Sentences with phrase «questions about the natural variability»

Then some of the questions about natural variability may be answered.

Within the limits of available data they address intriguing questions about the natural variability in the Arctic.

Not exact matches

My understanding of most of the (lets call it) skeptical positions from people like Roy Spencer is that they essentially claim exactly that: the absence of a large signal compared to noise (or natural variability) and the entire debate is essentially about the question, whether noise is a measurement / statistical problem or the very nature of climate itself?

Question: before talking about simulating climate CHANGE, how long does the climate science community expect it to take before GCM's can reproduce the real world climate PRIOR to human induced CO2 perturbation in terms of: — «equilibrium point», i.e. without artificial flux adjustment to avoid climatic drift, — «natural variability», in terms of, for instance, the Hurst coefficient at different locations on the planet?

The governing assumption in the vast majority of GCM / climate studies is that natural variability is a) small, b) integrates to zero over time and therefore its un interesting when it comes to answering the questions we care about: How much warming will human forcing cause.

I suspect this question is best answered by a post: «Natural Variability Limits Confidence about Attribution and Climate Sensitivity.»

Dr. Trenberth, along with several colleagues, recently penned a letter raising some questions about the hypothesis: namely raising the point that such jet stream behavior has been seen before and can exist in even a non-warming climate, due to natural variability.