In defense of the traditional null hypothesis: remarks on the Trenberth and Curry WIREs opinion articles
Article first published online: 3 NOV 2011
Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change
Volume 2, Issue 6, pages 931–934, November/December 2011
How to Cite
Allen, M. (2011), In defense of the traditional null hypothesis: remarks on the Trenberth and Curry WIREs opinion articles. WIREs Clim Change, 2: 931–934. doi: 10.1002/wcc.145
- Issue published online: 9 NOV 2011
- Article first published online: 3 NOV 2011
In response to their respective opinion articles, I argue that Kevin Trenberth's proposal to reverse the burden of proof in attribution studies is misguided, but Judith Curry's counter proposal to abandon hypothesis tests as useless is worse still. Some observed weather events will have been made more likely by human influence on climate, some less likely, and it is a legitimate and very important field of scientific enquiry to work out which are which. The appropriate null hypothesis to use in such studies is that human influence has not increased the probability of occurrence of a particular weather event unless the evidence suggests otherwise. WIREs Clim Change 2011, 2:931–934. doi: 10.1002/wcc.145
For further resources related to this article, please visit the WIREs website.