Sentences with phrase «literature on climate sensitivity»

It has been shown that you do not understand the literature on climate sensitivity, historical paleo - temperature reconstructions, and many others and none of this has stopped you from declaring the IPCC 2001 and beyond «hockey stick» graphic a lie, misrepresenting Dr. Pinker, misrepresenting the science of deep - time paleoclimatology (notably the reference to the Ordovician), and many others.

New paper mixing «climate feedback parameter» with climate sensitivity... «climate feedback parameter was estimated to 5.5 ± 0.6 W m − 2 K − 1» «Another issue to be considered in future work should be that the large value of the climate feedback parameter according to this work disagrees with much of the literature on climate sensitivity (Knutti and Hegerl, 2008; Randall et al., 2007; Huber et al., 2011).

Not exact matches

At Dr. Sebastian Lüning's and Prof. Fritz Vahrenholt's Die kalte Sonne site, the two experts have reviewed the recent literature on CO2's ability to warm the globe, which we call CO2 climate sensitivity.

There are three main methodologies that have been used in the literature to constrain sensitivity: The first is to focus on a time in the past when the climate was different and in quasi-equilibrium, and estimate the relationship between the relevant forcings and temperature response (paleo constraints).

As you say in a previous post on sensitivity... «There are three main methodologies that have been used in the literature to constrain sensitivity: The first is to focus on a time in the past when the climate was different and in quasi-equilibrium, and ESTIMATE the relationship between the relevant forcings and temperature response (paleo constraints).

There are three main methodologies that have been used in the literature to constrain sensitivity: The first is to focus on a time in the past when the climate was different and in quasi-equilibrium, and estimate the relationship between the relevant forcings and temperature response (paleo constraints).

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.

So once again, can anyone supply me with a reference in the peer reviewed literature of a numeric value for climate sensitivity that is based on measured data, and not just estimations and the output of non-validated models?

We already looked at how climate skeptics rely on a selective reading of the literature to highlight low estimates of climate sensitivity and use the divergence between climate models and measured temperatures to make conjectural statements about climate models being too sensitive to CO2, without considering other factors that could account for such divergence.

It aims to provide a review of the literature on crop pollination, with a focus on the effects of climate change on pollinators important for global crop production, and to present an overview of available data on the temperature sensitivity of crop pollinators and entomophilous crops.

You are correct that climate sensitivity is probably more uncertain than to < 10 %, however there is a substantial literature on why it is very likely greater than 1.5 - 2 C per doubling of CO2, while ruling out higher end values of climate sensitivity is much more difficult.

Much of the recent discussion of climate sensitivity in online forums and in peer - reviewed literature focuses on two areas: cutting off the so - called «long tail» of low probability \ high climate sensitivities (e.g., above 6 C or so), and reconciling the recent slowdown in observed surface warming with predictions from global climate models.

We have two new entries to the long (and growing) list of papers appearing the in recent scientific literature that argue that the earth's climate sensitivity — the ultimate rise in the earth's average surface temperature from a doubling of the atmospheric carbon dioxide content — is close to 2 °C, or near the low end of the range of possible values presented by the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change climate sensitivity — the ultimate rise in the earth's average surface temperature from a doubling of the atmospheric carbon dioxide content — is close to 2 °C, or near the low end of the range of possible values presented by the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Climate Change (IPCC).

On the other hand, in the SMEs with relatively high climate sensitivity (about 4 — 10 K), or the SMEs with relatively low climate sensitivity (about 2 — 3 K) compared to the studies in the literature, SW and LW radiation and cloud radiative forcing are not reliable.

The base climate sensitivity parameter κis the most influential of the three factors of ΔTλ: for the final or «with - feedbacks» climate sensitivity parameter λ is the product of κand the feedback factor f, which is itselfdependent not only on the sum b of all climate - relevant temperature feedbacks but also on κ.Yet κ has received limited attention in the literature.