Why it matters:
Current global climate models used to predict climate change account for large - scale climate processes, typically at scales greater than 100 kilometers, or about 62 miles.
Abstract: «Proxy - based indicators of past climate change show that
current global climate models systematically underestimate Holocene - epoch climate variability on centennial to multi-millennial timescales, with the mismatch increasing for longer periods.
Although this work considered the effect of afforestation on atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration, there are other biogeochemical processes not yet captured
by current global climate models that could influence the impact of any afforestation scheme.
In terms of making projections of future changes in these events, the authors find that, owing to the resolution
of current global climate models, they are limited in their ability to simulate such precipitation events.
I am under impression that all current climate models can't see farther than their nose of returning to «global equillibrium» after perturbation in «forcing», any substantial excursions of state trajectories are dismissed as numerical errors, so the global glaciation - deglaciation episodes have no support
in current global climate models.
Current global climate models do not have a clear picture of the MJO, which hinders scientists» ability to predict its influence on rain, storms and weather systems that affect millions of people.
Proxy - based indicators of past climate change show that
current global climate models systematically underestimate Holocene - epoch climate variability on centennial to multi-millennial timescales, with the mismatch increasing for longer periods1, 2,3,4,5.
«
Current global climate models have failed to predict the rapid Arctic warming, and clouds are one of the largest uncertainties.
The spatial resolution of
current global climate models, roughly 200 km, is too coarse to simulate the impact of global change on most individual river basins.