You are hereForums
Forums
- Login to post a new forum topic.
| Forum | Topics | Posts | Last post |
|---|---|---|---|
If you have comments on the way things are explained in the 3rd Edition. Add them here. If you think there are factual errors, let us know.
| |||
Give page and line numbers in 3rd edition and the correction
| 1 | 2 | 23 weeks 3 days ago by admin (not verified) |
If you're teaching a class using this book, let us know your thoughts.
| 0 | 0 | n/a |
Are you a student in a course using this book? Tell us about your experiences with the Primer. Good and bad!
| 0 | 0 | n/a |
Add comments here if you have problems or suggestions related to the EBM. Suggestions on how to improve the implementation or reports of odd behaviour would be useful for further development.
| |||
| 0 | 0 | n/a | |
| 0 | 0 | n/a | |
| 0 | 0 | n/a | |
Discussion forum for workshop participants
| |||
A forum for general discussion on 'Coupling People and Climate Change Science'.
| 1 | 1 | 1 year 7 weeks ago by Anonymous |
Post outlines of existing and proposed methodological approaches and offer concrete examples of ways to couple social and physical climate modelling approaches
| 1 | 1 | 21 weeks 2 days ago by Anonymous |
The idea of a fourth edition of 'A Climate Modelling Primer has been raised and we are looking for input from the user community about what should be developed in a new edition and what parts need to be de-emphasised as the science has moved on.[img_assist|nid=18|title=|desc=|link=none|align=left|width=100|height=96]
| |||
The structure and content of a possible fourth edition are open for discussion. Add topics and comment on possible changes and improvements
| |||
We have always maintained that ‘The Primer’ is about climate modelling and not particularly about ‘greenhouse’, but we recognize that climate change is the big discussion item in the public forum and many users come to the book via climate change courses. Should greenhouse and climate change be a bigger topic or receive greater emphasis in the book?
| 1 | 1 | 21 weeks 6 days ago by robertm |
‘The Primer’ was conceived and written before IPCC existed and although it draws on many international comparisons of modelling capability and output, the IPCC reports have arguably been the major drivers in the development of climate models over the last 20 years. Should these and perhaps the Ecosystem Millennium Assessment be used to frame the approach and structure rather than the previous progression through model types without the "wisdom" gleaned from assessment?
| 0 | 0 | n/a |
Is the structure used in the third edition the correct one for the future? An historical introduction is followed by a progression through models of increasing complexity: from zero-D, through 1-D, 2-D to 3D and coupled models followed by a final chapter on models of intermediate complexity and integrated models. Should this be retained or is there a better way to arrange climate modelling material, for example starting with integrated assessment?
| 0 | 0 | n/a |
