ub.xmlui.mirage2.page-structure.muninLogoub.xmlui.mirage2.page-structure.openResearchArchiveLogo
    • EnglishEnglish
    • norsknorsk
  • Velg spraaknorsk 
    • EnglishEnglish
    • norsknorsk
  • Administrasjon/UB
Vis innførsel 
  •   Hjem
  • Fakultet for naturvitenskap og teknologi
  • Institutt for matematikk og statistikk
  • Artikler, rapporter og annet (matematikk og statistikk)
  • Vis innførsel
  •   Hjem
  • Fakultet for naturvitenskap og teknologi
  • Institutt for matematikk og statistikk
  • Artikler, rapporter og annet (matematikk og statistikk)
  • Vis innførsel
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

Comment on "Scaling regimes and linear/nonlinear responses of last millennium climate to volcanic and solar forcing" by S. Lovejoy and C. Varotsos (2016)

Permanent lenke
https://hdl.handle.net/10037/10363
DOI
https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-7-597-2016
Thumbnail
Åpne
article.pdf (2.990Mb)
Main article (PDF)
Dato
2016-07-13
Type
Journal article
Tidsskriftartikkel
Peer reviewed
Forfatter
Rypdal, Kristoffer; Rypdal, Martin Wibe
Sammendrag
Lovejoy and Varotsos (2016) (L&V) analyse the temperature response to solar, volcanic, and solar plus volcanic forcing in the Zebiak–Cane (ZC) model, and to solar and solar plus volcanic forcing in the Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) E2-R model. By using a simple wavelet filtering technique they conclude that the responses in the ZC model combine subadditively on timescales from 50 to 1000 years. Nonlinear response on shorter timescales is claimed by analysis of intermittencies in the forcing and the temperature signal for both models. The analysis of additivity in the ZC model suffers from a confusing presentation of results based on an invalid approximation, and from ignoring the effect of internal variability. We present tests without this approximation which are not able to detect nonlinearity in the response, even without accounting for internal variability. We also demonstrate that internal variability will appear as subadditivity if it is not accounted for. L&V’s analysis of intermittencies is based on a mathematical result stating that the intermittencies of forcing and response are the same if the response is linear.We argue that there are at least three different factors that may invalidate the application of this result for these data. It is valid only for a power-law response function; it assumes power-law scaling of structure functions of forcing as well as temperature signal; and the internal variability, which is strong at least on the short timescales, will exert an influence on temperature intermittence which is independent of the forcing. We demonstrate by a synthetic example that the differences in intermittencies observed by L&V easily can be accounted for by these effects under the assumption of a linear response. Our conclusion is that the analysis performed by L&V does not present valid evidence for a detectable nonlinear response in the global temperature in these climate models.
Beskrivelse
Published version. Source at http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/esd-7-597-2016
Forlag
European Geosciences Union
Sitering
Rypdal K, Rypdal Mw. Comment on "Scaling regimes and linear/nonlinear responses of last millennium climate to volcanic and solar forcing" by S. Lovejoy and C. Varotsos (2016). Earth System Dynamics. 2016;7(3):579-609
Metadata
Vis full innførsel
Samlinger
  • Artikler, rapporter og annet (matematikk og statistikk) [353]

Bla

Bla i hele MuninEnheter og samlingerForfatterlisteTittelDatoBla i denne samlingenForfatterlisteTittelDato
Logg inn

Statistikk

Antall visninger
UiT

Munin bygger på DSpace

UiT Norges Arktiske Universitet
Universitetsbiblioteket
uit.no/ub - munin@ub.uit.no

Tilgjengelighetserklæring