Recent Evidence for Reduced Climate Sensitivity

David Archibald has suggested I post the PowerPoint presentation of Dr Spencer’s paper from the final session of “The 2008 International Conference on Climate Change”, Sponsored by The Heartland Institute, March 2 – March 4, 2008 in New York. For an audio of Dr Spencer’s presentation.
Note my earlier posting on this subject, How MINISCULE is the Anthropogenic Greenhouse Effect ? an html version of a 1998 paper by Sherwood B Idso in Vol 10: 69-82 of Climate Research, “CO2-induced global warming: a skeptic’s view of potential climate”.

4 comments to Recent Evidence for Reduced Climate Sensitivity

  • Andrew

    I don’t know if you are aware of David Douglass R S Knox’s estimate of climate senstivity based on the eruption of Mount Pinatubo:
    www.worldclimatereport.com/index.php/2005/05/16/determining-climate-sensitivity-from-volcanoes-observations-vs-models/#more-111
    They get a value of 0.6ºC for CO2 doubling. The reference is:
    Douglass, D.H., and R. S. Knox, 2005. Climate forcing by volcanic eruption of Mount Pinatubo. Geophysical Research Letters, 32, doi:10.1029/2004GL022119.

    I mention it becuase it is almost identical to the value which Spencer believes follows from the feedback process he found. Douglass’s own presentation sounds interesting, to, where he discusses the missing “fingerprint”.

  • This is my compilation of Climate sensitivity estimates
    Climate sensitivity

  • Douglas Hoyt

    There is an important blog post by a statistician at rankexploits.com/musings/2008/accounting-for-enso-cochrane-orcutt/

    Quoting:

    “Results:
    Accounting for the effect of ENSO by introducing the MEI index into the regression for temperature, the best estimate for trend of m=-0.5 C/century. the 95% confidence intervals are -2.0C/century

  • Douglas Hoyt

    There is an important blog post by a statistician at rankexploits.com/musings/2008/accounting-for-enso-cochrane-orcutt/

    Quoting:

    “Results:
    Accounting for the effect of ENSO by introducing the MEI index into the regression for temperature, the best estimate for trend of m=-0.5 C/century. the 95% confidence intervals are -2.0C/century .le. m .le. 1.1 C/century. The IPCC AR4 projection of of +2.0C/century is rejected. In contrast, not accounting for the MEI index had resulted in m=-1.0 C/century with 95% confidence intervals of -3.0 C/century .le. m .le. 1.0 C/century. So, using the current data, the negative temperature trend with time remains, though the magnitude is smaller.”

    In other words, the climate sensitivity is considerably lower than what the IPCC estimates.

Leave a Reply

  

  

  

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>