Sentences with phrase «based sensitivity studies»

Our only data on temperature for these geology - based sensitivity studies are proxy - based.

Not exact matches

In my opinion, we have to pay attention to results of sensitivity analyses because this allows us to see the results based on studies which were definitely known to be eligible or clearly described their methods and outcomes.»

Based on past observations, Held, who was not involved with the study, said the climate sensitivity of 5 °C or more shown by the new research may be implausible.

The Hansen et al study (2004) on target atmospheric CO2 and climate sensitivity is quite clear on this topic: equilibrium responses would double the GCM - based estimates, with very little to be said about transient effects.

However, studies evaluating model performance on key observed processes and paleoclimate evidence suggest that the higher end of sensitivity is more likely, partially conflicting with the studies based on the recent transient observed warming.

Therefore studies based on observed warming have underestimated climate sensitivity as they did not account for the greater response to aerosol forcing, and multiple lines of evidence are now consistent in showing that climate sensitivity is in fact very unlikely to be at the low end of the range in recent estimates.

Our sample of 107 YSO candidates was selected based on IRAC colors from the high spatial resolution, high sensitivity Spitzer / IRAC images in the Central Molecular Zone (CMZ), which spans th... ▽ More We present results from our spectroscopic study, using the Infrared Spectrograph (IRS) onboard the Spitzer Space Telescope, designed to identify massive young stellar objects (YSOs) in the Galactic Center (GC).

Indeed, another metaanalysis based on intervention studies showed that moderate alcohol consumption improved glycated haemoglobin in both sexes but tended to improve insulin sensitivity in women only (132).

A 2008 study led by James Hansen found that climate sensitivity to «fast feedback processes» is 3 °C, but when accounting for longer - term feedbacks (such as ice sheet disintegration, vegetation migration, and greenhouse gas release from soils, tundra or ocean), if atmospheric CO2 remains at the doubled level, the sensitivity increases to 6 °C based on paleoclimatic (historical climate) data.

Given that clouds are known to be the primary source of uncertainty in climate sensitivity, how much confidence can you place in a study based on a model that doesn't even attempt to simulate clouds?

On the studies of sensitivity based on the last glacial maximum, what reduction in solar forcing is used based on the increased Albedo of the ice - sheets, snow and desert.

Estimates of the most likely sensitivity from most such studies are, however, consistent with those based on other analyses.

One of his reasons to claim that «the risk of catastrophic anthropogenic global warming appears to be so low that it is not currently worth doing anything to try to control it» is that he uses a very low value for the climate sensitivity based on non-reviewed «studies», while ignoring the peer - reviewed work.

Absent understanding of cloud feedback processes, the best you can really do is mesh it into the definition of the emergent climate sensitivity, but I think probing (at least some of) the uncertainties in effects like this is one of the whole points of these ensemble - based studies.

They conclude, based on study of CMIP5 model output, that equilibrium climate sensitivity (ECS) is not a fixed quantity — as temperatures increase, the response is nonlinear, with a smaller effective ECS in the first decades of the experiments, increasing over time.

26 Paul W asked, «On the studies of sensitivity based on the last glacial maximum, what reduction in solar forcing is used based on the increased Albedo of the ice - sheets, snow and desert.

My main criticism of their study is that they have calculated effective climate sensitivity (their ICS) on a basis which is wrong for ICS in GCMs; their basis is also inconsistent with observationally - based estimates of ICS.

Chromium based studies have repeatedly demonstrated improvement in blood sugar levels, insulin sensitivity and lipid profiles.

Some important studies include: • Beneficial effects of a high carbohydrate, high fiber diet on hyperglycemic diabetic men (1976) • Response of non-insulin-dependent diabetic patients to an intensive program of diet and exercise (1982) • Diet and exercise in the treatment of NIDDM: The need for early emphasis (1994) • Toward improved management of NIDDM: A randomized, controlled, pilot intervention using a low fat, vegetarian diet (1999) • The effects of a low - fat, plant - based dietary intervention on body weight, metabolism, and insulin sensitivity (2005) • A low - fat vegan diet improves glycemic control and cardiovascular risk factors in a randomized clinical trial in individuals with type 2 diabetes (2006) • A low - fat vegan diet and a conventional diabetes diet in the treatment of type 2 diabetes: a randomized, controlled, 74 - wk clinical trial (2009) • Vegetarian diet improves insulin resistance and oxidative stress markers more than conventional diet in subjects with Type 2 diabetes (2011) • Glycemic and cardiovascular parameters improved in type 2 diabetes with the high nutrient density (HND) diet (2012)

Based on animal studies, beneficial effects of caffeine on insulin sensitivity have also been suggested (12).

Sensitivity analyses based on within - study comparisons indicated that summer reading interventions had significantly larger benefits for children from low - income backgrounds than for children from a mix of income backgrounds.

The study found that teachers who participated in a mindfulness - based professional development program «were more emotionally supportive and demonstrated greater sensitivity to students than those in the control group.»

Other AgMIP initiatives include global gridded modeling, data and information technology (IT) tool development, simulation of crop pests and diseases, site - based crop - climate sensitivity studies, and aggregation and scaling.

8 The diagnosis of food sensitivity was made by dietary elimination - challenge studies using commercial selected - protein diets (chicken or venison - based).

Based on many studies covering a wide range of regions and crops, negative impacts of climate change on crop yields have been more common than positive impacts (high confidence)... Since AR4, several periods of rapid food and cereal price increases following climate extremes in key producing regions indicate a sensitivity of current markets to climate extremes among other factors (medium confidence).

The link is based on a single modelling sensitivity study (Rotstayn and Lohmann, 2002) which looked at only the changes in the indirect effect from the pre-industrial (ca. 1850) to the present day.

One of his reasons to claim that «the risk of catastrophic anthropogenic global warming appears to be so low that it is not currently worth doing anything to try to control it» is that he uses a very low value for the climate sensitivity based on non-reviewed «studies», while ignoring the peer - reviewed work.

On the studies of sensitivity based on the last glacial maximum, what reduction in solar forcing is used based on the increased Albedo of the ice - sheets, snow and desert.

Therefore studies based on observed warming have underestimated climate sensitivity as they did not account for the greater response to aerosol forcing, and multiple lines of evidence are now consistent in showing that climate sensitivity is in fact very unlikely to be at the low end of the range in recent estimates.

Hegerl et al (2006) for example used comparisons during the pre-industrial of EBM simulations and proxy temperature reconstructions based entirely or partially on tree - ring data to estimate the equilibrium 2xCO2 climate sensitivity, arguing for a substantially lower 5 % -95 % range of 1.5 — 6.2 C than found in several previous studies.

My main criticism of their study is that they have calculated effective climate sensitivity (their ICS) on a basis which is wrong for ICS in GCMs; their basis is also inconsistent with observationally - based estimates of ICS.

They do cite a study by Lindzen and Choi, which has shown, based on ERBE satellite observations, that the net impact of a doubling of CO2 including all feedbacks is likely to be significantly lower than the model - based estimates by Myhre for sensitivity without feedbacks.

Consequently studies based on pure correlation, like all of the statistical time series stuff that shows lower 2XCO2 sensitivity, higher solar responses is deprecated because the causal mechanism isn't explicit.

The question to ask modelers is whether they have done sensitivity studies, and then examine the range of answers based on the high / low values of aerosols forcings that have empirical support based on in - field measurements.

How is IPCC going to handle yet another study based on actual physical observations, which shows that climate sensitivity is low?

I haven't seen a study that compared the number of studies based upon actual observations as compared to model studies and sensitivity beliefs either come to think of it.

«Lewis & Crok perform their own evaluation of climate sensitivity, placing more weight on studies using «observational data» than estimates of climate sensitivity based on climate model analysis.»

The simplest is the zero - dimensional model (ZDM) commonly used as a conceptual basis for climate sensitivity and feedback studies.

As we discussed regarding the Norwegian paper, studies estimating climate sensitivity based on recent data may be biased low due to a failure to account for increased heat transfer to the 700 — 2000 meter ocean layer (Figure 3).

Design / methodology / approach: The analyses are based on the IPCC's own reports, the observed temperatures versus the IPCC model - calculated temperatures and the warming effects of greenhouse gases based on the critical studies of climate sensitivity (CS).

In light of the comments by Craig Loehle and Willis Eschenbach, we decided to update our original draft to include sections, • Discussing the different reconstruction methods used by the 19 proxy - based estimates, and their relative advantages / disadvantages • Providing a more detailed discussion of the lack of consistency between individual proxies, and the importance of carrying out rigorous «sensitivity studies», including a discussion of Willis Eschenbach's cluster analysis.

Craig Loehle claims [wrongly, and without citations] «Only those [studies] based on models [or on paleo data] get the high IPCC sensitivity.»

The 95 percent confidence range in this study was between about 1 and 7 °C equilibrium sensitivity, so very low and very high climate sensitivities could not be ruled out, but are relatively unlikely, based on the historical record.

Let me get this straight, The IPCC fudged the only climate sensitivity study based on observations, and the rest are from tautological models?

In the Working Group 1: The Physical Science Basis Report of AR4 («AR4: WG1»), various studies deriving estimates of equilibrium climate sensitivity from observational data are cited, and a comparison of the results of many of these studies is shown in Figure 9.20, reproduced below.

13.2.1 Incremental Scenarios for Sensitivity Studies 13.2.2 Analogue Scenarios 13.2.2.1 Spatial analogues 13.2.2.2 Temporal analogues 13.2.3 Scenarios Based on Outputs from Climate Models 13.2.3.1 Scenarios from General Circulation Models 13.2.3.2 Scenarios from simple climate models 13.2.4 Other Types of Scenarios

The sensitivity of that upper bound in this study has important implications for risk - based climate change policy.

As sensitivity studies, we also calculated these time series based on (i) different values of b obtained by fitting Eq.

Then he appeared lately as a co-author on the Rohling et al. (2012; Nature) paper that excludes climate sensitivities lower than 2.2 K - based on remote paleo studies.

Kevin Dayaratna's testimony favored low probability distributions for climate sensitivity, all based on empirical studies of recent warming.