Therefore, climate change is the negative system response whereby changes in circulation within an increased or decreased atmospheric volume effectively
prevent changes in surface temperature.
To predict
changes in surface temperatures in the coming decades, scientists use global climate models (GCMs), which offer a general overview of future trends in surface temperature, but not reliable regional details that can cause extreme temperatures.
An international team of university and NASA scientists examined the relationship
between changes in surface temperature and vegetation growth from 45 degrees north latitude to the Arctic Ocean.
Consistent with
observed changes in surface temperature, there has been an almost worldwide reduction in glacier and small ice cap (not including Antarctica and Greenland) mass and extent in the 20th century; snow cover has decreased in many regions of the Northern Hemisphere; sea ice extents have decreased in the Arctic, particularly in spring and summer (Chapter 4); the oceans are warming; and sea level is rising (Chapter 5).
For example, Kosaka and Xie showed than when the El Niño - related changes in Pacific ocean temperature are entered into a model, it not only reproduced the global surface warming over the past 15 years but it also accurately reproduced regional and
seasonal changes in surface temperatures.
Dessler finds that the short -
term changes in surface temperature are related to exchanges of heat to and from the ocean - which tallies well with what we know about El Niño and La Niña, and their atmospheric warming / cooling cycles.
The Spencer / Braswell and Lindzen / Choi papers have an unusual take on global warming: rather than warming causing a change in cloud cover (i.e. acting as a feedback to either increase or reduce warming), both papers claim that it's the other way around - changes in cloud cover
cause changes in the surface temperature (in the present case, warming).
That illustrates my point, which is that
present changes in surface temperature is not a good indicator of what we should expect in the future, and as such, it is not a great idea to make the debate about the observed ocean temperature.
I agree that reduction in snow or ice cover resulting from warming constitutes a likely slow positive feedback, but its magnitude may be quite small, at least for the
modest changes in surface temperature that can be expected to arise if sensitivity is in fact fairly low, so the Forster / Gregory 06 results may nevertheless be a close approximation to a measurement of equilibrium climate sensitivity.
The dramatic differences between regional and hemispheric / global past trends, and the distinction
between changes in surface temperature and precipitation / drought fields, underscore the limited utility in the use of terms such as the «Little Ice Age» and «Medieval Warm Period» for describing past climate epochs during the last millennium.
In the next few years, we should be able to completely refute the argument that solar fluctuations are a primary reason for
the change in surface temperatures.
Fortunately, thanks to the Miata's famously communicative chassis, you can feel
this change in surface temperatures.
where H is the heat content of the land - ocean - atmosphere system and T ′ is
the change in surface temperature in response to a change in heat content.....
While Spencer hypothesizes that the changes in cloud cover are the main driver behind global warming, Dessler concludes that they're only responsible for a small percentage of
the changes in surface temperature from 2000 to 2010.
I clearly see that
the change in surface temperature and TOA radiative forcing simulated by the model depends upon the model complexity, for example, how the ocean circulations are represented.
But
the change in surface temperature would also cause a change in radiative forcing.