Sentences with phrase «by warm ocean currents»

They underwent rapid collapse through calving of vast armadas of icebergs and undercutting of the ice margin by warm ocean currents.»

Hamish Pritchard prepares us, «In most places in Antarctica, we can't explain the ice - shelf thinning through melting of snow at the surface, so it has to be driven by warm ocean currents melting them from below.

They underwent rapid collapse through calving of vast armadas of icebergs and undercutting of the ice margin by warm ocean currents.»

Not exact matches

Starting from the same kernel of scientific truth as did The Day After Tomorrow — that global warming could disrupt ocean currents in the North Atlantic — a study commissioned by the Pentagon, of all organizations, concluded that the «risk of abrupt climate change... should be elevated beyond a scientific debate to a U.S. national security concern.»

Changes in ocean currents, Kennett says, triggered the methane bursts by channeling warmer water over continental slopes, as at Storegga.

Extreme weather does not prove the existence of global warming, but climate change is likely to exaggerate it — by messing with ocean currents, providing extra heat to forming tornadoes, bolstering heat waves, lengthening droughts and causing more precipitation and flooding.

«Our research indicates that as global warming continues, parts of East Antarctica will also be affected by these wind - induced changes in ocean currents and temperatures,» Dr Jourdain said.

The warm waters give up their heat in the bitterly cold regions monitored by OSNAP, become denser, and sink, forming ocean - bottom currents that return southward, hugging the perimeter of the ocean basins.

One of the most outstanding and diverse coral reefs in the world is found in the Ryukyu Archipelago, a group of subtropical islands and islets belonging to Japan and blessed by the warm Kuroshio ocean current.

So the report notes that the current «pause» in new global average temperature records since 1998 — a year that saw the second strongest El Nino on record and shattered warming records — does not reflect the long - term trend and may be explained by the oceans absorbing the majority of the extra heat trapped by greenhouse gases as well as the cooling contributions of volcanic eruptions.

Given the strength of the Hurst coefficients — something we all agree on — is it not possible that a large portion of the current warming trend is a product of internal climate variability, as mediated by complex dynamics of ocean circulation?

Gray believes that the increased atmospheric heat — which he calls a «small warming» — is ``... likely a result of the natural alterations in global ocean currents which are driven by ocean salinity variations.»

This small warming is likely a result of the natural alterations in global ocean currents which are driven by ocean salinity variations.

A group of researchers find a new reason for the current hiatus of global warming: the Atlantic Ocean could be keeping things cooler by drawing heat into its deepest fathoms.

A circular room studded with windows eight metres (26 feet) beneath the ocean's surface reveals up to 300 species of colourful coral, fish and other marine life, fed by an unusually warm current.

Located on the eastern side of Mauritius, an island glimmering in the warm currents of the Indian Ocean, Blue Bay is protected by a vast coral reef that protects the beach from larger wave breaks, allowing for calm, safe swimming.

Real scientists (as opposed to climate modellers) have long maintained that the decline in Arctic ice is caused not by warmer air — in the past year or two Arctic air temperatures have actually been falling — but by shifts in major ocean currents, pushing warmer water up into the Arctic Circle.

By analogy, a warmer world wouldn't be rainier (or cloudier); it's an imperfect analogy, because rain isn't absolutely correlated with cloudiness, and lateral transport of energy by ocean, air, and latent heat currents in and out of the E & W Pacific Ocean areas won't scale to global warmiBy analogy, a warmer world wouldn't be rainier (or cloudier); it's an imperfect analogy, because rain isn't absolutely correlated with cloudiness, and lateral transport of energy by ocean, air, and latent heat currents in and out of the E & W Pacific Ocean areas won't scale to global warmiby ocean, air, and latent heat currents in and out of the E & W Pacific Ocean areas won't scale to global waocean, air, and latent heat currents in and out of the E & W Pacific Ocean areas won't scale to global waOcean areas won't scale to global warming

The current Landsea / Trenberth / Emanuel discussion has been parsed by many to mean that Landsea claims that the number of hurricanes is constant, and Trenberth is claiming that their intensity should increase as global warming heats the ocean surface.

Gavin disputes that the main driver of the sea ice retreat is the albedo flip, but we are seeing not only polar amplification of global warming but positive feedback, which would not be explained simply by radiative forces and ocean currents.

A lot of reseach energy is being devoted to the study of Methane Clathrates — a huge source of greenhouse gases which could be released from the ocean if the thermocline (the buoyant stable layer of warm water which overlies the near - freezing deep ocean) dropped in depth considerably (due to GHG warming), or especially if the deep ocean waters were warmed by very, very extreme changes from the current climate, such that deep water temperatures no longer hovered within 4C of freezing, but warmed to something like 18C.

Excerpt: Livermore CA (SPX) Nov 01, 2005 If humans continue to use fossil fuels in a business as usual manner for the next several centuries, the polar ice caps will be depleted, ocean sea levels will rise by seven meters and median air temperatures will soar 14.5 degrees warmer than current day.

2) Anthropogenic global warming will not affect the Arctic (or any other region) solely by increasing local temperatures, but also by its complex effects on climate as a whole, which includes affects on patterns of wind and ocean currents.

The current energy imbalance at the surface (as demonstrated by the increasing heat content of the oceans) implies there is at least a further 0.5 deg C surface warming in the «pipeline».

As the area / volume ratio for the NH parts of the oceans is practically the same as for the SH, the surface heating (W / m2) must be larger in the NH parts, within the constraints of heat exchange via ocean and air currents (and partly by the difference in warming area in the tropics vs. the cooling areas in the higher latitudes)...

(In real life I understand that mixing is the main agent of deeper warming in the ocean due to winds, currents, etc.) Only the top skin of water heats up and therefore lower warming must be by diffusion, or are convection cells within the water inevitable?

Even if there is equal warming in the tropics, but the heat is not dissipated to the poles fast enough by the ocean currents, the area of high SSTs will increase and more heat will dissipated by other means like TC's.

But as cogently interpreted by the physicist and climate expert Dr. Joseph Romm of the liberal Center for American Progress, «Latif has NOT predicted a cooling trend — or a «decades - long deep freeze» — but rather a short - time span where human - caused warming might be partly offset by ocean cycles, staying at current record levels, but then followed by «accelerated» warming where you catch up to the long - term human - caused trend.

Surface temperature is an imperfect gauge of whether the earth has been warmed by an imbalance between incoming radiation from the sun, and outgoing radiation, because of the role of ocean currents in the distribution of heat between deeper and surface waters.

bozzza - The differences in the Arctic are perhaps 1/4 the ocean thermal mass as global ocean averages, small overall size (the smallest ocean), being almost surrounded by land (which warms faster), more limited liquid interchanges due to bottlenecking than the Antarctic, and very importantly considerable susceptibility to positive albedo feedbacks; as less summer ice is present given current trends, solar energy absorbed by the Arctic ocean goes up very rapidly.

SLR by 2100 is more likely to come from ice mass loss from West Antarctica (WAIS) where warm ocean currents are already melting ice at glacier mouths and attacking areas of the WAIS resting on the seabed.

We have had lengthy heating phase caused by a spurt of insolation, now we have had a big El Nino, a subsequent shift to La Nina and the resulting warm currents moving up the the Western Pacific, causing warming polar oceans and changes in atmospheric water vapor content.

For example, atmospheric carbon dioxide grew by approximately 30 % during the transition from the most recent cold glacial period, about 20,000 years ago, to the current warm interglacial period; the corresponding rate of decrease in surface ocean pH, driven by geological processes, was approximately 50 times slower than the current rate driven largely by fossil fuel burning.

Adapted for Australian oceans, the model simulates the effect of climate in the 2060s on temperature and currents in the warm pool, a tuna habitat defined by warmer surface water.

If fresh submarine groundwater discharge approaches just 7 % of the total SGD, it would not only balance current groundwater recharge, but would steadily raise sea level by an additional 2 mm / year, even if there was no ocean warming and no melting glaciers.

They describe abnormally warm or cool sea surface temperatures in the South Pacific that are caused by changing ocean currents.

The explanation of the that «incongruous» sea ice decline is very simple: Arctic warming is not caused by an imaginary AGW but by warm Gulf Stream water carried into the Arctic Ocean by North Atlantic currents.

The Norwegians also noted very little ice around Svalbard in the early 1920's so who is to say that this recent decline isn't just part of a longer 80 - 100 year cycle, probably led by changes to ocean currents (which would explain why the Arctic has warmed, unlike the Antarctic continent).

We should be more worried about global warming upsetting the ocean currents by overheating the ocean, which is now happening at an alarming rate.

One of the rationales given by Chen & Tung for dismissing the role of the IPO in deep ocean warming is the expectation that the Pacific Ocean basin should have warmed more during the current (2000 - to present) IPO negative pocean warming is the expectation that the Pacific Ocean basin should have warmed more during the current (2000 - to present) IPO negative pOcean basin should have warmed more during the current (2000 - to present) IPO negative phase.

For example, because the mass balance argument says nothing about absolute numbers or attribution it may be that we are also — for example — destroying carbon - fixing plankton, reducing the breaking of waves and hence mechanical mixing with the upper ocean, releasing methane in the tundra which was previously held by acid rain and which can now be converted to CO2, or it may be we are just seeing a deep current, a tiny bit warmer than usual because of the MWP, heating deep ocean clathrate so that methanophage bacteria can devour it and give off CO2.

The present state of the Arctic is not caused by any global warming but is the consequence of North Atlantic currents carrying warm Gulf Stream water into the Arctic Ocean.

A single paper that demonstrated global warming was actually driven by the sun or ocean currents would render all of Cook's thousands of abstracts redundant.

Conversely, during low solar activity during the Little Ice Age, transport of warm water was reduced by 10 % and Arctic sea ice increased.17 Although it is not a situation I would ever hope for, if history repeats itself, then natural climate dynamics of the past suggest, the current drop in the sun's output will produce a similar cooler climate, and it will likely be detected first as a slow down in the poleward transport of ocean heat.22 Should we prepare for this possibility?

Parts of North America and Europe may cool naturally over the next decade, as shifting ocean currents temporarily blunt the global - warming effect caused by mankind, Germany's Leibniz Institute of Marine Sciences said.

Sediment cores the team collected by drilling in front of the current Cosgrove Ice Shelf indicate that relatively warm ocean waters dissolved the vast ice shelf and even some of the glacier behind it about 2000 years ago, they recently reported.

The cause of this emerging outbreak of methane, as explained by AMEG, is a horrendous cycle that started 20 - 30 years ago when Atlantic and Pacific Ocean currents, warmed by greenhouse gases, flowed into the Arctic Ocean.

Some of the warm water would be subducted by Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation / Thermohaline Circulation, some would be carried by ocean currents into the Arctic Ocean where it would melt sea ice, and the remainder would be spun southward by the North Atlantic gyre toward the tropics so it could be warmed more by the effects of the slower - than - normal trade wocean currents into the Arctic Ocean where it would melt sea ice, and the remainder would be spun southward by the North Atlantic gyre toward the tropics so it could be warmed more by the effects of the slower - than - normal trade wOcean where it would melt sea ice, and the remainder would be spun southward by the North Atlantic gyre toward the tropics so it could be warmed more by the effects of the slower - than - normal trade winds.

A new study on ice loss in Antarctica by the British Antarctic Survey confirms what we already know about the effects of global warming but it differentiates between the effects of ocean currents, their cause and the air temperature effects at the ice surface.

Since the East Indian and West Pacific Oceans are not isolated by landmass, ocean currents spread this cumulative warming into the adjoining ocean basins.