110 likes | 206 Views
Wie konnen (sollen) Wissenschaftler ihre Ergebnisse verantworten gegenuber nicht-Wissenschaftler?. Case study: the Hockeystick. Nanne Weber (1989-1992 am MPI). Communication – early 1990. A climate scientist is an authority. Some are better in communication than others
E N D
Wie konnen (sollen) Wissenschaftler ihre Ergebnisse verantworten gegenuber nicht-Wissenschaftler? Case study: the Hockeystick Nanne Weber (1989-1992 am MPI)
Communication – early 1990 • A climate scientist is an authority. Some are better in communication than others • Communication=how can I explain science to a layperson • Big question= how do I deal with bad (stupid) journalists • Central point: • wir haben recht
The beginning – tentative IPCC FAR: Schematic diagrams of global temperature variations since the Pleistocene on three timescales (the last million yrs, the last 10,000 yrs and the last 1000 yrs)
The next step– growing confidence IPCC SAR: Decadal summer temperature index for the Northern Hemisphere (Bradley and Jones, 1993) based on 16 proxy records from N. America, Europe and E. Asia. Instrumental data are 50-yr smoothed.
The finale– quantified! Error bars!! IPCC TAR: Millennial NH temperature reconstruction for the warm season (purple, green) and annual mean (black; 2- error bars shaded) and annual instrumental data (red). All data are 40-yr smoothed
Communication – 2006 realclimate.org: ‘nearly a dozen proxy-based reconstructions by different groups show qualitatively similar behavior’ climateaudit.org: ‘they are all based on the same data’
Site maps from Mann et al. (1998), Huang et al. (2000) and Moberg et al. (2005)