Sentences with phrase «giss model trend»
When this type of adjustment is applied tot eh temperature data, the Pinatubo effect in 1992, 1993, and 1994 should be somewhat stronger (especially in 1992), and a bit closer to the GISS model trend.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/ Not exact matches
The first 50 years (my longer term model was based on GISS land station data) had something like a 0.15 C upward trend due to increased solar activity, compared to a ~ 0.10 C anthropogenic contribution.
On your further claim that the RSS data is consistent with the models, please provide us with GISS plots of the tropospheric and lower stratospheric layer average temperature data trends (corresponding to their weighting functions TLS; TTS; TMT and TLT).
But models are not tuned to the trends in surface temperature, and as Gavin noted before (at least for the GISS model), the aerosol amounts are derived from simulations using emissions data and direct effects determined by changes in concentrations.
The data analysis in this paper mainly concerned the trends over land, thus a key assumption for this study appears to rest solely on a personal communication from an economics professor purporting to be the results from the GISS coupled climate model.
In the meantime you appear to be arguing with me over what the GISS model shows for amplification of the MSU - LT trends over land.
My question: The GISS climate model follows the 1993 - 2003 trend quite good.
I do have confidence on trends of trends, for example I can show real patterns in ratios of 4 year or longer rising vs falling trends consistently both in the data (and in BEST, HADCRUT, GISS, etc separately) and in the models, if done correcly too.
Dr Curry, the mean model surface temperature trend estimate is ~ 0.20 C / decade compared to Cowtan and Way ~ +0.17 C or GISS ~ +0.16 C (both attempting improved Arctic representation).
We are investigating the effects of long - term emissions trends using a version of the GISS climate model that includes atmospheric chemistry.
Thus the trend of RSS satellite data from September 1997 through August 2009, for instance, would be negative (and not statistically significant) while the trend of the GISS surface data from September 1998 through August 2009 would be positive, and marginally below model projections.
GISS and NCDC have higher trends and fall in a different, «more likely» part of the model distribution.
Despite this huge 6 - month surge, the GISS linear trend is still well below the model's simulated linear trend since 1988
If the climate models use hindcasting to Hadley or Giss pre-1979 temperature series as any sort of calibration, they are calibrating to a CREATED TREND, created using cooling adjustments to pre-1979 data.
Isn't it amazing how well a temperature record such as GISS can be modeled by a montonically accelerating warming trend dotted with the SOI fluctuations and precisely placed volcanic disturbances?
Of course, that doesn't prove the GISS model is correct, since the modeled trend seems due to a combination of overstated ocean heat uptake (known to be incorrect) and an almost certainly overstated sensitivity to forcing.