Sentences with phrase «models of the climate reproduce»

Not exact matches

This is because the models are based on equations representing the best understanding of the physical processes that govern climate, and in 2001 they were not fine - tuned to reproduce the most recent data.

Instead, this effect could be used to test climate models, he said, to check if their physics is good enough to reproduce how the pull of the moon eventually leads to less rain.

«The result is not a surprise, but if you look at the global climate models that have been used to analyze what the planet looked like 20,000 years ago — the same models used to predict global warming in the future — they are doing, on average, a very good job reproducing how cold it was in Antarctica,» said first author Kurt Cuffey, a glaciologist at the University of California, Berkeley, and professor of geography and of earth and planetary sciences.

«How much we trust our model depends on how well we can reproduce the climate of yesterday.

«By prescribing the effects of human - made climate change and observed global ocean temperatures, our model can reproduce the observed shifts in weather patterns and wildfire occurrences.»

To get around the problem, Fasullo and Trenberth decided to examine how well 16 global climate models reproduce recent satellite observations of relative humidity in the tropics and subtropics, a quantity that is directly related to cloud formation.

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.

When the researchers compared their results with the output of a number of climate models, they found that several of the newer models that have higher resolution and use updated ice sheet configurations do «a very good job» of reproducing the patterns observed in the proxy records.

Ultimately, we'd like to be able to reproduce the global signatures of these abrupt climate events with numerical models of the climate system, and investigate the physics that drive such events.»

But a large piece of the puzzle is missing, he added, because climate models have not been able to reproduce an early Mars climate sufficiently warm enough to promote an active hydrologic cycle.

There are some caveats with their study: The global climate models (GCMs) do not reproduce the 1930 - 1940 Arctic warm event very well, and the geographical differences in a limited number of grid - boxes in the observations and the GCMs may have been erased through taking the average value over the 90 - degree sectors.

Hopefully, more refined work with recent and future data, and incorporation of research into the coupling mechanisms themselves, will allow us to validate the model climate sensitivities to the various forcings, and confidently reproduce multidecadal internal climate modes.

Model performance in reproducing the observed seasonal cycle of land snow cover may provide an indirect evaluation of the simulated snow - albedo feedback under climate change.

A number of subsequent publications qualitatively describe parameter values that allow models to reproduce features of observed changes, but without directly estimating a climate sensitivity probability density function (PDF).

The models can't reproduce the rapid climate change at the end of the Younger Drys, nor can the models reproduce the lapse rate in the tropics measured by radiosondes and MSUs.

Guemas et al. (Nature Climate Change 2013) shows that the slower warming of the last ten years can not be explained by a change in the radiative balance of our Earth, but rather by a change in the heat storage of the oceans, and that this can be at least partially reproduced by climate models, if one accounts for the natural fluctuations associated with El Niño in the initialization of the Climate Change 2013) shows that the slower warming of the last ten years can not be explained by a change in the radiative balance of our Earth, but rather by a change in the heat storage of the oceans, and that this can be at least partially reproduced by climate models, if one accounts for the natural fluctuations associated with El Niño in the initialization of the climate models, if one accounts for the natural fluctuations associated with El Niño in the initialization of the models.

Assessing the ability of climate models to reproduce this change is an important part of determining the fidelity with which the models can be expected to forecast the way climate will change in response to future increases in greenhouse gas content.

I also explain that given any set of initial weather conditions (wintin reason) a good model will eventually reproduce realistic climate patterns.

For instance, the climate models are unable to reproduce the climate of the last 10,000 year, the Holocene,

See point 1 — since the models do in fact reproduce Earth's climate pretty well with the «ingredients» now on offer, the well - known principle of Occam's Razor says that we shouldn't be needlessly bringing in additional factors.

Is it conceivable that the best actual climate models, only with the basic laws of fluid thermodynamics, could reproduce a climate variability such ENSO, AMO, NAO,..., or is there the need of parametrization?

The thing I find a bit curious about the result that is the subject of this blog article, though, is the statement that the model used reproduces the Little Ice Age climate simply as a response to the luminosity reduction.

There are some caveats with their study: The global climate models (GCMs) do not reproduce the 1930 - 1940 Arctic warm event very well, and the geographical differences in a limited number of grid - boxes in the observations and the GCMs may have been erased through taking the average value over the 90 - degree sectors.

It is possible to build a computer model which reproduces chaos, but since the climate has been stable, the climate scientists have not needed to incorporate that sort of code.

As noted in Chapter 8, Section 8.4.2, at the time of the SAR most coupled models had difficulty in reproducing a stable climate with current atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases, and THEREFORE NON-PHYSICAL «FLUX ADJUSTMENT TERMS» WERE ADDED.

Even really simple, naive models do a good job of reproducing climate.

Result: NS 2) «In reviewing the results, the IPCC report concluded: «No climate model using natural forcings [i.e., natural warming factors] alone has reproduced the observed global warming trend in the second half of the twentieth century.

And if you nudge a climate model in the tropical Pacific to follow the observed sequence of El Niño and La Niña (rather than generating such events itself in random order), then the model reproduces the observed global temperature evolution including the «hiatus» (Kosaka and Xie 2013).

As we have discussed several times elsewhere on this site, studies employing model simulations of the past millennium have been extremely successful in reproducing many of the details evident in paleoclimate reconstructions of this interval as a forced response of the climate to natural (primarly volcanic and solar) and in more recent centuries, anthropogenic, radiative changes.

The lines of evidence and analysis supporting the mainstream position on climate change are diverse and robust — embracing a huge body of direct measurements by a variety of methods in a wealth of locations on the Earth's surface and from space, solid understanding of the basic physics governing how energy flow in the atmosphere interacts with greenhouse gases, insights derived from the reconstruction of causes and consequences of millions of years of natural climatic variations, and the results of computer models that are increasingly capable of reproducing the main features of Earth's climate with and without human influences.

If so, the actual models are in serious trouble because none of them is able to reproduce this temperature patter, and they might need a much stronger climate sensitivity to solar cycle that might include a lot of things in addition to the simple TSI forcing.

However, in my paper I have argued that if the long term of the solar variability falls down and the Moberg temperature data are correct, the actual models are very wrong because they will never be able to reproduce the millenaria cycle presented in the Moberg data without a strong climate sensitivity to solar cicle.

Tuning models principally to reproduce a short 30y segment of uncertain climate data and then extrapolating an exponential forcing 100y outside the data is not scientific.

Our study shows that in 35 - years long high - resolution simulations the new model version can reproduce the state of the Fenno - Scandinavian lakes realistically, thus leading to a better representation of the overall climate.

These models are formulated using physical principles and they can credibly reproduce a broad range of climates around the world, which increases confidence in their ability to downscale realistically future climates.

Each SCC estimate is the average of numerous iterations (10,000 in the EPA's assessment, which we reproduce here) of the model using different potential values for climate sensitivity (how much warming a doubling of CO2 will generate).

However, this same models fail to reproduce the natural cyclical variability of the climate system at many time scales from the decadal to the multidecadal, secular and millennial scale.

The climate models used by the IPCC needs a climate sensitivity of about 3 C because only in this way the chosen readiative forcing functions are able to reproduce the about 0.8 - 0.9 C warming since 1850.

Specifically, when he looked at the climate models used by the IPCC, Kiehl found they all used very different assumptions for aerosol cooling and, most significantly, he found that each of these varying assumptions were exactly what was required to combine with that model's unique sensitivity assumptions to reproduce historical temperatures.

«By prescribing the effects of man - made climate change and observed global ocean temperatures, our model can reproduce the observed shifts in weather patterns and wildfire occurrences.»

The existence of such phenomena, along with the fact that all climate models appear to fail so reproduce them, is very good evidence that the entire selection of climate models sample only a tiny fraction of the space of earth - system emulations available.

The day - by - day, month - by - month, year - by - year, etc. sequencing of values, however, will not correspond to observations, since climate models solve a «boundary value problem» and are not constrained to reproduce the timing of natural climate variability (e.g., El Niño - Southern Oscillation) in the observational record.

Clearly something else other than CO2 has been the predominant cause of the warming 1910 - 1940, and climate models do not include this effect since they don't reproduce the magnitude of the warming.

Those changes are not easy to measure or reproduce with climate models, and some researchers think natural variability or changes in the tropics are more important drivers of weather extremes in the mid-latitudes.

Italian flag analysis: 30 % Green, 50 % White, 20 % Red (JC Note: all climate models produce this result in spite of different sensitivities and using different forcing data sets; the models do not agree on the causes of the early 20th century warming and the mid-century cooling and do not reproduce the mid-century cooling.)

For the current solar flux (F ⋆ ≈ 341 W / m2), our generic model reproduces the energetic budget and the characteristics of our climate (see Fig. 1).

«all of the coupled climate models used in the IPCC AR4 reproduce the time series for the 20th century of globally averaged surface temperature anomalies; yet they have different feedbacks and sensitivities and produce markedly different simulations of the 21st century climate.»

When models only include natural drivers of climate change, such as natural variability and volcanic eruptions, they can not reproduce the recent increase in temperature.

Many climate models, however, have difficulty reproducing the precipitation pattern of the Dust Bowl drought using SSTs alone.

Even if they could find a model that did this, which of course they won't, it would be useful, because models have to conserve things like energy and reproduce the current climate.