model results, or both, and expert judgment2. Where appropriate, findings are also
formulated as statements of fact without using uncertainty qualifiers. (See Chapter 1 and Box TS.1
for more details about the specific language the IPCC uses to communicate uncertainty)"
