Sentences with phrase «about global temperature trends»

Scientists have high confidence about global temperature trends over recent decades because those observations are based on a massive amount of data.

Titley passed on the opportunity — which Mr. Takano offered up twice — and instead talked about global temperature trends and the probability of getting heads if you flip a coin 36 times.

In our «Global temperature changes of the last millennium» paper, we reviewed these estimates, discussed the assumptions and approximations they made, and attempted to assess what they tell us about the global temperature trends of the last millennium.

«If the global numbers come out as CRU has presented over the years, then it will strike a blow to skepticism about global temperature trend records produced by CRU and restore a good deal of credibility to this area of climate science.»

In between our series about the global temperature trend and our (upcoming) series about climate & biodiversity, let's do a short series about sea level rise, shall we?

Not exact matches

They estimate that, across about 60 % of the global vegetated area, greening has buffered warming by about 14 %; for the remaining areas, which mostly include boreal zones, LAI trends have amplified the raise in air temperatures, leading to an additional warming of about 10 %.

(Bottom) Patterns of linear global temperature trends from 1979 to 2005 estimated at the surface (left), and for the troposphere (right) from the surface to about 10 km altitude, from satellite records.

For example, the borehole data show warming since about 1500 AD which clearly was not anthropogenic, and in the latest decade, since the very warm 1998, the temperature trend is downward even in the Hadley Center compilations; the most ardent supporters of anthropogenic global warming.

A new study from The Auk: Ornithological Advances uses European House Sparrows, which have spread into a variety of climates in Australia and New Zealand since their introduction in the mid-19th century, to show that this trend in birds might actually be due to the effects of high temperatures during development — raising new alarms about how populations might be affected by global warming.

If mean global temperatures trending significantly upward over the last 100 years isn't worrying enough for you, how about that giant piece of Antarctica that is about to crack off and sink into the ocean... I don't know how the existence of global warming is still a debate!

Now if this cycle is repeating then everyone can be very relaxed about the long term temperature trend even if global temperatures dip definitively.

http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/current.area.jpg How about we start discussing 20th century U.S. temperature trends using global datasets?

I should add too that I was not allowed at work to study or talk about trends in frequency and magnitude of floods or trends in temperatures and precipitation, due to the «highly political and controversial subject of global warming».

Failing that: Blair, if you look carefully, you'll see the paper is about global surface temperature trends, not about the life histories of Robert Way and Kevin Cowtan.

Extending the data out to last year — 2006 — we see the temperature trend is still below Scenario C and about 0.2 C below Scenario B. I am asserting that the 1998 models over-estimate the impact on global temperature.

There are however statistical reasons why 1975 is a break point — breaking the trend there provides a substantially better fit over the whole record (not true for Aug 1997), and if you look at when anthropogenic effects came out of the «noise» of global temperatures, it is about the same time (fig 9.5 WG1 AR4).

Neil confronted them with the claim that the Antarctic ice is getting thicker, and asked them to explain how this was compatible with global warming; he also talked about mean temperatures and the trend in the same since 1998 (see the programme from about 7 minutes in, and also from about 9m 15s in).

In these, despite the various minor ups and downs, the general trend is down until about 1850 CE when anthropogenic effects really started lifting the temperature, following the excess global warming (so - called greenhouse) gases.

««Barring a major volcanic eruption, most 15 - year global mean surface temperature trends in the near - term future will be larger than during 1998 - 2012...» --- That sounds about right.

«Global surface temperature trends, based on land and marine data, show warming of about 0.8 deg C over the last 100 years.

In my earlier posting, I tried to make the distinction that global climate change (all that is changing in the climate system) can be separated into: (1) the global warming component that is driven primarily by the increase in greenhouse gases, and (2) the natural (externally unforced) variability of the climate system consisting of temperature fluctuations about an equilibrium reference point, which therefore do not contribute to the long - term trend.

(3) Any ten - year period or more with no increasing trend in global average temperature is reason for worry about state of understandings

«To summarize - Using the 60 and 1000 year quasi repetitive patterns in conjunction with the solar data leads straightforwardly to the following reasonable predictions for Global SSTs 1 Continued modest cooling until a more significant temperature drop at about 2016 - 17 2 Possible unusual cold snap 2021 - 22 3 Built in cooling trend until at least 2024 4 Temperature Hadsst3 moving average anomaly 2035 — 0.15 5Temperature Hadsst3 moving average anomaly 2100 — 0.5 6 General Conclusion — by 2100 all the 20th century temperature rise will have been reversed, 7 By 2650 earth could possibly be back to the depths of the litttemperature drop at about 2016 - 17 2 Possible unusual cold snap 2021 - 22 3 Built in cooling trend until at least 2024 4 Temperature Hadsst3 moving average anomaly 2035 — 0.15 5Temperature Hadsst3 moving average anomaly 2100 — 0.5 6 General Conclusion — by 2100 all the 20th century temperature rise will have been reversed, 7 By 2650 earth could possibly be back to the depths of the littTemperature Hadsst3 moving average anomaly 2035 — 0.15 5Temperature Hadsst3 moving average anomaly 2100 — 0.5 6 General Conclusion — by 2100 all the 20th century temperature rise will have been reversed, 7 By 2650 earth could possibly be back to the depths of the littTemperature Hadsst3 moving average anomaly 2100 — 0.5 6 General Conclusion — by 2100 all the 20th century temperature rise will have been reversed, 7 By 2650 earth could possibly be back to the depths of the litttemperature rise will have been reversed, 7 By 2650 earth could possibly be back to the depths of the little ice age.

The main basis for the claim that there has been «unusual» global warming since the late 19th century is that the global temperature estimates constructed from weather station records suggest a warming trend of about 0.8 - 1.0 °C since about 1880.

In addition, the longest station records are mostly confined to Europe (and North America), so they don't tell us about «global» temperature trends.

Present 12 - month running - mean global temperature jumps about as far above the linear trend line (Fig. 2b in the paper) as it did during the 1997 - 98 El Nino.

From UAH and Dr. John Christy Global temperatures drop; November still warm Global climate trend since Nov. 16, 1978: +0.13 C per decade November temperatures (preliminary) Global composite temp.: +0.36 C (about 0.65 degrees Fahrenheit) above 30 - year average for November.

To put this in context, the «unusual global warming» implied by the global temperature trends in Figure 1 has been about 0.8 °C / century.

The most recent 13 complete calendar years, from 2002 through 2014, have averaged 0.18 °C (about 0.33 °F) warmer than the 30 - year baseline average, while the global temperature trend during that span was a warming trend at the rate of +0.05 °C per decade — which is also statistically insignificant.

Marcott paper Basically the folks at RC have probably made poor ol Marcott respond that the uptick did not matter anyway its not important, significant, robust etc don't rely on it just forget about it please etc but unfortunately for them as Ross MC on Realclimate reply, at CA says «But that is precisely what they do in Figure 3 of their paper, and it is the basis of their claim that «Global temperature, therefore, has risen from near the coldest to the warmest levels of the Holocene within the past century, reversing the long - term cooling trend that began ~ 5000 yr B.P.» Without the uptick in their proxy reconstruction this kind of statement could never have been made.

ocean temperatures, widespread melting of snow and ice, and rising global average sea level,» are three disjoint sources of confirmation that give us reliable enough trend information to establish consilience about what we may say after 2005 on HadCRUT4.

The observed trend of 0.07 deg C per decade for the latest 15 year period is BELOW IPCC's «suggested global average temperature increases between about 0.15 °C and 0.3 °C per decade».

Yet the linear trend on the Hadley / CRU monthly global temperature anomalies for the 18 years 1995 - 2012 shows no statistically - significant warming, even though the partial pressure of CO2 rose by about a tenth in that time.

«the point is that you can not make any statement about trends based on only 14 years of global temperature data.»

However, despite this, the team reckon to have perhaps isolated a «global warming» signal in the accelerated run off of the Greenland Ice Mass — but only just, because the runoff at the edges is balanced by increasing central mass — again, they focus upon recent trends — a net loss of about 22 cubic kilometres in total ice mass per year which they regard as statistically not significant — to find the «signal», and a contradiction to their ealier context of air temperature cycles.

DCC: the point is that you can not make any statement about trends based on only 14 years of global temperature data.

We emerged from the last ice age about 10 000 years ago, and the global temperature trend has been downward for the last 8000 years.

I'm very convinced that the physical process of global warming is continuing, which appears as a statistically significant increase of the global surface and tropospheric temperature anomaly over a time scale of about 20 years and longer and also as trends in other climate variables (e.g., global ocean heat content increase, Arctic and Antarctic ice decrease, mountain glacier decrease on average and others), and I don't see any scientific evidence according to which this trend has been broken, recently.

Again like global temperatures, if we want to detect any long term trend we need to look at what is happening over spans of time of about a decade.

To point out just a couple of things: — oceans warming slower (or cooling slower) than lands on long - time trends is absolutely normal, because water is more difficult both to warm or to cool (I mean, we require both a bigger heat flow and more time); at the contrary, I see as a non-sense theory (made by some serrist, but don't know who) that oceans are storing up heat, and that suddenly they will release such heat as a positive feedback: or the water warms than no heat can be considered ad «stored» (we have no phase change inside oceans, so no latent heat) or oceans begin to release heat but in the same time they have to cool (because they are losing heat); so, I don't feel strange that in last years land temperatures for some series (NCDC and GISS) can be heating up while oceans are slightly cooling, but I feel strange that they are heating up so much to reverse global trend from slightly negative / stable to slightly positive; but, in the end, all this is not an evidence that lands» warming is led by UHI (but, this effect, I would not exclude it from having a small part in temperature trends for some regional area, but just small); both because, as writtend, it is normal to have waters warming slower than lands, and because lands» temperatures are often measured in a not so precise way (despite they continue to give us a global uncertainity in TT values which is barely the instrumental's one)-- but, to point out, HadCRU and MSU of last years (I mean always 2002 - 2006) follow much better waters» temperatures trend; — metropolis and larger cities temperature trends actually show an increase in UHI effect, but I think the sites are few, and the covered area is very small worldwide, so the global effect is very poor (but it still can be sensible for regional effects); but I would not run out a small warming trend for airport measurements due mainly to three things: increasing jet planes traffic, enlarging airports (then more buildings and more asphalt — if you follow motor sports, or simply live in a town / city, you will know how easy they get very warmer than air during day, and how much it can slow night - time cooling) and overall having airports nearer to cities (if not becoming an area inside the city after some decade of hurban growth, e.g. Milan - Linate); — I found no point about UHI in towns and villages; you will tell me they are not large cities; but, in comparison with 20-40-60 years ago when they were «countryside», many small towns and villages have become part of larger hurban areas (at least in Europe and Asia) so examining just larger cities would not be enough in my opinion to get a full view of UHI effect (still remembering that it has a small global effect: we can say many matters are due to UHI instead of GW, maybe even that a small part of measured GW is due to UHI, and that GW measurements are not so precise to make us able to make good analisyses and predictions, but not that GW is due to UHI).

«Causes of differences in model and satellite tropospheric warming rates» «Comparing tropospheric warming in climate models and satellite data» «Robust comparison of climate models with observations using blended land air and ocean sea surface temperatures» «Coverage bias in the HadCRUT4 temperature series and its impact on recent temperature trends» «Reconciling warming trends» «Natural variability, radiative forcing and climate response in the recent hiatus reconciled» «Reconciling controversies about the «global warming hiatus»»

Following a warming trend early in the 20th century and mid-century cooling, surface air temperatures in the Arctic have shown a strong increase over the last few decades, warming at about twice the global average.

T&S go on about breaks in the global mean temperature trend.

At the end of the day, the discussion about a single calendar year obscures the more important long - term trend of warming air temperatures, warming and acidifying oceans along with melting ice sheets, all of which are hallmarks of manmade global warming.

Bob Tisdale says, «They increased the trend of the global sea surface temperature anomalies from 0.088 degrees Celsius per decade to 0.125 degrees Celsius per decade or about 42 %.

However, little has been said in this discussion about observed and simulated trends in global temperature extremes.

The discrepancy between recent observed and simulated trends in global mean surface temperature has provoked a debate about possible causes and implications for future climate change projections.

Btw, one could similarly use Bayesian analyses to determine, given BEST and HADSST, what is the likelihood of various global trends; indeed, one needs only know BEST and the relative size of the part of the globe BEST covers, to give definitive answers about global temperatures using Bayes (improved considerably if one has meaningful information about land - sea temperature relationships).

, according to NASA scientists: «Coincidence, conspired to dampen warming trends» — Excuse number 10 for global warming «pause» or «standstill» — NASA's Gavin Schmidt & colleagues finds «that a combination of factors, by coincidence, conspired to dampen warming trends in the real world after about 1992» — Latest excuse for global temperature standstill mocked by skeptics: «Apparently, if you go back and rework all the forcings, taking into account new data estimates (add half a bottle of post-hoc figures) and «reanalyses» of old data (add a tablespoon of computer simulation) you can bridge the gap and explain away the pause.»

If you're talking about a change in the rate, trend of warming, or even just say that «warming has slowed» in the context of the general discussion about global temperature records, you are implying something about a change in trend.