Comment on "Another look at climate sensitivity" by Zaliapin and Ghil (2010)

Zaliapin and Ghil (hereafter, ZG) claim that the linearity of the climate feedback model in Roe and Baker (2007) (hereafter, RB) invalidates our derivation of the well-known skewed shapes of published probability distributions (pdfs) of climate sensitivity. We show here that linearity is fully justi...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: G. H. Roe, M. B. Baker
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Copernicus Publications 2011-02-01
Series:Nonlinear Processes in Geophysics
Online Access:http://www.nonlin-processes-geophys.net/18/125/2011/npg-18-125-2011.pdf
Description
Summary:Zaliapin and Ghil (hereafter, ZG) claim that the linearity of the climate feedback model in Roe and Baker (2007) (hereafter, RB) invalidates our derivation of the well-known skewed shapes of published probability distributions (pdfs) of climate sensitivity. We show here that linearity is fully justified. Nonlinearity could be of some importance only if the focus is on exotic and improbable events, which appear to be the focus of ZG, instead of the sensitivity pdfs, which were the focus of RB.
ISSN:1023-5809
1607-7946