Sentences with phrase «so global dimming»

Not exact matches

And as England has rose and then dimmed as a global superpower, so too has cod seen ups and downs.

So currently we have experienced something between two and three watts per meter square already since the preindustrial times and there's been a bit of global dimming to take into account and the net forcing we are experiencing at the moment, relative to preindustrial is 1.6.

It comes from ARM and James Hansen's references to global dimming developing from clouds being enhanced and or formed by pollution, sulfates, and or certain aerosols and so forth.

As we decarbonise so we take away the aerosol effect aka global dimming.

This was discussed here a couple of months back in the Global Dimming and the climateprediction.net posts, and so it is worth revisiting the question in the light of their analysis.

While I am a scientist, I am not a climatologist so I thought I'd ask what the mainstream opinion is of the «Global Dimming» phenomenon.

Dr Rotstayn says that «what our model is suggesting is that these droughts in the Sahel in the 1970s and the 1980s may have been caused by pollution from Europe and North America» and the commentary goes on to say «if his model is correct...» So the science is certainly not presented without caveats, and nowhere do we simply state that global dimming is unquestionably the cause of the Sahel drought.

So the phenomenon of Global Dimming is certainly relevant to the question of the climate sensitivity.

So while there may be additional, complicating factors (global dimming from the particulates slowing down the warming from the gases??)

Regarding the divergence problem, could there have been an anthropomorphic effect that affects tree - rings over the last fifty years, the «global - dimming», so that the tree - rings don't grow properly due to a lack of light?

Global dimming and methane hydrates have so much more to teach us I just hope we have a solution to crop yield in reduced sun and increased temperatures.

So if we could shed light on the fact, «Global Dimming» really isn't a good idea, that it isn't helping, in fact it is doing the opposite.

It says pollution is the cause of global dimming and it doesn't mention geoengineering so it's misinformation in my opinion.

Are you so dim in your scientific understanding that you thought it was a big deal to understand this bogus global warming paradigm?

Further, because they are short - lived, these sulfate dimming effects really only can be expected to operate over in a few isolated areas around land - based industrial areas, limiting their effect on global temperatures since they effect only a quarter or so of the globe.

In a large sense, this is why the global climate community has latched onto the global dimming / aerosols hypothesis so quickly and so strongly.