Recent Changes for "Climate Models" - Climate Audit 101

Climate Models

jkearns — 2008-01-27 12:06:28

reword

Differences for Climate Models

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 21:	Line 21:
- [http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=2658 Hansen in Antarctica]: Compares ["Hansen et al. (1988)"]'s model projections with actual temperatures in Antarctica.	+ [http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=2658 Hansen in Antarctica]: Compares ["Hansen et al. (1988)"]'s model projections with actual temperature observations in ["Antarctica"].

Climate Models

jkearns — 2008-01-27 12:05:08

added Hansen in Antarctica post

Differences for Climate Models

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 20:	Line 20:
	+ + [http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=2658 Hansen in Antarctica]: Compares ["Hansen et al. (1988)"]'s model projections with actual temperatures in Antarctica.

Climate Models

jkearns — 2008-01-27 12:02:09

added latest post: RSS Corrects 2007 Error

Differences for Climate Models

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 20:	Line 20:
	+ + [http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=2648 RSS Corrects 2007 Error]: The error correction is discussed in relation to ["Hansen et al. (1988)"], along with some new information regarding comparing satellite and surface temperatures provided by J Christy.

Climate Models

jkearns — 2008-01-20 22:00:39

added link

Differences for Climate Models

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 43:	Line 43:
- [http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=796 Hansen and Model Reliability] - Compares recent temperatures with older model predictions.	+ [http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=796 Hansen and Model Reliability] - Compares recent temperatures with older model predictions from ["Hansen et al. (1988)"].

Climate Models

jkearns — 2008-01-20 21:58:33

linked thread

Differences for Climate Models

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 23:	Line 23:
- [http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=2629 Pielke Comparison of Trends 1990-2007] is a discussion thread based on [http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/prometheus/archives/climate_change/001330temperature_trends_1.html Pielke's post] comparing Hansen 1988, and all IPCC model accuracy with temperatures from different sources to 2007.	+ [http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=2629 Pielke Comparison of Trends 1990-2007] is a discussion thread based on [http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/prometheus/archives/climate_change/001330temperature_trends_1.html Pielke's post] comparing ["Hansen et al. (1988)"], and all IPCC model accuracy with temperatures from different sources to 2007.

Climate Models

jkearns — 2008-01-20 21:56:50

added a few more posts

Differences for Climate Models

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 21:	Line 21:
- [http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=2630 Hansen Scenarios A and B - Revised] is a further look at ["Hansen (1988)"] scenarios, breaking down each forcing prediction (CO2, CH4, etc) and how well they held up over time.	+ [http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=2630 Hansen Scenarios A and B - Revised] is a further look at ["Hansen et al. (1988)"] scenarios, breaking down each forcing prediction (CO2, CH4, etc) and how well they held up over time.
Line 25:	Line 25:
- [http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=2621 Hansen Scenarios A and B - Original] The original post on ["Hansen (1988)"] scenarios, this post was updated and the newer revision should be consulted [http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=2630 here].	+ [http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=2621 Hansen Scenarios A and B - Original]: The original post on ["Hansen et al. (1988)"] scenarios, this post was updated and the newer revision should be consulted [http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=2630 here]. + + [http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=2611 Hansen GHG Concentration Projections]: is a first look at various ["Hansen et al. (1988)"] and IPCC forcing predictions and how well they've held up. + + [http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=2602 Thoughts on Hansen et al 1988]: Takes an initial look at ["Hansen et al. (1988)"] and its scenarios' relations to current temperatures. The Hansen model seems to predict a larger temperature increase than occurred.

Climate Models

jkearns — 2008-01-20 21:49:50

added Pielke link

Differences for Climate Models

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 23:	Line 23:
- [http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=2629 Pielke Comparison of Trends 1990-2007] is a discussion thread based on Pielke's post comparing Hansen 1988, and all IPCC model accuracy with temperatures from different sources to 2007.	+ [http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=2629 Pielke Comparison of Trends 1990-2007] is a discussion thread based on [http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/prometheus/archives/climate_change/001330temperature_trends_1.html Pielke's post] comparing Hansen 1988, and all IPCC model accuracy with temperatures from different sources to 2007.

Climate Models

jkearns — 2008-01-20 21:48:39

linked threads

Differences for Climate Models

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 15:	Line 15:
- [http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/wg1/308.htm IPCC 2001 Chapter 8] discusses model evaluation. Armstrong & Green 2007 evaluated the forecasting skill of the IPCC models and said "We have been unable to identify any scientific forecasts to support global warming. Claims that the Earth will get warmer have no more credence than saying that it will get colder." this paper was briefly [http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=1807 discussed on CA].	+ [http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/wg1/308.htm IPCC 2001 Chapter 8] discusses model evaluation. ["Armstrong & Green (2007)"] evaluated the forecasting skill of the IPCC models and said "We have been unable to identify any scientific forecasts to support global warming. Claims that the Earth will get warmer have no more credence than saying that it will get colder." this paper was briefly [http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=1807 discussed on CA].
Line 21:	Line 21:
- [http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=2630 Hansen Scenarios A and B - Revised] is a further look at Hansen 1988 scenarios, breaking down each forcing prediction (CO2, CH4, etc) and how well they held up over time.	+ [http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=2630 Hansen Scenarios A and B - Revised] is a further look at ["Hansen (1988)"] scenarios, breaking down each forcing prediction (CO2, CH4, etc) and how well they held up over time.
Line 25:	Line 25:
- [http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=2621 Hansen Scenarios A and B - Original] The original post on Hansen's 1988 scenarios, this post was updated and the newer revision should be consulted [http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=2630 here].	+ [http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=2621 Hansen Scenarios A and B - Original] The original post on ["Hansen (1988)"] scenarios, this post was updated and the newer revision should be consulted [http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=2630 here].

Climate Models

jkearns — 2008-01-20 21:45:47

added newest posts

Differences for Climate Models

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 20:	Line 20:
	+ + [http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=2630 Hansen Scenarios A and B - Revised] is a further look at Hansen 1988 scenarios, breaking down each forcing prediction (CO2, CH4, etc) and how well they held up over time. + + [http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=2629 Pielke Comparison of Trends 1990-2007] is a discussion thread based on Pielke's post comparing Hansen 1988, and all IPCC model accuracy with temperatures from different sources to 2007. + + [http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=2621 Hansen Scenarios A and B - Original] The original post on Hansen's 1988 scenarios, this post was updated and the newer revision should be consulted [http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=2630 here].

Climate Models

jkearns — 2008-01-14 21:14:11

typo

Differences for Climate Models

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 31:	Line 31:
- In [http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=2475 Kiehl (2007) on Tuning GCMs] CA summarizes and discusses some key points of the paper including; that there are no standard datasets for ozone, aerosols or natural forcing factors (all prominent features of moden models), the magnitude of applied anthropogenic total forcing compensates for the model sensitivity, and GCMs may do little more than embody certain key assumptions.	+ In [http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=2475 Kiehl (2007) on Tuning GCMs] CA summarizes and discusses some key points of the paper including; that there are no standard datasets for ozone, aerosols or natural forcing factors (all prominent features of modern models), the magnitude of applied anthropogenic total forcing compensates for the model sensitivity, and GCMs may do little more than embody certain key assumptions.

Climate Models

jkearns — 2008-01-14 21:13:33

added links to recent modeling posts

Differences for Climate Models

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 23:	Line 23:
	+ [http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=2565 AR4: “ad hoc tuning of radiative parameters”] discusses the unscientific tuning of some (4?) AR4 IPCC GCMs. + + [http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=2564 AR4: “Now-Classic” Results on Cloud Uncertainty are “Unsettling”] explores the statement that "They produced global average surface temperature changes (due to doubled atmospheric CO2 concentration) ranging from 1.9°C to 5.4°C, simply by altering the way that cloud radiative properties were treated in the model." + + [http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=2562 IPCC and Radiative Forcing #2: 1992-AR2] + + [http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=2560 IPCC on Radiative Forcing #1: AR1(1990)] +

Climate Models

jkearns — 2008-01-14 21:03:54

added most recent post: Pielke Jr on IPCC Predictions

Differences for Climate Models

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 21:	Line 21:
	+ [http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=2599 Pielke Jr on IPCC Predictions] is a discussion thread based upon Pielke Jr's post showing that 1990-92 IPCC GCMs have overestimated temperature increase due to global warming through 2007 when compared to surface and satellite temperature records. +
Line 27:	Line 29:
	+

Climate Models

jkearns — 2007-12-04 22:21:45

fix typo

Differences for Climate Models

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 21:	Line 21:
- In [http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=2475 Kiehl (2007) on Tuning GCMs] CA summarizes and discusses some key points of the paper including; that there are no standard datasets for ozone, aerosols or natural forcing factors (all prominent features of moden models), the magnitude of applied anthropogenic total forcing compensates for the model sensitivity, and GCMs may do little more than embody certain key assumptions..	+ In [http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=2475 Kiehl (2007) on Tuning GCMs] CA summarizes and discusses some key points of the paper including; that there are no standard datasets for ozone, aerosols or natural forcing factors (all prominent features of moden models), the magnitude of applied anthropogenic total forcing compensates for the model sensitivity, and GCMs may do little more than embody certain key assumptions.

Climate Models

jkearns — 2007-12-04 22:21:27

reformatted to fit other pages

Differences for Climate Models

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 17:	Line 17:
- CA has a [http://www.climateaudit.org/?cat=25 section on modeling], it has discussed [http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=796 Hansen and Model Reliability] by comparing recent temperatures with older model predictions, CA has also [http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=593 backtested a Hansen and Gavin Schmidt model] and discussed the [http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=466 complexity of the Navier-Stokes equations] behind some models.	+ CA posts on GCMs + + CA has a [http://www.climateaudit.org/?cat=25 section on modeling]
Line 21:	Line 23:
	+ [http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=796 Hansen and Model Reliability] - Compares recent temperatures with older model predictions. + [http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=593 backtested a Hansen and Gavin Schmidt model] + [http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=466 complexity of the Navier-Stokes equations] behind some models. + + many more exist but are not entered yet. +

Climate Models

jkearns — 2007-12-01 22:32:05

added latest post Kiehl 2007

Differences for Climate Models

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 19:	Line 19:
	+ In [http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=2475 Kiehl (2007) on Tuning GCMs] CA summarizes and discusses some key points of the paper including; that there are no standard datasets for ozone, aerosols or natural forcing factors (all prominent features of moden models), the magnitude of applied anthropogenic total forcing compensates for the model sensitivity, and GCMs may do little more than embody certain key assumptions.. +

Climate Models

jkearns — 2007-11-29 22:47:08

added modeling section

Differences for Climate Models

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 17:	Line 17:
- CA has discussed [http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=796 Hansen and Model Reliability] by comparing recent temperatures with older model predictions, CA has also [http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=593 backtested a Hansen and Gavin Schmidt model] and discussed the [http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=466 complexity of the Navier-Stokes equations] behind some models.	+ CA has a [http://www.climateaudit.org/?cat=25 section on modeling], it has discussed [http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=796 Hansen and Model Reliability] by comparing recent temperatures with older model predictions, CA has also [http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=593 backtested a Hansen and Gavin Schmidt model] and discussed the [http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=466 complexity of the Navier-Stokes equations] behind some models.

Climate Models

jkearns — 2007-11-29 22:38:56

add more links to CA

Differences for Climate Models

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 17:	Line 17:
	+ CA has discussed [http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=796 Hansen and Model Reliability] by comparing recent temperatures with older model predictions, CA has also [http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=593 backtested a Hansen and Gavin Schmidt model] and discussed the [http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=466 complexity of the Navier-Stokes equations] behind some models. +

Climate Models

GeorgeCastanza — 2007-11-29 02:23:47

answered the question

Differences for Climate Models

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 9:	Line 9:
- It is important to note that GCMs are [http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=1781 run independent of temperature measurements] [http://www.norcalblogs.com/watts/2007/06/a_note_from_a_nasa_climate_res.html ref]. So a change to a temperature record will not affect GCM output. However, the GCM trends are often compared to measured temperature and other trends. [Please clarify: Are temperature measurements used in model validation?]	+ It is important to note that GCMs are [http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=1781 run independent of temperature measurements] [http://www.norcalblogs.com/watts/2007/06/a_note_from_a_nasa_climate_res.html ref]. Thus, changes to a temperature record will not affect GCM output. However, the GCM trends are often compared to measured temperature and other trends; if the trends were found to be sufficiently divergent, the GCM would require retooling until it became reasonably in line with actual recorded temperatures. In light of this, although recorded temperatures are not inputs into GCMs, they can and do affect model validation.

Climate Models

2007-11-29 01:01:32

Differences for Climate Models

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 9:	Line 9:
- It is important to note that GCMs are [http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=1781 run independent of temperature measurements] [http://www.norcalblogs.com/watts/2007/06/a_note_from_a_nasa_climate_res.html ref]. So a change to a temperature record will not affect GCM output. However, the GCM trends are often compared to measured temperature and other trends. [<--Please clarify: Are temperature measurements used in model validation?]	+ It is important to note that GCMs are [http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=1781 run independent of temperature measurements] [http://www.norcalblogs.com/watts/2007/06/a_note_from_a_nasa_climate_res.html ref]. So a change to a temperature record will not affect GCM output. However, the GCM trends are often compared to measured temperature and other trends. [Please clarify: Are temperature measurements used in model validation?]

Climate Models

2007-11-29 00:59:02

added a question to be answered (hopefully) - Clayton B

Differences for Climate Models

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 9:	Line 9:
- It is important to note that GCMs are [http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=1781 run independent of temperature measurements] [http://www.norcalblogs.com/watts/2007/06/a_note_from_a_nasa_climate_res.html ref]. So a change to a temperature record will not affect GCM output. However, the GCM trends are often compared to measured temperature and other trends.	+ It is important to note that GCMs are [http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=1781 run independent of temperature measurements] [http://www.norcalblogs.com/watts/2007/06/a_note_from_a_nasa_climate_res.html ref]. So a change to a temperature record will not affect GCM output. However, the GCM trends are often compared to measured temperature and other trends. [<--Please clarify: Are temperature measurements used in model validation?]

Climate Models

jkearns — 2007-11-28 21:53:58

added Armstrong and Green CA post

Differences for Climate Models

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 15:	Line 15:
- [http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/wg1/308.htm IPCC 2001 Chapter 8] discusses model evaluation.	+ [http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/wg1/308.htm IPCC 2001 Chapter 8] discusses model evaluation. Armstrong & Green 2007 evaluated the forecasting skill of the IPCC models and said "We have been unable to identify any scientific forecasts to support global warming. Claims that the Earth will get warmer have no more credence than saying that it will get colder." this paper was briefly [http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=1807 discussed on CA].

Climate Models

jkearns — 2007-11-28 21:49:21

added CA links

Differences for Climate Models

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 9:	Line 9:
- It is important to note that GCMs are run independent of temperature measurements [http://www.norcalblogs.com/watts/2007/06/a_note_from_a_nasa_climate_res.html ref]. So a change to a temperature record will not affect GCM output. However, the GCM trends are often compared to measured temperature and other trends.	+ It is important to note that GCMs are [http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=1781 run independent of temperature measurements] [http://www.norcalblogs.com/watts/2007/06/a_note_from_a_nasa_climate_res.html ref]. So a change to a temperature record will not affect GCM output. However, the GCM trends are often compared to measured temperature and other trends.
Line 13:	Line 13:
- ''None of the models used by IPCC are initialized to the observed state and none of the climate states in the models correspond even remotely to the current observed climate. In particular, the state of the oceans, sea ice, and soil moisture has no relationship to the observed state at any recent time in any of the IPCC models. There is neither an El Niño sequence nor any Pacific Decadal Oscillation that replicates the recent past; yet these are critical modes of variability that affect Pacific rim countries and beyond. The Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation, that may depend on the thermohaline circulation and thus ocean currents in the Atlantic, is not set up to match today’s state, but it is a critical component of the Atlantic hurricanes and it undoubtedly affects forecasts for the next decade from Brazil to Europe. Moreover, the starting climate state in several of the models may depart significantly from the real climate owing to model errors. I postulate that regional climate change is impossible to deal with properly unless the models are initialized.''[http://blogs.nature.com/climatefeedback/2007/06/predictions_of_climate.html ref]	+ ''None of the models used by IPCC are initialized to the observed state and none of the climate states in the models correspond even remotely to the current observed climate. In particular, the state of the oceans, sea ice, and soil moisture has no relationship to the observed state at any recent time in any of the IPCC models. There is neither an El Niño sequence nor any Pacific Decadal Oscillation that replicates the recent past; yet these are critical modes of variability that affect Pacific rim countries and beyond. The Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation, that may depend on the thermohaline circulation and thus ocean currents in the Atlantic, is not set up to match today’s state, but it is a critical component of the Atlantic hurricanes and it undoubtedly affects forecasts for the next decade from Brazil to Europe. Moreover, the starting climate state in several of the models may depart significantly from the real climate owing to model errors. I postulate that regional climate change is impossible to deal with properly unless the models are initialized.''[http://blogs.nature.com/climatefeedback/2007/06/predictions_of_climate.html ref]

Climate Models

jkearns — 2007-11-27 23:22:07

added IPCC 2001 ref re: model evaluation, will try to find IPCC 2007 later

Differences for Climate Models

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 15:	Line 15:
	+ [http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/wg1/308.htm IPCC 2001 Chapter 8] discusses model evaluation. +

Climate Models

jkearns — 2007-11-27 23:11:54

add more details re GCMs

Differences for Climate Models

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 3:	Line 3:
- A reference to a climate model can refer to either a global climate model (GCM) or a regional climate model (RCM).	+ A reference to a climate model can refer to a global climate model (GCM) or a regional climate model (RCM).
Line 6:	Line 6:
	+ + GCMs can be divided into three groups, atmospheric GCMs (AGCM), oceanic GCMs (OGCM), or coupled atmospheric and oceanic GCMs (AOGCM).

Climate Models

jkearns — 2007-11-27 23:00:43

formatting - 3rd time is a charm

Differences for Climate Models

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 7:	Line 7:
- It is important to note that GCMs are run independent of temperature measurements ["http://www.norcalblogs.com/watts/2007/06/a_note_from_a_nasa_climate_res.html" ^ref]. So a change to a temperature record will not affect GCM output. However, the GCM trends are often compared to measured temperature and other trends.	+ It is important to note that GCMs are run independent of temperature measurements [http://www.norcalblogs.com/watts/2007/06/a_note_from_a_nasa_climate_res.html ref]. So a change to a temperature record will not affect GCM output. However, the GCM trends are often compared to measured temperature and other trends.
Line 11:	Line 11:
- ''None of the models used by IPCC are initialized to the observed state and none of the climate states in the models correspond even remotely to the current observed climate. In particular, the state of the oceans, sea ice, and soil moisture has no relationship to the observed state at any recent time in any of the IPCC models. There is neither an El Niño sequence nor any Pacific Decadal Oscillation that replicates the recent past; yet these are critical modes of variability that affect Pacific rim countries and beyond. The Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation, that may depend on the thermohaline circulation and thus ocean currents in the Atlantic, is not set up to match today’s state, but it is a critical component of the Atlantic hurricanes and it undoubtedly affects forecasts for the next decade from Brazil to Europe. Moreover, the starting climate state in several of the models may depart significantly from the real climate owing to model errors. I postulate that regional climate change is impossible to deal with properly unless the models are initialized.''["http://blogs.nature.com/climatefeedback/2007/06/predictions_of_climate.html" ^ref]	+ ''None of the models used by IPCC are initialized to the observed state and none of the climate states in the models correspond even remotely to the current observed climate. In particular, the state of the oceans, sea ice, and soil moisture has no relationship to the observed state at any recent time in any of the IPCC models. There is neither an El Niño sequence nor any Pacific Decadal Oscillation that replicates the recent past; yet these are critical modes of variability that affect Pacific rim countries and beyond. The Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation, that may depend on the thermohaline circulation and thus ocean currents in the Atlantic, is not set up to match today’s state, but it is a critical component of the Atlantic hurricanes and it undoubtedly affects forecasts for the next decade from Brazil to Europe. Moreover, the starting climate state in several of the models may depart significantly from the real climate owing to model errors. I postulate that regional climate change is impossible to deal with properly unless the models are initialized.''[http://blogs.nature.com/climatefeedback/2007/06/predictions_of_climate.html ref]

Climate Models

jkearns — 2007-11-27 22:59:48

formatting again, sorry, getting used to it

Differences for Climate Models

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 7:	Line 7:
- It is important to note that GCMs are run independent of temperature measurements [http://www.norcalblogs.com/watts/2007/06/a_note_from_a_nasa_climate_res.html]. So a change to a temperature record will not affect GCM output. However, the GCM trends are often compared to measured temperature and other trends.	+ It is important to note that GCMs are run independent of temperature measurements ["http://www.norcalblogs.com/watts/2007/06/a_note_from_a_nasa_climate_res.html" ^ref]. So a change to a temperature record will not affect GCM output. However, the GCM trends are often compared to measured temperature and other trends.
Line 11:	Line 11:
- None of the models used by IPCC are initialized to the observed state and none of the climate states in the models correspond even remotely to the current observed climate. In particular, the state of the oceans, sea ice, and soil moisture has no relationship to the observed state at any recent time in any of the IPCC models. There is neither an El Niño sequence nor any Pacific Decadal Oscillation that replicates the recent past; yet these are critical modes of variability that affect Pacific rim countries and beyond. The Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation, that may depend on the thermohaline circulation and thus ocean currents in the Atlantic, is not set up to match today’s state, but it is a critical component of the Atlantic hurricanes and it undoubtedly affects forecasts for the next decade from Brazil to Europe. Moreover, the starting climate state in several of the models may depart significantly from the real climate owing to model errors. I postulate that regional climate change is impossible to deal with properly unless the models are initialized.[http://blogs.nature.com/climatefeedback/2007/06/predictions_of_climate.html]	+ ''None of the models used by IPCC are initialized to the observed state and none of the climate states in the models correspond even remotely to the current observed climate. In particular, the state of the oceans, sea ice, and soil moisture has no relationship to the observed state at any recent time in any of the IPCC models. There is neither an El Niño sequence nor any Pacific Decadal Oscillation that replicates the recent past; yet these are critical modes of variability that affect Pacific rim countries and beyond. The Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation, that may depend on the thermohaline circulation and thus ocean currents in the Atlantic, is not set up to match today’s state, but it is a critical component of the Atlantic hurricanes and it undoubtedly affects forecasts for the next decade from Brazil to Europe. Moreover, the starting climate state in several of the models may depart significantly from the real climate owing to model errors. I postulate that regional climate change is impossible to deal with properly unless the models are initialized.''["http://blogs.nature.com/climatefeedback/2007/06/predictions_of_climate.html" ^ref]

Climate Models

jkearns — 2007-11-27 22:56:00

formatted

Differences for Climate Models

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 1:	Line 1:
	+ = Climate Models = +
Line 3:	Line 5:
- = Global Climate Models =	+ == Global Climate Models ==
Line 11:	Line 13:
- = Regional Climate Models =	+ == Regional Climate Models ==

Climate Models

jkearns — 2007-11-27 22:55:26

added info re: GCMs

Differences for Climate Models

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 2:	Line 2:
	+ + = Global Climate Models = + + It is important to note that GCMs are run independent of temperature measurements [http://www.norcalblogs.com/watts/2007/06/a_note_from_a_nasa_climate_res.html]. So a change to a temperature record will not affect GCM output. However, the GCM trends are often compared to measured temperature and other trends. + + Furthermore, Kevin Trenberth states: + + None of the models used by IPCC are initialized to the observed state and none of the climate states in the models correspond even remotely to the current observed climate. In particular, the state of the oceans, sea ice, and soil moisture has no relationship to the observed state at any recent time in any of the IPCC models. There is neither an El Niño sequence nor any Pacific Decadal Oscillation that replicates the recent past; yet these are critical modes of variability that affect Pacific rim countries and beyond. The Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation, that may depend on the thermohaline circulation and thus ocean currents in the Atlantic, is not set up to match today’s state, but it is a critical component of the Atlantic hurricanes and it undoubtedly affects forecasts for the next decade from Brazil to Europe. Moreover, the starting climate state in several of the models may depart significantly from the real climate owing to model errors. I postulate that regional climate change is impossible to deal with properly unless the models are initialized.[http://blogs.nature.com/climatefeedback/2007/06/predictions_of_climate.html] + + = Regional Climate Models =

Climate Models

jkearns — 2007-11-27 22:36:13

GCM and RCM

Differences for Climate Models

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 1:	Line 1:
- Describe Climate Models here.	+ A reference to a climate model can refer to either a global climate model (GCM) or a regional climate model (RCM).

Climate Models

GeorgeCastanza — 2007-11-26 22:23:04

Differences for Climate Models

Deletions are marked with - .	Additions are marked with +.
Line 1:	Line 1:
	+ Describe Climate Models here.