rasmus

#135 JMS. RealClimate ran away from Nir Shaviv after he had hit everything rasmus threw at him out of the ground.

The Dendroclimatologists are Angry « Climate Audit 2007

I got a response from rasmus on Real Climate, he says that the data is available on the Norwegian national weather site here.

Unthreaded #19 « Climate Audit 2007

So, for a single series, yes it's true that it would be silly to state the figure to 0.1C precision if the errors are +-0.5C, but when taking the mean over thousands of series, then 0.1C signals are discernible. -rasmus

Hansen's "Bias Method" « Climate Audit 2007

We can take this up another time, so I say good bye for now… -rasmus

The Dendroclimatologists are Angry « Climate Audit 2007

Most of all, the "attribution" questions to quote again rasmus, "how much of the trend is natural and how much is anthropogenic" and "to which degree are the variations ‘natural’" are statistical questions as they imply statistical testing.

Demetris Koutsoyannis « Climate Audit 2006

Even if one believes that the climate system is perfectly understood (which I do not believe, thus not concurring with rasmus), its complex dynamics entail uncertainty (this has been well documented nowadays).

Demetris Koutsoyannis « Climate Audit 2006

Interestingly, there is an underlying true statement that rasmus keeps referring to – it is essential to relate the statistics to the underlying physical process.

Cohn and Lins [GRL 2005] « Climate Audit 2005

I want to hear a sticker who is willing to engage on the content/logic. rasmus

Pelletier [2002] on Temperature Autocorrelation « Climate Audit 2005

This is a thread about time series autocorrelation. “rasmus” seems to think the latter could somehow be a problem that applies to the former.

Pelletier [2002] on Temperature Autocorrelation « Climate Audit 2005

“… We have one explanation for the trend based on physics: GW; there are no good alternatives. -rasmus”

Cohn and Lins [GRL 2005] « Climate Audit 2005