Sentences with phrase «empirical estimate of climate sensitivity»

HS12 uses the oxygen isotope record in ocean sediments Zachos et al. (2008) to estimate past changes of sea level and ocean temperature, and thus obtain a largely empirical estimate of climate sensitivity.

Would the lower rate of cooling give us something close to an empirical estimate of climate sensitivity to increased CO2?

However, as Hansen notes, empirical estimates of climate sensitivity based on paleoclimate data are consistent with the sensitivity in climate models of approximately 3 °C for doubled atmospheric CO2.

Not exact matches

Climate model studies and empirical analyses of paleoclimate data can provide estimates of the amplification of climate sensitivity caused by slow feedbacks, excluding the singular mechanisms that caused the hyperthermal Climate model studies and empirical analyses of paleoclimate data can provide estimates of the amplification of climate sensitivity caused by slow feedbacks, excluding the singular mechanisms that caused the hyperthermal climate sensitivity caused by slow feedbacks, excluding the singular mechanisms that caused the hyperthermal events.

We should underscore that the concepts of radiative forcing and climate sensitivity are simply an empirical shorthand that climatologists find useful for estimating how different changes to the planet's radiative balance will lead to eventual temperature changes.

The reports for which you provided links are interesting, but do not provide any empirical evidence in support of the Myhre et al. model - based estimate of CO2 climate sensitivity (clear sky, no feedbacks).

It's NOT a matter of me being «stubborn», it is a matter of you failing to cite studies providing empirical evidence to support the Myhre et al. estimates of 2xCO2 climate sensitivity (upon which the whole IPCC CAGW house of cards rests), as requested by Jim Cripwell and myself.

Gavin's refusal to admit the extreme LU efficacy comes down to accepting one very dubious run, a run which is a clear statistical outlier, goes to the heart of the problem with Marvel et al: the authors got results they «liked» (lower efficacy for many forcings implies higher climate sensitivity... casting doubt on lower empirical estimates), and so failed to critically examine if their results might have errors.

Climate model studies and empirical analyses of paleoclimate data can provide estimates of the amplification of climate sensitivity caused by slow feedbacks, excluding the singular mechanisms that caused the hyperthermal Climate model studies and empirical analyses of paleoclimate data can provide estimates of the amplification of climate sensitivity caused by slow feedbacks, excluding the singular mechanisms that caused the hyperthermal climate sensitivity caused by slow feedbacks, excluding the singular mechanisms that caused the hyperthermal events.

However, I noticed in one of his recent postings that he deliberately avoided claiming that there was any empirical evidence to support the various estimates of climate sensitivity.

We study climate sensitivity and feedback processes in three independent ways: (1) by using a three dimensional (3 - D) global climate model for experiments in which solar irradiance So is increased 2 percent or CO2 is doubled, (2) by using the CLIMAP climate boundary conditions to analyze the contributions of different physical processes to the cooling of the last ice age (18K years ago), and (3) by using estimated changes in global temperature and the abundance of atmospheric greenhouse gases to deduce an empirical climate sensitivity for the period 1850 - 1980.