Английская Википедия:Eduardo Zorita

Материал из Онлайн справочника
Версия от 03:46, 2 марта 2024; EducationBot (обсуждение | вклад) (Новая страница: «{{Английская Википедия/Панель перехода}} {{Short description|Spanish paleoclimatologist}} thumb|Eduardo Zorita '''Eduardo Zorita''' (born 1961 in Madrid) is a Spanish paleoclimatologist. {{As of|2010}}, he is a Senior Scientist at the Institute for Coastal Research,<ref>{{Cite web |url=http://www.gkss.de/institute/coastal_research/index.html.en |title=Institute for Coastal Research |acce...»)
(разн.) ← Предыдущая версия | Текущая версия (разн.) | Следующая версия → (разн.)
Перейти к навигацииПерейти к поиску

Шаблон:Short description

Файл:Zorita thumbnail.jpg
Eduardo Zorita

Eduardo Zorita (born 1961 in Madrid) is a Spanish paleoclimatologist. Шаблон:As of, he is a Senior Scientist at the Institute for Coastal Research,[1] GKSS Research Centre in Geesthacht, Germany, where he has worked since 1996. Zorita is review editor of the journal Climate Research.

Professional life

Zorita received his Ph.D. in solid state physics at the University of Zaragoza in 1988, and then held a postdoctoral appointment at the Max Planck Institute for Meteorology,[2] Hamburg. He was an Associate Researcher at the Laboratoire de Océanographie Dynamique et de Climatologie (LOCEAN), Pierre-and-Marie-Curie University, Paris, 1994–95.

Zorita is a regular contributor to Die Klimazwiebel, a climate science blog operated by Hans von Storch, Zorita and other climate scientists.

In 2013 he was part of a research group confirming the hockey stick graph reconstruction.[3]

Climatic Research Unit email controversy

At the outset of the Climatic Research Unit email controversy (Climategate) Zorita published his opinion on his personal web site. This was republished by The Wall Street Journal on 5 December 2009:[4] Шаблон:Blockquote

Zorita set up the Klimazwiebel blog shortly afterwards, on 9 December 2009. In a 2012 interview with Hans von Storch, Zorita said "Climategate did not show that the essentials of climate science were wrong or that anthropogenic climate change is the result of a conspiracy. It did show that some scientists were impelled to present a clean story, cleaner than it really is, and in doing so they went a bit too far." He felt that in trying to present a clear message, scientists had lost public credibility, but independent groups checking work which appeared compromised found that the original conclusions were in order. In particular, the main surface temperature datasets which had been called into question were confirmed by the Muller et al. data analysis.[5]

Selected publications

References

Шаблон:Reflist

Sources and external links

Шаблон:Authority control

  1. Шаблон:Cite web
  2. Шаблон:Cite web
  3. PAGES 2k Consortium: Continental-scale temperature variability during the past two millennia. Nature Geoscience 6, 2013, 339–346, Шаблон:Doi.
  4. Шаблон:Cite web
  5. Шаблон:Cite web