| Title |
Forcing, feedback and internal variability in global temperature trends
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Nature, January 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1038/nature14117 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jochem Marotzke, Piers M. Forster |
| Abstract |
Most present-generation climate models simulate an increase in global-mean surface temperature (GMST) since 1998, whereas observations suggest a warming hiatus. It is unclear to what extent this mismatch is caused by incorrect model forcing, by incorrect model response to forcing or by random factors. Here we analyse simulations and observations of GMST from 1900 to 2012, and show that the distribution of simulated 15-year trends shows no systematic bias against the observations. Using a multiple regression approach that is physically motivated by surface energy balance, we isolate the impact of radiative forcing, climate feedback and ocean heat uptake on GMST--with the regression residual interpreted as internal variability--and assess all possible 15- and 62-year trends. The differences between simulated and observed trends are dominated by random internal variability over the shorter timescale and by variations in the radiative forcings used to drive models over the longer timescale. For either trend length, spread in simulated climate feedback leaves no traceable imprint on GMST trends or, consequently, on the difference between simulations and observations. The claim that climate models systematically overestimate the response to radiative forcing from increasing greenhouse gas concentrations therefore seems to be unfounded. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 137 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 24 | 18% |
| United Kingdom | 21 | 15% |
| France | 5 | 4% |
| Canada | 5 | 4% |
| Germany | 5 | 4% |
| Australia | 4 | 3% |
| Spain | 3 | 2% |
| Sweden | 2 | 1% |
| Belgium | 2 | 1% |
| Other | 16 | 12% |
| Unknown | 50 | 36% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 91 | 66% |
| Scientists | 37 | 27% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 6 | 4% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 2% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 402 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 10 | 2% |
| Switzerland | 2 | <1% |
| Japan | 2 | <1% |
| Canada | 2 | <1% |
| Korea, Republic of | 1 | <1% |
| Italy | 1 | <1% |
| Austria | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Norway | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 8 | 2% |
| Unknown | 373 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 120 | 30% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 98 | 24% |
| Student > Master | 29 | 7% |
| Professor | 28 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 19 | 5% |
| Other | 63 | 16% |
| Unknown | 45 | 11% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 173 | 43% |
| Environmental Science | 88 | 22% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 18 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 15 | 4% |
| Engineering | 10 | 2% |
| Other | 35 | 9% |
| Unknown | 63 | 16% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 384. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 10 October 2023.
All research outputs
#82,434
of 25,882,826 outputs
Outputs from Nature
#5,946
of 99,014 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#834
of 363,186 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature
#91
of 882 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,882,826 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 99,014 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 102.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 363,186 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 882 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.