Actual temperature falls largely within projected ranges; lower recent temperatures may result from a variety of factors, including the deep ocean storing more heat than anticipated.
Not exact matches
And the rise and
fall of microbial populations follows a reliable course as a corpse decomposes, even though the
actual pace of activity varies widely due to
temperature and other environmental factors.
As we transition into *
actual *
fall and winter
temperatures, I can totally see myself layering a cozy sweater over it.
None of them does a particularly good job of tracing the
actual temperature changes, but in aggregate, the eyeball average of all of them appears to
fall at approximately the ending
temperature for the 10 - year graph.
However, in my paper I have argued that if the long term of the solar variability
falls down and the Moberg
temperature data are correct, the
actual models are very wrong because they will never be able to reproduce the millenaria cycle presented in the Moberg data without a strong climate sensitivity to solar cicle.
While it's true BEST reproduced a far more accurate representation of the observations than any other, and BEST indicated strong signs that other collections were
falling further and further behind the
actual temperature trend, we know BEST has some drawbacks: they've presented (to date, that I know of) land only, and that dataset stopped quite some time ago.
The green curve in Figure 2 does not
fall off because of any decline in
actual temperature but because F3 is bending it down for the same reason it bends the orange curve in Figure 3 down.
Yes, Dyson doesn't put as much faith in mathmatical models as some (despite the fact that
actual temperature measurements
fall within the confidence bands of those same models), but let's DO pay attention to what Dyson actually says, but with just a bit more detail:
Yes, it is possible that natural variability could cause
actual temperatures to
fall outside the range of model predictions without invalidating the models, but I'm not yet ready to accept model outputs under these conditions.
We know that as one goes higher
temperature falls; however, you deliberately combine
actual temperature and potential energy and state that this is
temperature, when of course it is not.
When the
actual observed
temperature falls outside these limits, as predicted by the proponents of CAGW, then, and only then, will I start to worry.
The old «
temperatures rose along with CO2 levels, proving AGW theory» statement
falls apart under scrutiny of the
actual details.
They are running too hot an after 22 years since 1990
actual global average
temperature fell below the lowest model prediction.
Converting the anomalies to the
actuals, GIStemp in 2002 had Global Mean
temperature in 1880 at 13.89 oC, and by March 2010 this had
fallen to 13.76 oC, i.e. colder, not warmer, as your comment claims, thereby exaggerating the apparent warming since 1880.
We tested the
actual charge times as well as the dynamic current and battery
temperature, and actually found the USB - PD solution in the Pixel XL to
fall flat in every way (we'll have an extensive comparison on this very shortly)-- the device got warmer and it ultimately charged slower than Quick Charge 3.0, Huawei's SuperCharge and OnePlus» Dash Charge.