I used the monthly volcano data and found tau and alpha
One thought on “Planet Lucia”
Hi Lucia,
I was arguing with people at Tammy’s about the Pinatubo prediction that supposedly validates the climate models. It is appears a model did predict the post eruption response but there is a bait and switch going on because they did not use the GCMs to make the prediction – they used a “primitive climate model”.
The model ensemble range in this figure is quite interesting because seems to cover all of the bases from no cooling at all to whopping 0.6 degC of cooling. With ensembles like that it is really hard to be wrong.
That said the bottom half of Fig 9.5 is also interesting because it seems to be telling us what the IPCC claims is ‘weather noise’ without anthropogenic forcings and the ensemble range is amazingly tight – but that is the just the eyeball method. I am curious how this noise compares to the other estimates of noise you have been using.
Hi Lucia,
I was arguing with people at Tammy’s about the Pinatubo prediction that supposedly validates the climate models. It is appears a model did predict the post eruption response but there is a bait and switch going on because they did not use the GCMs to make the prediction – they used a “primitive climate model”.
http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/briefs/hansen_02/
The mention of a “primitive climate model” made me think of lumpy.
The paper does not say what primitive means. I wondered if it might be similar to lumpy but the wiggles seem a little large for that.
Now I have spent some time looking at Figure 9.5 in AR4
http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/Report/AR4WG1_Print_Ch09.pdf
The model ensemble range in this figure is quite interesting because seems to cover all of the bases from no cooling at all to whopping 0.6 degC of cooling. With ensembles like that it is really hard to be wrong.
That said the bottom half of Fig 9.5 is also interesting because it seems to be telling us what the IPCC claims is ‘weather noise’ without anthropogenic forcings and the ensemble range is amazingly tight – but that is the just the eyeball method. I am curious how this noise compares to the other estimates of noise you have been using.