Sentences with phrase «by modern climate models»
Does this mean that the hypothesis of nuclear winter does not survive testing by modern climate models?
http://www.realclimate.org/ Not exact matches
Troublingly, said Evans, when the team compared their data with various modern climate models under Eocene conditions, most models underestimated polar amplification by about 50 percent.
«As Earth continues to warm, it may be approaching a critical climate threshold beyond which rapid and potentially permanent — at least on a human time - scale — changes not anticipated by climate models tuned to modern conditions may occur,» the report says.
A Science paper by Huber and Caballero (2003) on Eocene El Nino reports on similar ENSO in the Eocene warm climate as the model has in the modern climate.
This link can be established by computer climate models or modern observations.
in the meantime, in the absence of reliable climate models or any certainty of «how much climate may change,» how many trillions should we spend and how far backward must modern industrial civilization be propelled by imposing draconian co2 emissions cuts?
(M1 & M2): We are the very model for all modern Climate Modellers We forecast things for foolish kings and not precocious toddlers By using tricks that would excite a high priest of the Aztecs For example those subjective «priors» in Baysian stitastecs??
Fourth, the null hypothesis (that observed modern climate variation is due to natural causes) is NOT tested by those computer models.
Originally posted on Open Mind: A new paper by Hansen et al., Ice melt, sea level rise and superstorms: evidence from paleoclimate data, climate modeling, and modern observations that 2 °C global warming is highly dangerous is currently under review...
I'll say again... Lindzen, Spencer, and some others catch a lot of heat for attempts to verify climate models by some of the more modern, more accurate measures, but I believe they are moving in the right direction.
The significantly higher early climate warming rates versus modern warming are not only unexplained by experts, but also by the computer climate models that have become known for being utter flops.
The participants in the countermovement have attacked climate models, paleoclimatic data on which warming trends are based, modern temperature records, mainstream scientists who have claimed there is an urgent need to act, and manufactured bogus non-peer-reviewed climate science claims which they have then widely publicized in books and pamphlets, and then widely circulated the publications to journalists and politicians, tactics which have succeeded in getting the disinformation propaganda widely distributed by friendly media.
As emphasized by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), modern models faithfully simulate continental to global scale temperature patterns and trends observed during the 20th century.
It's a freak event even by modern standards, and climate models point the finger firmly at humans.
AMO / PDO on the other hand are system states that last 20 - 40 years, and there's very good reasons to think that they are the cause of the entire modern warming, these should be modeled by GCM's, but they don't do this either, and they have a far bigger effect on «climate» while the smaller scale chaotic artifacts have no effect on «climate».
«Third, in a period when ocean basins were similar to modern, ice age climate sensitivity to pCO2 changes is underestimated by climate models even when long term changes in solar forcing and ice sheet size and distribution are taken into account, implying that internal positive feedbacks are stronger than previously thought.»
Eli, and the bunnies, have been following the on line review of Ice melt, sea level rise and superstorms: evidence from paleoclimate data, climate modeling, and modern observations that 2 °C global warming is highly dangerous by J. Hansen, M. Sato, P. Hearty, R. Ruedy, M. Kelley, V. Masson - Delmotte, G. Russell, G. Tselioudis, J. Cao, E. Rignot, I. Velicogna, E. Kandiano, K. von Schuckmann, P. Kharecha, A. N. Legrande, M. Bauer, and K. - W.
That might have changed this week with the coverage of announcement of «Ice Melt, Sea Level Rise and Superstorms: Evidence from Paleoclimate Data, Climate Modeling, and Modern Observations that 2 °C Global Warming is Highly Dangerous» by James Hansen and 16 other eminent scientists.
Interactive comment on «Ice melt, sea level rise and superstorms: evidence from paleoclimate data, climate modeling, and modern observations that 2C global warming is highly dangerous» by J. Hansen et al..
«It is unlikely that coastal cities or low - lying areas such as Bangladesh, European lowlands, and large portions of the United States eastern coast and northeast China plains could be protected against such large sea level rise,» states a report co-authored by Hansen, titled «Ice Melt, Sea Level Rise and Superstorms: Evidence from Paleoclimate Data, Climate Modeling, and Modern Observations that 2 °C Global Warming is Highly Dangerous».
Instead climate scientists have developed scientific predictive techniques (aka computer climate models) that are informed by the paleoclimatic data we have, but that also incorporate the differences between the climate of modern humanity and the analyzed paleoclimates into their analyses.
What is more, modern climate modeling has been traditionally implemented by people with a technological background and little knowledge of ecosystem functioning.
Depending on what is meant by «robust», I would venture that modern schemes for integrating the dynamical core equations in climate models are no more «robust» than in those in the NWP codes.