Sentences with phrase «claims about global temperatures»

Yet these proxies are being used to make claims about global temperatures (when coverage within the northern hemisphere is rather poor and coverage outside the northern hemisphere is almost nonexistent) with uncertainties of less than one degree celcius..

In light of some of his other claims about global temperatures and Arctic sea ice, however, I thought I'd do some of my own snooping.

With this package, students can impress their friends (and annoy their AGW skeptic parents) by shooting down Anthony Watts» favorite claims about the global temperature record with just a series of mouse - clicks.

Not exact matches

The public, press and policy makers have been repeatedly told that three claims have widespread scientific support: Global temperature has risen about a degree since the late 19th century; levels of CO2 in the atmosphere have increased by about 30 % over the same period; and CO2 should contribute to future warming.

The public, press and policy makers have been repeatedly told that three claims have widespread scientific support: Global temperature has risen about a degree since the late 19th century; levels of CO2 [carbon dioxide] in the atmosphere have increased by about 30 percent over the same period; and CO2 should contribute to future warming.

There has been a bit of excitement and confusion this week about a new paper in Nature Geoscience, claiming that we can still limit global warming to below 1.5 °C above preindustrial temperatures, whilst emitting another ~ 800 Gigatons of carbon dioxide.

Milloy further claims that the observed global warming of 0.6 - 0.8 C over the 20th Century is «well within the natural variation in average global temperature, which in the case of the Arctic, for example, is a range of about 3 degrees Centigrade».

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).

It's clear that Smith doesn't understand, willfully or otherwise, even the most basic ideas about global warming; he still claims global temperatures haven't risen since 1998, for example, sticking to a «pause» in warming that we know, and have known for some time, doesn't exist.

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.

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.

Since IPCC's first report in 1990, assessed projections have suggested global average temperature increases [at least, because of IPCC's accelerated warming claim] between about 0.15 °C and 0.3 °C per decade for 1995 to 2010.

If someone of the ones who state the assertion about the «stopped» global warming, is able to demonstrate that the Null hypothesis above can be successfully rejected, using proper statistical analysis, I will concede that they indeed have statistical evidence at hand, which indicates something has changed significantly in the global temperature record since 1997 or whatever point is claimed to be the one at which global warming allegedly «stopped».

Jeff Masters, a meteorologist with a bent to blaming every weather event on global warming, chose to make some extreme claims about hot ocean temperatures that are... er... well, bizarre for someone with a science background.

I don't believe climate scientists know any where near as much as they think they do about «global average temperature,» let alone the tenths of a degree change per year they claim to detect.

While these earlier periods are outside the claims of the IPCC statement, the point is valid that we need to know the character of natural variability to make claims about the extent of human influence on global temperatures.

Just as any sort - term drop in temperatures becomes a claim that global warming has «stopped», any study that mentions a decrease in climate sensitivity is grabbed as if it is evidence that everything about climate sensitivity is decreasing.

Exactly, but using good numbers not a «hotchpotch assembly» for which it is claimed to be global temperature (there is no such thing, there is global energy content, but that is totally different story) So calculate correlation CET - GT from 1880 using 5 year bin averaging http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net//CETGNH.htm P.S. your statement on natural variability on decadal scale is grossly misleading, you got about 130 years of good records so you need to look at multi-decadal picture.

Besides, warmists can perfectly debunk that claim about no increase in the nonsensical «global temperature» fake skeptics like so much.

I get very confused about the competing claims for global temperatures in recent years.

been repeatedly told that three claims have widespread scientific support: Global temperature has risen about a degree since the late 19th century; levels of CO2 in

The public, press and policy makers have been repeatedly told that three claims have widespread scientific support: Global temperature has risen about a degree since the late 19th century; levels of CO2 in the atmosphere have increased by about 30 % over the same period; and CO2 should contribute to future warming.

The public, press and policy makers have been repeatedly told that three claims have widespread scientific support: Global temperature has risen about a degree since the late 19th century; levels of CO2 [carbon dioxide] in the atmosphere have increased by about 30 percent over the same period; and CO2 should contribute to future warming.

However, Senate Republicans released a report ahead of the hearing that rejected many of the claims made by scientists, politicians and activists about rising global temperatures.

f anybody is still in any doubt that it is UNSCIENTIFIC to make claims about hottest years, without taking into account error bars, I would advise what the World Meteorological Organisation had to say on the issue in their report on global temperatures for 2006: «All temperature values have uncertainties, which arise mainly from gaps in data coverage.

If anybody is still in any doubt that it is UNSCIENTIFIC to make claims about hottest years, without taking into account error bars, I would advise what the World Meteorological Organisation had to say on the issue in their report on global temperatures for 2006: «All temperature values have uncertainties, which arise mainly from gaps in data coverage.

He felt confident enough to make an accusation of dishonesty about our claim of a global surface temperature pause / hiatus.

Climatologist Dr. Ross McKitrick, one of the authors and an Associate Professor at the University of Guelph, believes that the United Nations agency promoting the global temperature graph has made «false claims about the quality of its data.»

In particular, it claims that «Since the 1940's the mean global temperature has dropped about 2.7 degrees F» (my emphasis).

And as Judith Curry points out about the current climate, there are many problems with the claim that «more than half of the observed increase in global average surface temperature from 1951 to 2010 was caused by the anthropogenic increase in greenhouse gas concentrations and other anthropogenic forcings together» — far from speaking for itself, the statement needs unpacking and its premises interrogating.

The authors make no specific claim about the cause of the noted spring temperature increase, other than to point to El Nino and global warming.

We have record temperatures, have had for 12 months now, and the very folks who claimed we were about to enter a period of global cooling still claim there's nothing going on.