Sentences with phrase «with ocean temps»

The same can be done with ocean temps.

Perhaps it has to do with the ocean temps being «Raw» and the land being «Adjusted», sorry Quality Controlled.

With ocean temps increasing, it is only a matter of time before we will be able to water - ski down the mountain of water that will form above the Mariana Trench.

With ocean temps increasing, it is only a matter of time before we will be able to water - ski down the mountain of water that will form above the Mariana Trench.

Not exact matches

Set atop the cliffs of Pointe Milou, overlooking the ocean and with unforgettable sunset views of surrounding islands, you'll find Bon Temps: a 6 - bedroom villa built in the Palladian style and fit for a Roman emperor.

Illuminated with blue LED lights embedded in the tops of the walls, Brian Tolle's Tempest brings the experience of dynamic ocean water into the North Forest.

(Or are these just particular configurations of temperatures, with the average temp of the entire oceans remaining the same?)

Undoubtedly in past climate changes, increasing temps did in fact cause CO2 to move from the ocean to the air as solubility of a gas in a liquid decreases with higher temps.

But today, even with higher temps, the ocean is absorbing more CO2 as a result of our emissions.

I've updated the graph at top to show a comparison with GISS ocean temps, click to refresh if it doesn't show up as a two - panel graph.

If you add to this the evidence Roger A. Pielke, Sr. offers in his rebuttal of RC propaganda, I think one can safely and sanely declare that the AGW proponents are working with a house of cards: it looks like a great integrated, well designed structure, a consensus — especially to the so - called environmentalists and to their media and political allies — but so many of its foundational data sets (ocean temps, net ice melt, etc) don't support their model; at the very least, they don't support the hysterical, «save the planet» nuttiness that is rampant today.

You'd think that hurricane energy would be a nice proxu (with a lag / lead, I'm sure) for ocean temp, and yet there is a slope to yhe temp graph, and not the hurricane energy graph.

You'd think that hurricane energy would be a nice proxy (with a lag / lead, I'm sure) for ocean temp, and yet there is a slope to the temp graph, and not the hurricane energy graph.

Following Nylo, the ocean surface temps are best compared with the seasonal signal in CO2 at Mauna Loa.

Ocean surface heat and anomalous warmth at the poles were deciding factors for the new September record with very few regions of the global ocean surface showing cooler than average temps and with extraordinary heat at the poles, especially in AntarcOcean surface heat and anomalous warmth at the poles were deciding factors for the new September record with very few regions of the global ocean surface showing cooler than average temps and with extraordinary heat at the poles, especially in Antarcocean surface showing cooler than average temps and with extraordinary heat at the poles, especially in Antarctica.

When he presented his misleading graph, when he said 97 % of climate scientists agree, (knowing full well the actual situation that the number is bogus and misleading,) when he mentions adjustments to satellite data but not to surface temperatures with major past cooling and absurd derived precision to.005 * C, when he defends precision in surface global averages but ignores major estimates of temps and krigging in Arctic, Africa, Asia and oceans or Antarctica, he forfeits credibility.

of the proxies are marine sediments which should correlate with SST's or even deeper ocean temp.

With the Earth known as the «water planet» because of over 70 % of the globe covered by deep oceans, warmer temps directly result in more evaporation of the ocean water into the air - clouds.

It's possible it got past us, but with the extensive coverage by ARGO and other ocean temp measuring devices, it does seem to be a stretch.

(B) We have been measuring ocean temps from 0 to 700 meters with some accuracy for some time.

It goes with saying that all the usual caveats apply as to cloud clover, ocean temps and pressure levels etc..

By bringing the deep ocean into play, it's like turning on a bigger AC - with observed changes to surface global temps in recent years.

Ocean currents and weather have as much to do with Artic ice as temperatures, but UAH for 60 - 85N shows increasing temps from 1991 to 2007, and generally decreasing temp anomaly since.

Also, warmer ocean temps seem to be associated with the thicker ice sheets.

That temp rise then causes something to outgas CO2 (possibly oceans, but maybe not) that then raises the temp even more (along with other GHG that feedback and enhance the warming), which causes more outgasing.

If the Ocean slowly cools with radiant heat loss to space via warmer Arctic waters and a discernible decrease in atmospheric temps the last 1.5 years since the Super El Nino of 2016, then there should be more atmospheric CO2 uptake by cooling oceans.

You should provide evidence that CO2 is causing the air and ocean temps to rise with out hiding the decline etc..

Obviously the ocean cycles then transport heat subsequently so that there is immediate and long - term output to atmosphere that shows up in temperature series with long - term (150 + years) Temp / PDO + AMO+S unspot integral correlation 0.96.

There's a lovely 520million year correlation between GCR and ocean temps far stronger than the correlation between temps and CO2, with the peaks of temperature coinciding with the minimums of GCR, and snowball earth episodes coinciding with the GCR maxima (Shaviv & Veizer 2003).

True, generally ocean cycles will be a larger influence, but the connection of solar cycles (specifically through solar irradiance which rises and falls in tandem with sunspots) to global temps obvious.

That's consistent with the atmosphere and from what I remember there is a rough calculation that ocean 0 - 700m temps should be about 1/2 the rise of air temps.

OWASLT = Sum (Temp x Mass x Heat Capacity) / Sum (Mass x Heat Capacity), and looking at all pieces of mass components in the atmosphere + mass in the ocean (say down to 2000m or whatever depth would appropriate with respect to available global data & that should rightfully be included for an all inclusive weighted average temperature like this).

The «poor fits» in ocean oscillation effects for 1900 - 1920 (and beyond) in this report combined with the magnetic «poor fit» of 1900 - 1920 would actually cancel each other to cause the measured temps pretty well... Can you see what I mean?

Your quotes here pertain to surface temp, offer no apparent awareness of the physical problems associated with arguing that changes in ocean currents are self - heating the oceans to depth.

Ocean temps vary in ARGO with Net toa flux and in the order of magnitude — and most of this is changes in reflected SW.

Warmer air temperatures with ocean temperatures lagging would result in La Nina's having a relatively larger spread between water and air temps producing a stronger effect even with weak La Nina's.

Ocean temperatures are rising slower than over land, therefore even if tropical land tropospheric temperatures were being set by a moist adiabat over the ocean, it would still have a smaller ratio with respect to the land Ocean temperatures are rising slower than over land, therefore even if tropical land tropospheric temperatures were being set by a moist adiabat over the ocean, it would still have a smaller ratio with respect to the land ocean, it would still have a smaller ratio with respect to the land temp.

As for ocean heat content, Argo hasn't been in the water long enough to show a clear signal, and there have been problems with the data, including a significant correction (you do recall the correction to the UAH satellite record after years of insistence that their data showed the surface temp record trends were completely wrong?).

Not to mention, why do skeptics continue to ignore, dismiss, or simply «argue with» by any means possible, the far more important fact that most of the increased absorbed heat energy is going into warming the oceans, not the atmosphere (thus keeping the ambient air temp rise from registering as high as it otherwise would, and impacting FUTURE climate far more).

These efforts are still band - aids and can't keep pace with the continued deterioration of reefs» ecosystems, as long as the reasons — ocean temps and acidity rising along with greenhouse gasses — aren't addressed aggressively.

If it is from space, it's an albedo measurement and the recovery has to do with a reduction of cloud cover to let more energy in to restore the balance, but if that's true, then the mechanism is not clear because the signal to restore is not evident in the ocean temps, at least globally.

The problem is, that when temperatures then stop rising, city / land temperatures don't return to equilibrium with ocean — if we believe land / city temps.