David B. Benson wrote:
> From
> http://www.amath.washington.edu/people/faculty/tung/publications.html
> 
> K.K. Tung, J. Zhou and C.D.Camp; 2008: "Constraining Model Transient
> Climate Response using Independent Observations of Solar-Cycle Forcing
> and Response" Geophys. Research Lett., 35, L17707,doi:
> 10.1029/2008GL034240.
> 


> I don't see anything actually wrong, but I'm suspicious of such large
> values.  Comments about what might have gone wrong, if anything, will
> be appreciated.

It's a bit misleading of them to claim the solar signal is confirmed by 
multiple data sets, when in fact these are all pretty much the same 
data, reanalysed in slightly different ways. I don't see any big howler 
in their analysis but I am not convinced by the uncertainty estimates. 
Actually, this may rise to the level of a significant error, since the 
uncertainty bounds on k in their fig 2 are barely consistent (first two 
subplots) even though the underlying data are almost the same! Thus, I 
suspect their uncertainties are substantially underestimated. They also 
admit in the text that their uncertainty estimates depend on the details 
of the analysis but "will not be discussed further here". The lower 
limit for k that they use in further analysis is actually the central 
estimate from 3 of their 4 data sets. Including a reasonable amount of 
uncertainty here would reconcile their estimate with others.

Their conversion from TCR to equilibrium sensitivity is also a bit 
dubious - the 3/2 factor is just an approximation, and may be lower for 
high TCR. That is, if the reason for high TCR is that the ocean mixing 
is lower than the models simulate, this means we are closer to 
equilibrium, it does not mean the equilibrium is higher. T&C haven't 
really estimated equilibrium sensitivity with this method. However, it 
may add some support for the work of Forest et al which claims that the 
mixing in the GCM ocean models is overstated.

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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to