Sentences with phrase «sensitivity calculations»

Isn't this a good argument for using S hemisphere temps in sensitivity calculations?

I am not a scientist, and in addition not particularly versed in the CO2 sensitivity calculations, so my remark may not be relevant.

Happy to learn more about the use of sensitivity calculations in climate models, if you can point me to the appropriate link.

The CO2 levels were too low and therefore sensitivity calculations must depend ONLY on current data.

Repeating the climate sensitivity calculation with these updated estimates, and we get 0.89 °C divided by 2.29 W / m2 equals 0.39 °C / W / m2.

Appears the original sensitivity calculations in the first publication were for WATERVAPOR, not CO2.

It has been used as the basis for climate sensitivity calculations by many warmists.

Shindell's climate sensitivity calculation suggests countries around the world need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions at the higher end of proposed emissions reduction ranges to avoid the most damaging consequences of climate change.

The conclusion remains that sensitivity calculations which assume the efficacies of each forcing must be exactly 1, with no uncertainty, are simply no longer credible.

If nobody believes the models or sensitivity calculations with any level of confidence then how come we can't get scientists to admit that the whole debate has become too political, they aren't sure of what is going to happen and please wait while we continue to work on the science and the models.

Finally, as gray bodies GHGs emit less than do true black bodies, so for reasonable accuracy any climate - sensitivity calculation based on their emission must be reduced accordingly.

The radius to the semicircular canal circumference (R, in mm) was recorded for use in sensitivity calculations.

(I'd guess they would be meaningless) And for climate sensitivity calculations (from both 20th C temp record and forcings, and; ice age and interglacial terminations, milankovitch cycles)?

The point of this post is that the ice core data are entirely consistent with what we already knew (and have known since 1896 A.D. when Arrhenius published his climate sensitivity calculations).

The point of this post is that the ice core data are entirely consistent with what we already knew (and have known since 1896 A.D. when Arrhenius published his climate sensitivity calculations).

At a minimum Hansen should admit as I said in the last post that his sensitivity calculations must be way off because we are below his C model in temperature results and we have above his A model CO2 output.

Thus the leads and lags involved doesn't have any impact on climate sensitivity calculations»

As this oscillation is natural, it must be removed from climate sensitivity calculation.

Please construe any such calculation as equivalent to a sensitivity calculation to show the effect of (say) excluding bristlecones, to illustrate the impact of certain assumptions, but not advocacy of a specific alternative.