Talk:Climate state

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Meteorology  
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Meteorology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Meteorology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

I'm dubious about this page's reason for existence. Unless someone can show that this is a commonly used term, it should go. Its also wrong in various ways: The orbital forcing from Milankovitch cycles is a main factor to determine Earth energy budget is obviously wrong (icehouse) for example. And what is Hansen doing here? William M. Connolley (talk) 17:02, 21 September 2013 (UTC)


The part where Hansen explains the Runaway Greenhouse Effect (see here recent study ) leads to the moist climate state. You removed the part which i wrote, please re-add at least the chunk with the greenhouse explanation, this is the very content for this page existence.

IPCC using climate state[edit]

Climate state is a common term in climatology. Example Google scholar (eng) has over 2 mil entries on "Climate State".

Then you should have no problem finding a defn from the literature, rather than using your own William M. Connolley (talk) 08:01, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
Sure. From the IPCC definition on Climate = Climate in a wider sense is the state, including a statistical description, of the climate system Prokaryotes (talk) 12:45, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

Orbital forcing and energy balance[edit]

I don't understand what you mean with "is obviously wrong (icehouse) for example". This article explains energy balance Prokaryotes (talk) 19:51, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

Claiming that Milankovitch forcing is the main driver William M. Connolley (talk) 08:02, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
Milankovitch cycles are a main factor, because they change the thermal energy periodically by 25%. Prokaryotes (talk) 12:40, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
Improved this part - removed "a main factor". Prokaryotes (talk) 13:44, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

What is there in "climate state" that there isn't in "climate"? William M. Connolley (talk) 19:16, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

You seem to confuse the general term climate with the different climate states. Climate states are not part of the climate article. Prokaryotes (talk) 19:26, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

Does the Climate state article serve a distinct purpose or should it be merged with others?[edit]

Please compare/contrast this articles topic with that of

This is your chance to persuade me that I should not propose a merger between Climate state and one or more other climate articles. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 12:33, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

Greenhouse and icehouse state is not covering all states (modeling perspective or runaway etc), but that article might be merged into climate state? The article is to big to include into "climate", no? prokaryotes (talk) 12:40, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
Anything else? NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 12:54, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
Why don't you respond to my arguments? prokaryotes (talk) 12:56, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
Because I have only asked you for info so I can make up my mind what I think, that's why. Anything else? NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 13:00, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
Generally, the term has enough weight and exposure in the literature (Google Scholar has 7700 entries]) and in common context when referring to a shift of the climate to a new state or explicit in media reports (see google news, and web), thus the term requires a dedicated article. However, the article could be extended of course, for instance how the term is used in the media vs in science. prokaryotes (talk) 13:06, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
Ah, the old Google Test. I'll wait awhile, and if nothing more tangible comes up I'll probably proceed with an AFD and/or merge proposal. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 13:17, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
Google Scholar is not Google search. From the WP you cited, Note further that searches using Google's specialty tools, such as Google Books, Google Scholar, and Google News are more likely to return reliable sources that can be useful in improving articles than the default Google web search. prokaryotes (talk) 13:29, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

Recent edits[edit]

In this edit, editor William M. Connolley removed a new study on model simulations for projected timescales of the current inter glacial. The editor only mentioned this is new, and suggested therefore it should not be part of this article. In the edit he also double added existing content from the General section (previously moved there). Can the editor explain why he is against inclusion of this new Nature study? Alternatively i propose to add a new section, i.e. Projections or Model simulations. prokaryotes (talk) 12:47, 15 January 2016 (UTC)