R0002/2026-03-13/C003/H2¶
Statement¶
The two-axis model and five confidence levels are correct, but the likelihood scale has a different number of points than nine.
Status¶
Current: Supported
Supporting Evidence¶
| Evidence | Summary |
|---|---|
| SRC01-E05 | Seven primary likelihood terms identified |
| SRC02-E01 | Seven primary terms plus three supplementary terms (ten total), not nine |
| SRC02-E02 | Full likelihood table with all terms and ranges extracted |
Contradicting Evidence¶
| Evidence | Summary |
|---|---|
[No direct contradiction — the nine-point count is defensible under one counting method, but the standard presentation does not support it.]
Reasoning¶
H2 is the strongest hypothesis. The two-axis confidence model, evidence and agreement axes, and five confidence levels are all firmly confirmed. The likelihood scale presents seven primary terms. Including the three supplementary terms yields ten. The claim of "nine" could be achieved by counting seven primary plus two supplementary (excluding "More likely than not"), but this is an arbitrary selection. The standard IPCC presentation does not define a "nine-point scale." H2 best accounts for the evidence because the framework is correct but the specific count is not standard.
Relationship to Other Hypotheses¶
H2 accepts the structural accuracy confirmed by H1 while accounting for the non-standard count. H2 subsumes the confirmed portions of H1 (sub-claims 003a-003d) while correctly characterizing the ambiguity in 003e.