I thought that in the adiabatic case (in order to mirror the atmosphere) there is nil radiative or conductive heat flow.That is
the standard atmosphere model where conduction is very small compared with other energy transfers.
Not exact matches
The study also suggests that the
standard Community
Atmosphere Model version 4 has difficulty simulating the MJO because it produces sufficient upper level heating but not enough lower level heating.
CMIP was established as a resource for climate modelers, providing a
standard protocol for studying the output of coupled
atmosphere - ocean general circulation
models so that these
models can be compared and validated.
The altimeter is calibrated to show the pressure directly as altitudes, in accordance with a mathematical
model defined by the International
Standard Atmosphere (ISA).
Ongoing radio observations (SMA, JCMT, VLA) of Sirius A are being used to set an observationally determined
standard for stellar
atmosphere modeling and debris disk studies around A stars, as well as to take the first step toward characterizing potential intrinsic uncertainty in stellar emission at these wavelengths.
Another highlight contributing to a feel - good
atmosphere is the AIR - BALANCE package with active fragrancing, air ionisation and more efficient filtration than is available on the
standard model.
[Response # 2: The
standard for comparing responses across different
models is to look at the radiative forcing at the top of the
atmosphere — for 2xCO2 it is around 4 W / m2 (read the new National Academies report on this for a much more detailed discussion of the concept).
The US
standard atmosphere is treated as being correct globally, and IMHO this is one reason that the
models do not work for the tropical lapse rate.
The
atmosphere warms first in the
standard model and this is the cause of warming at the Earth's surface and in the oceans.
«Climate science» as it is used by warmists implies adherence to a set of beliefs: (1) Increasing greenhouse gas concentrations will warm the Earth's surface and
atmosphere; (2) Human production of CO2 is producing significant increases in CO2 concentration; (3) The rate of rise of temperature in the 20th and 21st centuries is unprecedented compared to the rates of change of temperature in the previous two millennia and this can only be due to rising greenhouse gas concentrations; (4) The climate of the 19th century was ideal and may be taken as a
standard to compare against any current climate; (5) global climate
models, while still not perfect, are good enough to indicate that continued use of fossil fuels at projected rates in the 21st century will cause the CO2 concentration to rise to a high level by 2100 (possibly 700 to 900 ppm); (6) The global average temperature under this condition will rise more than 3 °C from the late 19th century ideal; (7) The negative impact on humanity of such a rise will be enormous; (8) The only alternative to such a disaster is to immediately and sharply reduce CO2 emissions (reducing emissions in 2050 by 80 % compared to today's rate) and continue further reductions after 2050; (9) Even with such draconian CO2 reductions, the CO2 concentration is likely to reach at least 450 to 500 ppm by 2100 resulting in significant damage to humanity; (10) Such reductions in CO2 emissions are technically feasible and economically affordable while providing adequate energy to a growing world population that is increasingly industrializing.
CMIP was established as a resource for climate modelers, providing a
standard protocol for studying the output of coupled
atmosphere - ocean general circulation
models so that these
models can be compared and validated.
RE: 6th Error -RCB- The
standard for expertise in a climate related field [Expertise in Venus»
atmosphere does NOT necessarily make one an expert on the effects of trace CO2 in Earth's
atmosphere]- initially would have eliminated NASA - GISS Dir Jim Hansen whose expertise was on Venus» theorized run - a-way green - house effect — a
model which he then applied to theorize CO2 caused green - house global - warming on Earth.
My guess is that he did this analysis by using the lapse rate of the US
Standard Atmosphere as input to his
model, which is itself the result of an idealized mathematical
model.
As there are multiple periods in the geological record of tens of millions years in duration when CO2 levels were high and the planet was cold and when CO2 levels were low and the planet was warm, it appears there is a basic fundamental assumption in the
model of atmospheric radiation that is incorrect or there is an omission of another mechanism from the
standard models of
atmosphere radiation.
In climate - speak, people often talk about «forcings» as a shorthand for the forcings in a
standard coupled ocean -
atmosphere model and refer mainly to their TOA radiative effect which is useful for comparing their effects.
Called ModelE, it provides the ability to simulate many different configurations of Earth System
Models — including interactive atmospheric chemistry, aerosols, carbon cycle and other tracers, as well as the
standard atmosphere, ocean, sea ice and land surface components.
Jacobson's
models, published in the Journal of Geophysical Research —
Atmospheres, concluded that, even with stringent U.S. and European
standards, diesel vehicles could warm the climate more over 100 years than gasoline - powered cars as a result of the relatively higher black carbon content of diesel.