It in some sense includes but (as I understand it) in no sense measures the impact
of water vapor feedback on radiative equilibrium.
IOW we have both the magnitude and the
sign of water vapor feedback still in question (except, of course, by the IPCC orthodoxy, which assumes positive feedback at a rate high enough to essentially maintain constant relative humidity in lockstep with Clausius - Clapeyron).
28 Estimated
Strength of Water Vapor Feedback Earliest studies suggest that if the absolute humidity increases in proportion to the saturation vapor pressure (constant relative humidity), this will give rise to a water vapor feedback that will double the sensitivity of climate compared to an assumption of fixed absolute humidity.
While there is at present no compelling reason to doubt the models»
handling of water vapor feedback, it is not out of the question that some unanticipated behavior of the hydrological cycle could make the warming somewhat milder — or on the other hand, much, much worse.
Nevertheless, the results described here provide key evidence of the reliability
of water vapor feedback predicted by current climate models in response to a global perturbation in the radiative energy balance.»
This sensitivity estimate is not the last word on the subject, because of uncertainties in the approximate formulae used to compute the terms in the energy balance, and neglect of possible
effects of water vapor feedback on the surface budget.
Nevertheless, the results described here provide key evidence of the
reliability of water vapor feedback predicted by current climate models in response to a global perturbation in the radiative energy balance.»
Through horizontal averaging, variations of water vapor and temperature that are related to the horizontal transport by the large - scale circulation will be largely removed, and thus the water vapor and temperature relationship obtained is more indicative of the property of moist convection, and is thus more relevant to the
issue of water vapor feedback in global warming.
Re: Steve McIntyre (# 78), Steve: Can you clarify the primary theme of this thread: Sign and
size of water vapor feedback or the review process.
This clearly confuses relative humidity in the boundary layer (which determines evaporation) and specific humidity throughout the troposphere (which determines the
strength of the water vapor feedback).
While there is at present no compelling reason to doubt the models»
handling of water vapor feedback, it is not out of the question that some unanticipated behavior of the hydrological cycle could make the warming somewhat milder — or on the other hand, much, much worse.
Where, particularly, is the wisdom and leadership to declare that the computer runs have been a mistake, now that the key incorrect assumption has been identified,
that of the water vapor feedback to CO2 forcing?