Maybe you have read Cess, et al. 1989 by now, but it is still not available online. If one uses JSTOR to access the Science issue (v. 245) its pages are absent. (513-516) I read a hard copy, Cess was cited in IPCC 1990 in proximity to a matter I wrote about yesterday, but Cess was not on point for the matter.

But I also read the Monckton paper linked above my post and observed something that might interest some. Monckton attempts to de- and re- construct IPCC figures. He quotes here from IPCC 2001:

“… λ is a nearly invariant parameter (typically, about 0.5 °K W−1 m2; Ramanathanet al., 1985) for a variety of radiativeforcings, thus introducing the notion of a possible universality of the relationship between forcing and response.”

At Monckton’s Table 2, Values of the “no-feedbacks” climate sensitivity parameter κ are listed nine papers, publ’d between 1984 to 2006, arranged lowest to highest by their κ, and coincidentally their λ. The lowest, Ramanathan 1988 [sic, I think he meant 1985] has λ = 0.500 K W-1 m2. This is the value used by IPCC 2001. The highest is Bony, et al. 2006 which has λ = 0.966 K W-1 m2. This value was cited in IPCC 2007.

Cess 1989 is lower.

…so that in the absence of interactive feedback mechanisms, λ = 0.3 K m2 W-1.

This value is quoted twice at p. 78 of IPCC 1990 Scientific Assessment, one example of which is shown in the text from that volume excerpted at the top of this thread.

The narrative gravamen of Cess 1989 is to chide modelers to better account for cloud feedbacks.

There are some numerical mis-transcriptions in the lengthy quotation of IPCC 1990 section 3 at the top of this thread which I will note down here, if anyone finds it important.

Learn to read. I said constant power source, not constant voltage source.

Ooops I should have pointed out I was correcting you, see my previous post and think about comparing apples with apples. You were comparing power with voltage across the capacitor.

My apology.

However, if we must do so, then wouldn’t, transformers, voltage doublers and resonant circuits all be exceptions to your rule?

No not really while it might be at first blush the underlying issue is energy and power, transformers, voltage doublers and resonant circuits while they raise the voltage the energy or power remains the same, assuming no losses. In fact usually there are losses as heat. However in the loss less situation E = I * Z (Z = impedance) holds for every change in voltage or in current there is an exactly proportional change in the other in the opposite direction. This however does not alter that fact that if you want to discuss gain you really need to compare volt to volt and current to current, pressure to pressure and flow to flow, but for true gain it must be a power gain. This is reflected in how we quote gain in dB it’s 20*log(Vo/Vi) or 10log(Po/Pi) same as voltage for current it six of one half a dozen of another.

I see no reason why when talking about the gain in the system to restrict the input and output to be the same variable.

Perhaps something about comparing apples with apples rings a bell?

If you have an RC circuit and put a constant supply across it after approximately 5 time constants (R*C) the voltage across the capacitor will be equal to the supply assuming no leaks in the capacitor irrespective of the resistance value. You will never get a higher voltage all that happens is that it changes the time it takes for the capacitor to charge. If the resistor is in parallel with a charged capacitor all it will change is the discharge time.

Learn to read. I said constant power source, not constant voltage source.

But it isn’t If you want to talk about amplification and gain and the output is temperature then the input must also be temperature the only external source for that is the sun’s temperature and it varies. There is way you can find an electrical system (or hydraulic or pneumatic for that matter I’ve worked with them all) where the signal is also the power supply.

The temperature of the sun is clearly not the limiting factor as the temperature of the earth is no where near the temperature of the sun. I see no reason why when talking about the gain in the system to restrict the input and output to be the same variable.

However, if we must do so, then wouldn’t, transformers, voltage doublers and resonant circuits all be exceptions to your rule?

As for resisters amplifying current to produce voltage, while that is just semantics but if you are trying to measure a constant current signal then simply put a bigger resister in the loop and measure the voltage across it. For some reason a bigger resister makes the signal easier to measure, almost like it amplifies the signal or something.

Er no! Unless you have a much higher input impedance in the measuring instrument a larger resistance the bigger the error because the relative load of the instrument is higher. If you want to measure current as accurately as possible you need smallest resistance possible that will give a reading.

You’re not teaching me anything.

I had noticed.

If you want an electrical analogy then let the sun be a constant power source

But it isn’t If you want to talk about amplification and gain and the output is temperature then the input must also be temperature the only external source for that is the sun’s temperature and it varies. There is way you can find an electrical system (or hydraulic or pneumatic for that matter I’ve worked with them all) where the signal is also the power supply.

If you have an RC circuit and put a constant supply across it after approximately 5 time constants (R*C) the voltage across the capacitor will be equal to the supply assuming no leaks in the capacitor irrespective of the resistance value. You will never get a higher voltage all that happens is that it changes the time it takes for the capacitor to charge. If the resistor is in parallel with a charged capacitor all it will change is the discharge time.

As for resisters amplifying current to produce voltage, while that is just semantics but if you are trying to measure a constant current signal then simply put a bigger resister in the loop and measure the voltage across it. For some reason a bigger resister makes the signal easier to measure, almost like it amplifies the signal or something.

Lastovicka,et al:

In the upper atmosphere, greenhouse gases produce a cooling effect, instead of a warming effect. Increases in greenhouse gas concentrations are expected to induce substantial changes in the mesosphere, thermosphere, and ionosphere, including a thermal contraction of these layers…
The upper atmosphere as a whole is cooling and contracting…

Interesting. Not enough power-density there to make any substantial shange in the atmospheric radiation balance, I suppose (see http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=2581), but the LEO satellite-launchers wil be happy…

Thanks for the link.
Cheers — Pete Tillman