Sentences with phrase «catastrophic warming of the atmosphere»

But some environmentalists remain skeptical that offsets can reduce greenhouse gases to avoid catastrophic warming of the atmosphere.

Not exact matches

Fast depletion of natural resources, pollution of air, land and water, the global warming and other atmosphere changes have catastrophic affects.

Carozza et al (2011) find that natural global warming occurred in 2 stages: First, global warming of 3 ° to 9 ° C accompanied by a large bolus of organic carbon released to the atmosphere through the burning of terrestrial biomass (Kurtz et al, 2003) over approximately a 50 - year period; second, a catastrophic release of methane hydrate from sediment, followed by the oxidation of a part of this methane gas in the water column and the escape of the remaining CH4 to the atmosphere over a 50 - year period.

The steady rise of Earth's temperature as greenhouse gases accumulate in the atmosphere and trap more and more heat is sending the planet spiraling closer to the point where warming's catastrophic consequences may be all but assured.

--- ignorance about atmospheric chemistry really shows here...... snip --- «Moreover, the CO2 that is supposedly causing «catastrophic» warming represents only 0.00035 of all the gases in the atmosphere (1.25 inches out of a 100 - yard football field), and proposals to control this vital plant nutrient ignore a far more critical greenhouse gas: water vapor.»

At the same time it will help mitigate and solve catastrophic consequences of human - induced global warming and climate change by reducing greenhouse gas emissions into the atmosphere.

Christy, a noted skeptic of catastrophic man - made global warming, said his results reinforce his claim that climate models predict too much warming in the troposphere, the lowest five miles of the atmosphere.

Carozza et al (2011) find that natural global warming occurred in 2 stages: First, global warming of 3 ° to 9 ° C accompanied by a large bolus of organic carbon released to the atmosphere through the burning of terrestrial biomass (Kurtz et al, 2003) over approximately a 50 - year period; second, a catastrophic release of methane hydrate from sediment, followed by the oxidation of a part of this methane gas in the water column and the escape of the remaining CH4 to the atmosphere over a 50 - year period.

I think the appeal in engaging with SebastianH is that he actually believes that CO2 functions like a «blanket» in the atmosphere and thus warms the oceans, melts glaciers at their base, raises sea levels to catastrophic heights, acidifies the oceans, kills off 30,000 species per year, browns the Earth (desertification), etc., and that he is so convinced of the «rightness» of his beliefs that he thinks anyone who disagrees must be insane, stupid, mathematically challenged, a conspiracy theorist, etc..

That list rated carbon - intensive resources or projects that could single - handedly pour enough carbon dioxide into the atmosphere to push the Earth's temperature above the catastrophic warming limit of 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels.

They found that, as humans burn ever more fossil fuels to release ever higher levels of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, to stoke yet further global warming and trigger catastrophic climate change, all 571 cities will experience ever greater heatwaves: that is, three consecutive days and nights at which temperatures are about as high as they have ever been for that city.

What they are practicing is not science, it is propaganda based on an unsupportable catastrophic AGW agenda designed to convince the public that a rise in a tiny trace gas comprising only 0.00038 of the atmosphere will cause runaway global warming and climate catastrophe.

Our climate got shifted onto a path to catastrophic warming because the ways we produce, use, and waste energy emit a massive amount of carbon into the atmosphere every single day.

Those 30 million, million tonnes of accumulated excavation, ore and manufacture can be seen as the physical residue of the colossal exploitation of energy, much of it in the form of fossil fuels that is returned to the atmosphere as greenhouse gas carbon dioxide to trigger global warming and potentially catastrophic climate change.

E.g., research assumes greenhouse gas emissions cause warming without explicitly stating humans are the cause»... carbon sequestration in soil is important for mitigating global climate change» (4a) No position Does not address or mention the cause of global warming (4b) Uncertain Expresses position that human's role on recent global warming is uncertain / undefined «While the extent of human - induced global warming is inconclusive...» (5) Implicit rejection Implies humans have had a minimal impact on global warming without saying so explicitly E.g., proposing a natural mechanism is the main cause of global warming»... anywhere from a major portion to all of the warming of the 20th century could plausibly result from natural causes according to these results» (6) Explicit rejection without quantification Explicitly minimizes or rejects that humans are causing global warming»... the global temperature record provides little support for the catastrophic view of the greenhouse effect» (7) Explicit rejection with quantification Explicitly states that humans are causing less than half of global warming «The human contribution to the CO2 content in the atmosphere and the increase in temperature is negligible in comparison with other sources of carbon dioxide emission»»

CNN: «Atmospheric rivers», airborne corridors of concentrated moisture which carry huge volumes of water, are set to get wider and longer, causing more frequent and catastrophic floods as the atmosphere warms.