by Judith Curry
Circa 2003-2005, we had the “hockey wars”. In 2005-2006, we had the “hurricane wars”. It looks like this is the season for “cloud wars.”
by Judith Curry
Circa 2003-2005, we had the “hockey wars”. In 2005-2006, we had the “hurricane wars”. It looks like this is the season for “cloud wars.”
Posted in Sensitivity & feedbacks
by Judith Curry
An important new paper on this topic has been published in J. Climate, that raises the bar in terms of uncertainty analysis.
Posted in Sensitivity & feedbacks, Uncertainty
by Judith Curry
The story surrounding Spencer & Braswell has gotten more interesting with the pre-publication of the rebuttal paper by Dessler.
Posted in Sensitivity & feedbacks
A paper in press in the Journal of Climate provides some insight into the interaction of cloud feedback with ocean heat transport.
Posted in Sensitivity & feedbacks
by Judith Curry
There is much hype and debate surrounding Spencer and Bradwell’s new paper “On the misdiagnosis of surface temperature feedbacks from variations in earth’s radiant energy balance.” So lets sort through all this.
Posted in Sensitivity & feedbacks
JC note: Pursuant to Nic’s post on “The IPCC’s alteration of Forster & Gregory’s model-independent climate sensitivity results,” he has sent a letter to Gabi Hegerl, who was coordinating lead author on chapter 9 of the IPCC AR4.
Posted in Sensitivity & feedbacks
The IPCC Fourth Assessment Report of 2007 (AR4) contained various errors, including the well publicised overestimate of the speed at which Himalayan glaciers would melt. However, the IPCC’s defenders point out that such errors were inadvertent and inconsequential: they did not undermine the scientific basis of AR4. Here I demonstrate an error in the core scientific report (WGI) that came about through the IPCC’s alteration of a peer-reviewed result. This error is highly consequential, since it involves the only instrumental evidence that is climate-model independent cited by the IPCC as to the probability distribution of climate sensitivity, and it substantially increases the apparent risk of high warming from increases in CO2 concentration.
Posted in IPCC, Sensitivity & feedbacks
by Judith Curry
Lindzen and Choi have published a new paper entitled “On the observational determination of climate sensitivity and its implications.” This paper is pursuant to a previous paper on the same topic that was discussed by me on a thread at ClimateAudit. The paper is receiving substantial attention in the blogosphere owing to the unusual attention that the paper received by the editors at PNAS.
Posted in Sensitivity & feedbacks
by Judith Curry
Jim Hansen has just posted his latest draft paper, entitled “Earth’s Energy Imbalance and Implications.” This is quite a meaty paper, and will be of particular interest to those of you wondering “where’s the missing heat?”
Posted in Sensitivity & feedbacks
by Judith Curry
Juoakola spotted an interesting paper, that I missed when it was originally published:
NONLINEARITIES, FEEDBACKS AND CRITICAL THRESHOLDS WITHIN THE EARTH’S CLIMATE SYSTEM
JOSÉ A. RIAL , ROGER A. PIELKE SR., MARTIN BENISTON , MARTIN CLAUSSEN, JOSEP CANADELL , PETER COX, HERMANN HELD , NATHALIE DE NOBLET-DUCOUDRÉ , RONALD PRINN, JAMES F. REYNOLDS and JOSÉ D. SALAS
Posted in climate models, Sensitivity & feedbacks
by Judith Curry
James Annan (with Hargreaves) has a new paper out, entitled “On the generation and interpretation of probabilistic estimates of climate sensitivity.” Here is the abstract:
Posted in Sensitivity & feedbacks, Uncertainty
by Judith Curry
Everybody talks about climate feedbacks, but what are they, really? And where did the expression ΔTs = λRF actually come from?
Posted in Greenhouse effect, Sensitivity & feedbacks