Sentences with phrase «atmospheric greenhouse effect»
A short while ago I published an article attempting to explain why the so called atmospheric greenhouse effect was insignificant as a planetary heat store in comparison to the oceans.
newclimatemodel.com
The most straightforward explanation would be a massive atmospheric greenhouse effect, from either carbon dioxide or methane, or both.
Originally denoted «climate change skeptics» or «anthropogenic (human - induced) global warming skeptics», the term referred to those who are as yet unconvinced by evidence that emissions of man - made CO2 significantly enhance the natural atmospheric greenhouse effect.
However, two German researchers are debunking the claim using a simple energy balance analysis to explain how the Earth's water cycle responds differently to heating by sunlight than it does to warming due to a stronger atmospheric greenhouse effect.
This statistically non-significant trend indicates that the enhancing global atmospheric greenhouse effect is slowed down.
[A] remarkably decreasing Gaa trend (− 0.27 W m − 2 yr − 1) exists over the central tropical Pacific, indicating a weakened atmospheric greenhouse effect in this area, which largely offsets the warming effect in the aforementioned surrounding regions.
The oceanic Gaa [atmospheric greenhouse effect] exhibits a notable increasing trend with a rate of 0.21 W m − 2 yr − 1 in 1979 — 1991, whereas its rate of change (− 0.04 W m − 2 yr − 1) during 1992 — 2014 is not statistically significant.
Climate Change Deniers, also known as Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) Deniers, refers to individuals or groups who disagree with the global scientific consensus that emissions of man - made CO2 significantly enhance the natural atmospheric greenhouse effect.
Inamdar, A.K., and V. Ramanathan, 1998: Tropical and global scale interactions among water vapour, atmospheric greenhouse effect, and surface temperature.
Where confusion arises, it is usually the glasshouse that is improperly described, rather than the atmospheric greenhouse effect.
If you can make a coherent and mathematically valid argument for your novel hypothesis (no atmospheric greenhouse effect), I can understand it.
The atmospheric Greenhouse Effect merely sets a theoretical background atmospheric temperature level that is continually overridden as a result of the size of the constant interlinked changes in both the solar and oceanic heat inputs.
The increased warmth allows the atmosphere to hold more water vapour so that total atmospheric density increases and the atmospheric greenhouse effect strengthens.
The atmospheric greenhouse effect is an irrelevance in the face of The Hot Water Bottle Effect.
When the atmosphere cools again water vapour content declines and the atmospheric greenhouse effect weakens.
Despite any atmospheric greenhouse effect land gets cold very quickly at night and in winter.
«The atmospheric greenhouse effect is a flea on the back of an oceanic elephant and the influence of CO2 but a microbe on the back of the flea and the influence of anthropogenic CO2 but a molecule on the back of the microbe.»
June 1, 1983 Mobil Oil Corporation status report published in the company's environmental affairs and toxicology department discusses the atmospheric greenhouse effect, and asks the question, «is burning fossil fuels affecting world climate?»
Every sane person should be perfectly happy and ecstatic to see if we still need an atmospheric greenhouse effect when treating the Earth dynamically with real inputs.
Even so, Mann said, certain predictions are based on physics and chemistry that are so fundamental, such as the atmospheric greenhouse effect, that the resulting predictions — that surface temperatures should warm, ice should melt and sea level should rise — are robust no matter the assumptions.
the planet's mean surface temperature in the absence of an atmosphere or an atmospheric greenhouse effect.
And, Gerlich and Tscheuschner seem to be the only ones who were so hopelessly confused by the different statements in the literature regarding the atmospheric greenhouse effect that they came to the ridiculous conclusion that it violates the Second Law of Thermodynamics.