Though we don't necessarily attribute this to global warming, it is interesting to note that
none of the climate models used for the 2007 International Panel on Climate Change report showed a decrease of this magnitude.
Not exact matches
Only two
of the 11
models used to project future warming in the most recent report from the Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change (IPCC) considered the effects
of limited nitrogen on plant growth;
none considered phosphorus, although one paper from 2014 subsequently pointed out this omission.
However, I am not a «warmista» by any means — we do not know how to properly quantify the albedo
of aerosols, including clouds, with their consequent negative feedback effects in any
of the
climate sensitivity
models as yet — and all
models in the ensemble
used by the «warmistas» are indicating the sensitivities (to atmospheric CO2 increase) are too high, by factors ranging from 2 to 4: which could indicate that
climate sensitivity to a doubling
of current CO2 concentrations will be
of the order
of 1 degree C or less outside the equatorial regions (
none or very little in the equatorial regions)- i.e. an outcome which will likely be beneficial to all
of us.
Surprisingly,
none of the IPCC
climate models used any
of the datasets which suggested that solar activity has been increasing!
«
None of the models used by IPCC are initialized to the observed state and none of the climate states in the models correspond even remotely to the current observed clim
None of the
models used by IPCC are initialized to the observed state and
none of the climate states in the models correspond even remotely to the current observed clim
none of the
climate states in the
models correspond even remotely to the current observed
climate.