ICE wrote:
> hi,
>
>> Variability is the flip-side
>> of sensitivity here, since a planet that varies by 0.3C in the absence
>> of any external forcing is likely to vary by rather a lot when it
>> actually *is* forced!
>
> i like this point. Do you actually see that, among the different
> climate models (more "natural" variability meaning greater
> sensitivity ?)
Off the top of my head, I don't know if anyone has looked. It is
complicated by the different ocean heat uptakes of the different GCMs,
and the fact that their range of sensitivity (and natural variability)
isn't all that large anyway (the 0.3C originally postulated is way
outside their range). It's a sort of "other things being equal"
statement and other things are rarely precisely equal! I'd expect to see
it more clearly across a range of slab-ocean models (such as CPDN or our
own ensembles) where the ocean damping is constant by construction and
the ensemble size is big enough for the signal to emerge above the noise.
James
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Global Change ("globalchange") newsgroup. Global Change is a public, moderated
venue for discussion of science, technology, economics and policy dimensions of
global environmental change.
Posts will be admitted to the list if and only if any moderator finds the
submission to be constructive and/or interesting, on topic, and not
gratuitously rude.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/globalchange
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
