Another Look at Climate Sensitivity
Ilya Zaliapin, Michael Ghil

TL;DR
This paper refutes claims that climate sensitivity inherently involves large, unpredictable responses due to linearization errors, emphasizing the role of nonlinear bifurcations like tipping points in climate models.
Contribution
It clarifies that intrinsic indeterminacy in climate sensitivity is only present near bifurcation points, correcting misconceptions from previous linearized analyses.
Findings
Equilibrium climate sensitivity does not support intrinsic indeterminacy.
Bistability and tipping points are key features in nonlinear climate models.
Large responses occur only near bifurcation points, not generally.
Abstract
We revisit a recent claim that the Earth's climate system is characterized by sensitive dependence to parameters; in particular, that the system exhibits an asymmetric, large-amplitude response to normally distributed feedback forcing. Such a response would imply irreducible uncertainty in climate change predictions and thus have notable implications for climate science and climate-related policy making. We show that equilibrium climate sensitivity in all generality does not support such an intrinsic indeterminacy; the latter appears only in essentially linear systems. The main flaw in the analysis that led to this claim is inappropriate linearization of an intrinsically nonlinear model; there is no room for physical interpretations or policy conclusions based on this mathematical error. Sensitive dependence nonetheless does exist in the climate system, as well as in climate models --…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
