Sentences with phrase «find higher climate sensitivity»

They find a higher climate sensitivity than most, the reason of which is not clear to me yet.

Not exact matches

When the scientists compared the output of climate models with a decade of satellite measurements of relative humidity, they found that the models that best reproduced observed conditions were built on the premise that climate sensitivity is relatively high — 7 degrees F or more.

«If the true climate sensitivity really is as high as 5 degrees C -LSB-(9 degrees F)-RSB-, the only way our descendants will find that out is if they stubbornly hold greenhouse gas concentrations constant for centuries at our target stabilization level.»

National Geographic News reports that this week's issue of Nature will publish a study from a team led by Gabriele Hegerl of Duke University which finds climate sensitivity of 1.5 º to 6.2 ºC, with a higher end somewhat higher than the standard range of 1.5 — 4.5 ºC.

Several studies have put the lower bound of climate sensitivity at about 1.5 °C, on the other hand, several others have found that a sensitivity higher than 4.5 °C can't be ruled out.

National Geographic News reports that this week's issue of Nature will publish a study from a team led by Gabriele Hegerl of Duke University which finds climate sensitivity of 1.5 º to 6.2 ºC, with a higher end somewhat higher than the standard range of 1.5 — 4.5 ºC.

Well I find it sort of amusing (and a little tragic) that climate scientists (at least the blogger ones) are patting themselves on the back over their high standards of a press release that will just focus on the mundane «we also show a 3K sensitivity as most likely.»

Interestingly, our results are actually pretty consistent with a lot of the recent literature on sensitivity: All studies comparing simple models with recent climate change (from Andronova and Schlesinger, 2001, onwards) find high sensitivities (more than 8K, say) are consistent (at the few - percent level) with the observed record unless they are ruled out a priori.

Are there already hints in this mix of findings that the climate's sensitivity to a CO2 buildup is at the higher, lower or mid-range of what's possible?

When the reseachers at the Center for International Climate and Environmental Research — Oslo (CICERO) applied their computer «model and statistics to analyse temperature readings from the air and ocean for the period ending in 2000, they found that climate sensitivity to a doubling of atmospheric CO2 concentration will most likely be 3.7 °C, which is somewhat higher than the IPCC prognosis.Climate and Environmental Research — Oslo (CICERO) applied their computer «model and statistics to analyse temperature readings from the air and ocean for the period ending in 2000, they found that climate sensitivity to a doubling of atmospheric CO2 concentration will most likely be 3.7 °C, which is somewhat higher than the IPCC prognosis.climate sensitivity to a doubling of atmospheric CO2 concentration will most likely be 3.7 °C, which is somewhat higher than the IPCC prognosis.»

That finding, supported by Forest 2006 Fig.S.7, means that the SFZ 2008 surface model data on their own provide very little discrimination against high climate sensitivity, unlike the CSF 2005 data.

Brown and Caldeira find a climate sensitivity of 3.7 °C, which is significantly higher than what most scientists use.

The BEST team also found that the observed warming is consistent with an equilibrium climate sensitivity of 3.1 ± 0.3 °C for CO2 doubling, in line with the IPCC climate sensitivity range, and demonstrates once again that contrary to the persistent claims of Richard Lindzen, the Earth has warmed as much as we expect given a relatively high climate sensitivity.

In the report, they find reasons to dismiss the many studies and varying approaches that arrive at higher climate sensitivity estimates, and fail to discuss the shortcomings of the lower sensitivity studies that they prefer.

I would urge climate scientists to test this mechanism, among others, in their GCM models so they can find out exactly how much higher climate sensitivity would be.

Interestingly, Penner et al. find that whether the climate sensitivity parameter is on the low or high end, reducing anthropogenic emissions of the short - lived warming pollutants would achieve a significant reduction in global warming over the next 50 - 100 years.

Low sensitivity likely The very high complexity of IPCC Global Climate Models with Armstrong's findings infer that the IPCC's > 95 % confidence in > 50 % anthropogenic is «an illusion».

However, the report is biased towards Lewis» preferred approach, finding poor excuses to reject the many other methods that arrive at higher climate sensitivity estimates.

The results reduced uncertainty in proxy records and improved earlier estimates and contribute to our understanding of climate change today, especially the findings hint at a higher climate sensitivity to CO2 emissions.

A recent study used NASA satellite observations to test the skill of climate models in simulating this cloud - type transition, and found that high sensitivity models simulate it more accurately, while low sensitivity models tend to overemphasize its climate cooling effect.

It is somewhat analogous to the first cpdn paper when they basically said «we found a high sensitivity model that is compatible with the current climate».

Further, as Reason Foundation Vice President Julian Morris «finds the administration's estimates of the social cost of carbon are «biased upwards» due to their reliance on three «simplistic models, all of which use estimates of climate sensitivity that are likely too high and two of which likely overestimate the economic impact of climate change.»