RESULTS: 21 - 30 of 146327
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Papers; IPCC Fourth Assessment Report Papers: Working Group I, The Physical Science Basis of Climate Change, 2005-2007; Expert Review Comments on First-Order Draft, Chapter 2. ESPP IPCCAR4WG1. Environmental Science and Public Policy Archives. Harvard College Library, Cambridge, Mass. page 273. 273
The rest of the global mean temperature response is due to the sum total of the
different feedback process contributions which few would claim to have an accuracy that
is within 25%.
[Andrew Lacis]
2-1945 A 57:30 57:31 I agree that this linearity argument makes sense. Noted
[Jerry Mahlman]
2-1946 A 57:30 57:32 This statement is not true for the evaluation of the aerosol indirect effect by Rotstayn and Accepted - clairfiaction added
Penner (J.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Papers; IPCC Fourth Assessment Report Papers: Working Group I, The Physical Science Basis of Climate Change, 2005-2007; Expert Review Comments on First-Order Draft, Chapter 2. ESPP IPCCAR4WG1. Environmental Science and Public Policy Archives. Harvard College Library, Cambridge, Mass. page 275. 275
Note for example the +/- 2% solar flux and
CFC + O3 experiments described by Hansen et al. (1997).
[Andrew Lacis]
2-1957 A 58:21 58:23 But this misses the important point for policy makers and engineers. Policy makers and Accepted
engineers can only act on future effects.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Papers; IPCC Fourth Assessment Report Papers: Working Group I, The Physical Science Basis of Climate Change, 2005-2007; Expert Review Comments on First-Order Draft, Chapter 6. ESPP IPCCAR4WG1. Environmental Science and Public Policy Archives. Harvard College Library, Cambridge, Mass. page 200. 200
[Michael MacCracken]
6-1602 A 39:28 39:30 Word inclusion used twice
Accepted
[Andrew Lacis]
6-1603 A 39:28 39:31 A more local-scale modelling study by Midgely et al., poublished in GCB alongside the Noted
Harriosn and Prentice work, also showed a major response of vegetation structure to the
glacial-interglacial CO2 shift.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Papers; IPCC Fourth Assessment Report Papers: Working Group I, The Physical Science Basis of Climate Change, 2005-2007; Expert Review Comments on First-Order Draft, Chapter 6. ESPP IPCCAR4WG1. Environmental Science and Public Policy Archives. Harvard College Library, Cambridge, Mass. page 212. 212
While Rejected - polemics with no
the point is appropriate, it should be more subtly presented. constructive suggestion for change
[Andrew Lacis]
6-1718 A 66:24 66:24 Change "of" to "over" Accepted
[Michael MacCracken]
6-1719 A 67:0 Table 6.1. Note on ocean cooling at LGM in North Atlantic: may also need to recall that Noted, but space liimitations apply
there is lots of differences between data reconstructions.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Papers; IPCC Fourth Assessment Report Papers: Working Group I, The Physical Science Basis of Climate Change, 2005-2007; Expert Review Comments on First-Order Draft, Chapter 10. ESPP IPCCAR4WG1. Environmental Science and Public Policy Archives. Harvard College Library, Cambridge, Mass. page 70. 70
This is referenced in Chapter 8.
is given by Hansen et al. (1997).
[Andrew Lacis]
10-552 A 18:30 18:37 The comments on the sign and uncertainity in cloud feedback are much better handelled Noted. We wish to show the new
in Chapter 8.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Papers; IPCC Fourth Assessment Report Papers: Working Group I, The Physical Science Basis of Climate Change, 2005-2007; Expert Review Comments on First-Order Draft, Chapter 9. ESPP IPCCAR4WG1. Environmental Science and Public Policy Archives. Harvard College Library, Cambridge, Mass. page 71. 71
documented GHG increases, and the radiative consequences of these GHG changes
(together with some inferred aerosol changes) fully account for the observed trends of
global temperature increase.
[Andrew Lacis]
9-518 A 22:27 22:50 Once again, the subject matter would seem to come under the purview of chapter 6, where Taken into account, but minimum
a more detailed discussion is already provided.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Papers; IPCC Fourth Assessment Report Papers: Working Group I, The Physical Science Basis of Climate Change, 2005-2007; Expert Review Comments on First-Order Draft, Chapter 2. ESPP IPCCAR4WG1. Environmental Science and Public Policy Archives. Harvard College Library, Cambridge, Mass. page 44. 44
Batch From To Comment Notes
could even be a section on "specific progress that needs to be made beyond what is
understood at the time of the current report".
[Andrew Lacis]
2-274 A 4:31 4:31 Comments like "medium level of scientific understanding" or "low level of scientific Rejected but clarified
understanding" are a fuzzy form of non-information and should be avoided.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Papers; IPCC Fourth Assessment Report Papers: Working Group I, The Physical Science Basis of Climate Change, 2005-2007; Expert Review Comments on First-Order Draft, Chapter 2. ESPP IPCCAR4WG1. Environmental Science and Public Policy Archives. Harvard College Library, Cambridge, Mass. page 67. 67
If the
equilibrium temperature change is smaller than Delta-T-zero, the feedbacks are negative.
[Andrew Lacis]
2-415 A 8:25 8:29 In principle, the preparation of fossil fuels for burning at specified geographic locations Noted. Text clarified
could be considered climate forcings at their basic non-radiative level, assuming then that
Confidential, Do Not Cite or Quote Chapter 2: Batch AB (11/16/05) Page 67 of 386
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Papers; IPCC Fourth Assessment Report Papers: Working Group I, The Physical Science Basis of Climate Change, 2005-2007; Expert Review Comments on First-Order Draft, Chapter 2. ESPP IPCCAR4WG1. Environmental Science and Public Policy Archives. Harvard College Library, Cambridge, Mass. page 330. 330
But,
renmarkably, the global mean surface temperature in January (with more incident solar
energy) is actually several degrees colder than it is during July.
[Andrew Lacis]
2-2345 A 94:26 :29 This definition is imprecise and erroneous. Radiative forcing is a change in an energy flux Accepted.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Papers; IPCC Fourth Assessment Report Papers: Working Group I, The Physical Science Basis of Climate Change, 2005-2007; Expert Review Comments on First-Order Draft, Chapter 6. ESPP IPCCAR4WG1. Environmental Science and Public Policy Archives. Harvard College Library, Cambridge, Mass. page 107. 107
bogus in the light of this evidence, and, as usual, no discussion of the contradiction is
included.
[Andrew Lacis]
6-867 A 17:37 18:12 I am surprised that there is no mention at all of possible tropical mechanisms, speculative Accepted.