Reply to ''Comments on 'Why Hasn't Earth Warmed as much as Expected?'''

In response to our article, Why Hasnt Earth Warmed as Much as Expected? (2010), Knutti and Plattner (2012) wrote a rebuttal. The term climate sensitivity is usually defined as the change in global mean surface temperature that is produced by a specified change in forcing, such as a change in solar heating or greenhouse gas concentrations. We had argued in the 2010 paper that although climate models can reproduce the global mean surface temperature history over the past century, the uncertainties in these models, due primarily to the uncertainty in climate forcing by airborne particles, mean that the models lack the confidence to actually constrain the climate sensitivity within useful limits for climate prediction. Knutti and Plattner are climate modelers, and they argued essentially that because the models could reproduce the surface temperature history, the issue we raised was moot. Our response amounts to straightening out this confusion; for the models to be constraining, they must be able to reproduce the surface temperature history with sufficient confidence, not just to match the measurements, but to exclude alternative histories. As before, we concluded that if we can actually make the aerosol measurements using currently available, state-of-the-art techniques, we can determine the aerosol climate forcing to the degree required to constrain that aspect of model climate sensitivity. A technical issue relating to the timescale over which a change in CO2 emissions would be equilibrated in the environmental energy balance was also discussed, again, a matter of differences in terminology.