Sentences with phrase «circulation models so»

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.

As I understand, clouds are particularly difficult to assess within the General Circulation Models so a discussion on CE is helpful for me.

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.

Not exact matches

So they used a pre-existing model of the atmosphere's circulation patterns and plugged in an extra module that took into account the reduction of chlorofluorocarbons.

The climate models aren't really good enough in their representation of present - day circulation to give you much confidence in the specifics of their predictions [so that you could use them to do a cost - benefit analysis for example], but the risk of widespread change is still there.

The app operates on a pay - per - circulation model, like Freading, so libraries don't have to deal with purchasing multiple copies to enable simultaneous use.

The use a «seeding» method to randomly generate small vortices analogous to «short wave» tropical disturbances in the real world (the tracks they take are defined in terms of the background atmospheric circulation of the model combined with the so - called «self advection» of the TC itself).

The best simple answer I've seen is basically that you have to go to a 2 - box model of Earth, with warm tropics and cold poles, and then realize that thanks to the thermohaline circulation the deep oceans are coupled almost exclusively to the polar regions, and so are in the «cold» box and not the warm one or some average of them.

This fits well with an increased circulation model where there is a competition of space for storms to form so they end up as static waves.

It * is * true too, that one can make numerical models, that when overlain with a large layer of fresh water that they reduce the so - called meridional overturning circulation.

So even though El Nià ± o may serve as an analogue for some aspects of the influence of the weakening Walker circulation on climate, it does not serve as a dynamical analogue nor is the sensitivity to model details the same.

The weakening of the Walker circulation arises in these models from processes that are fundamentally different from those of El Nià ± o — and is present in both mixed - layer and full - ocean coupled models, so is not dependent on the models» ability to represent Kelvin waves (by the way, most of the IPCC - AR4 models have sufficient oceanic resolution to represent Kelvin waves and the physics behind them is quite simple — so of all the model deficiencies to focus on this one seems a little odd).

So, if some of these ideas on termination of glaciations are correct (ice - sheet temperature, ocean circulation and CO2), and all of these are omitted from the current model, it leaves open the possibility that a more comprehensive model would get a different result.

This project used a compiled set of emission and forcing scenarios called the Representative Concentration Pathways (RCP) to drive a group of the most complex climate available, so - called Atmosphere Ocean General Circulation Models.

If ocean circulation is a major feedback to climate forcing, we would have heard more about it by now from the newer models, so I am skeptical.

If I were for a moment to play the Advocatus Diaboli in the discussion, however, I would note in the defense of the climate scientists who might be in good will misled by Global Circulation Models whether or not you consider them «falsifiable» — and your asserting that they are not does not make that so — they are, generally, based on actual physics.

Because radiative forcing, while it does vary somewhat with vertical profile, is relatively immune to changes of the atmosphere due to circulation, so models can do a reasonable job of predicting that the global mean temperatures increase.

In detail the large scale circulation structure would depend on the rotation speed of the planet so it is not easy to imagine the result without some more serious modelling.

«The authors write that «the notorious tropical bias problem in climate simulations of global coupled general circulation models manifests itself particularly strongly in the tropical Atlantic,»... they state that «the climate bias problem is still so severe that one of the most basic features of the equatorial Atlantic Ocean — the eastward shoaling thermocline — can not be reproduced by most of the IPCC assessment report models,... as they describe it, «show that the bias in the eastern equatorial Atlantic has a major effect on sea - surface temperature (SST) response to a rapid change in the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMcirculation models manifests itself particularly strongly in the tropical Atlantic,»... they state that «the climate bias problem is still so severe that one of the most basic features of the equatorial Atlantic Ocean — the eastward shoaling thermocline — can not be reproduced by most of the IPCC assessment report models,... as they describe it, «show that the bias in the eastern equatorial Atlantic has a major effect on sea - surface temperature (SST) response to a rapid change in the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMCirculation (AMOC).»

Direct measurements of the AMOC are only available for the past ten years or so, but Yeager et al. present a combination of observation - and model - based evidence that suggests that the Atlantic thermohaline circulation (THC, which is closely related to AMOC) transitioned from a weak state in the 1970s to a strong state in the 1990s and that this strengthening contributed to the accelerated rate of winter sea ice loss that was observed in the late 1990s.

1 — did the circulation - driven fall in Arctic sea ice (which AR4 models don't do a great job of) have anything to do with the recent jump in Arctic temperatures and if so, could we get the «right» global temp trend for the «wrong» reasons.

Motivated by findings that major components of so - called cloud «feedbacks» are best understood as rapid responses to CO2 forcing (Gregory and Webb in J Clim 21:58 — 71, 2008), the top of atmosphere (TOA) radiative effects from forcing, and the subsequent responses to global surface temperature changes from all «atmospheric feedbacks» (water vapour, lapse rate, surface albedo, «surface temperature» and cloud) are examined in detail in a General Circulation Model.

Article: Current knowledge about ocean circulations (AMOC and others) and their variability are so unsettled that the most sophisticated and powerful climate models are completely unable to accurately forecast these gargantuan climate forces.

About our climate, is the science really settled, as nobody really believes but too many have said, and already implemented in computer climate models, the so - called general circulation models (GCMs)?

So lets see, the global circulation models do not handle thunderstorms, or clouds in general, well, The particulates and aerosols interact with the clouds, but are not handled well either.

The toy global circulation models take latent heat flux into account so it isn't missing although one might question the accuracy of the number or how it changes with temperature.

So we will base our fault tree on an energy budget approach similar to a General Circulation Model (GCM), and we will take care to ensure that we separate anthropogenic effects from other effects.

We see similar excursions from the trend line in our modelling, so we feel that there is an actual variability here that is associated with year - to - year changes in the atmospheric circulation.