The paper confirms that realworld observations can be matched by
a linear feedback model with a climate sensitivity of something less than1.6 deg K / doubling of CO2.
This first graph shows a spectacularly good (and highly misleading) match of SAT data (Hadcrut3 in this instance) using Callendar's parameters in a single capacity
linear feedback model.
Not exact matches
It is definately a non
linear scenario as we are talking about mulitple + ve
feedbacks in play so a compounding graph will fit the
model better.
Dear RC, Is it not possible that scientists and mathematicians from the science of non
linear dynamics (which maths I am presuming is being used in the maths of climate
models) to shed light on the amplification and dampening of the climates
feedback cycles and hence the so called «sensitivity» issue and hence the possible range of temperatures?
So, whilst I agree that the issue is about regime change and not
linear feedback, I am not convinced that the
models used by climate scientists can not represent the actual system.
One might even find that the output of this complex sytem
model could be approximated to a relatively simple
linear system with
feedback just as complex socioeconomic sytems are often
modelled.
Since the industrial revolution,
models showing this
feedback have been largely
linear; however, this linearization is unlikely to hold for temperatures greater than 3 — 4 °C above pre-industrial temperatures.
Did you know that the exact same real world system can be
modeled with the exact same
feedback as either
linear or nonlinear by choice of flow variables?
Accordingly, the forcing estimation method relies upon a
model exhibiting a fairly
linear climate response, and hence having a climate
feedback parameter (and an effective climate sensitivity) that does not vary with time (in addition to having a temperature response that is proportional to forcing).