The best estimate of the human induced contribution to warming is similar to the observed warming over this period.
The period in question being from 1951 to 2010. You all probably recognise the above statement from the IPCC WG1 report: The human induced contribution to warming is similar to the observed warming over the period. In other words, 100% of the warming from 1951 to 2010 is caused by humans.
Judith Curry is clear that she is unclear about clear science
That was written in 2013. Judith Curry today quoted Jeb Bush and wrote that he "gets it exactly right" (my emphasis):
As he has before, Bush acknowledged “the climate is changing” but stressed that it’s unknown why. “I don’t think the science is clear of what percentage is man-made and what percentage is natural. It’s convoluted,” he said at a house party in Bedford, New Hampshire.
...Jeb gets it exactly right. There are two broad hypotheses for recent climate change: human causes and natural causes (with numerous sub-hypotheses contained within). The climate debate is dominated by the premature carving in stone of a theory that humans are the dominant cause of recent climate change.
What? You don't believe a Professor who is a climate scientist would get it so wrong? Look for yourself.
Gavin Schmidt is astonished that Judith is not clear, and so am I
When Gavin Schmidt called her on it in a tweet, saying "I find it astonishing that you 'are still not clear' what the IPCC attribution statement means", Judith replied that no, she was not clear, tweeting: "Not clear at all what it means in terms of the question that many policy makers have - how much natural, vs anthro"
Is Jeb Bush really as dumb as Judith Curry thinks?
Then Judith said that Jeb Bush was too dumb to do arithmetic, tweeting:
@ClimateOfGavin @JebBush Well do you really want to explain to presidential candidates that GHG contribution is ~110%?— Judith Curry (@curryja) May 21, 2015
Now I don't know about you, but it strikes me that someone who is smart enough to become governor of a state (even or especially Florida), would be able to figure out that 110% of positive forcing and 10% of negative forcing equals 100% of global warming. What do you think?
Judith gets all confused and she thinks that Jeb Bush will too. She tweeted: And then he'll ask: what % (out of 100%) is natural vs human. Which is where I started my criticism of IPCC stmt
It's natural - mutters Judith
Huh? Does Judith really and truly think that global warming since the 1950s is discernibly "natural"? What does she think it was - the sun? The sun's been sending less energy since the 1950s, not more. Fewer volcanoes? They don't have any long term effect anyway - even were there fewer than there were in the first half of last century, and I don't know that there were. Judith ought to go to SkepticalScience for some lessons.
I just caught up with this howler from Judith Curry - she sent a similar tweet to Michael Tobis:
@PeterGleick @EuphoniusNuts @ClimateOfGavin It's clear that you don't understand the concept of POSITIVE natural forcings— Judith Curry (@curryja) May 21, 2015
So she does think "it's the sun" - is there any other positive natural forcing you can think of? (Albedo won't do it because it's us who are causing the ice to melt.) No. It's not the sun. Nor is it magic. Nor is it a bouncing Little Ice Age.
If you didn't think that Judith Curry had lost the plot before, then the above must convince you.
Okay, you were already convinced - let's go back to last September:
Do I need to update it? You can read the whole sorry mess on Twitter and on her blog (archived here). She's really lost the plot (again).
Related Articles from HotWhopper
- What never occurred to Judith Curry (and does 50% equal half?)
- Judith Curry admits she gets her science from (denier interpretations of?) stolen emails
- Denier weirdness: Judith Curry's "Sober People"
- Confessions of deniers at Judith Curry's blog
- Heat-addled brains and a competition: Judith Curry vs Phil Plait
- Judith Curry picks a cherry in her motivated recycled denial
- Judith Curry vanquishes her uncertainty monster
- The Precautionary Principle in Atlanta, Georgia
- Is Judith Curry arguing for political constraints on climate science?
- What pushed Judith Curry over the edge?
There's more if you want to use the search bar up top :(