Sentences with phrase «cloud cover does»

These samples unambiguously showed that cloud cover does not show any widespread anomalous variations following statistically significant changes in the TSI flux, the CR flux or a proxy for extreme UV activity within a 20 - day lag period.

While reducing cloud cover does indeed let more infrared energy out, it also lets more sunlight in.

It looks as if the curve has been readjusted at some stage, but it is then a bit strange that the curve representing the global lower cloud cover doesn't seem to have been re-scaled: the difference between maximum and minimum is about 3 % in both figures (it's annoying that the vertical axis for the cloud cover are given in different units in Fig. 2 & 3).

Cloud cover does occur, along with blotting out the sun at times with rolling shadows on the environment.

What kind of cloud cover do you get: high / mid / low / deep convective?

«GeoFlynx says: June 8, 2010 at 11:45 am Changes in cloud cover do not offer an explanation for a cooling stratosphere.

Changes in cloud cover do not offer an explanation for a cooling stratosphere.

Variations in clouds cover do not necessary produce changes in global temperature.

«A write - up of my paper by Dr Roy Spencer indicated that I over-stated the increase in insolation due to a reduction in cloud cover I didn't take certain factors into account.»

Not exact matches

And even if all rough correlations could be made smooth by convoluted arguments about cloud covers and the like, the two Genesis accounts themselves, taken as chronologies, do not agree.

It is this weariness with well - doing that finally puts a permanent cloud cover over discipleship.

We're not too keen on the design (white cloud print on one side and a colorful bears on the other), but, hey, it's going to be covered with a sheet anyway, so don't let this put you off if you're looking for a great value mattress for home or the grandparents» house.

These nursing covers may not be spun from unicorn hair by cherubs on a cloud over a rainbow, but they'll do the job you need to be done, and help you look pretty fashionable while you're doing it!

I solved this problem last year by using taste safe ingredients to make my cloud dough and now I don't worry as much when my little one puts a cloud dough covered finger in her mouth.

Renewable energy sources such as solar, wind and wave just compound this unpredictability: changes in local cloud cover, wind speed and the like produce irregular peaks and troughs that do not necessarily correspond with spikes in demand.

«The only thing that they showed that we didn't look at is changes in cloud cover and atmospheric moisture trends,» she said.

Astronomers can't determine the exact makeup of HD 20782's atmosphere yet, but this newest observation does suggest that it might have an atmosphere with Jupiter - like, highly reflective cloud cover.

Does anyone know of a site with graphs of cloud cover and temperature anomalies for Longyearbyen?

«the variation of ionization by galactic cosmic rays over the decadal solar cycle does not entail a response... that would explain observed variations in global cloud cover»

It doesn't quite explode into uninhibited life, even when the anger overflows at the end, although this is partly the effect of its setting and era: the cloud - cover of Britain in the duffel - coated early 1960s.

(A public Cloud will give you the same promises at fault tolerance, but with less control, and as a one - size - fits - all solution that might, or might not, cover your unique business needs — unless you can get your Cloud vendor to sign a meaningful SLA that doesn't give them all kinds of leeway, as most do).

Why Acuant Blog is a Top Computer Security Blog: As more and more of our data is stored in the cloud by ourselves and everyone we do business with, identity theft will become more and more of an issue; this blog covers the latest threats to you and your customers» identities and how you can prevent breaches.

Trading the dark cloud cover candlestick pattern can be very profitable, if done the right way.

The nighttime hike didn't end up happening because we had some pretty intense and scary rainstorms during our stay, but it was still cool to look up at the full moon when the clouds were not covering it.

During October it is no different, the median cloud cover is a clear 3 % and does not vary substantially over the course of the month.

During June the median cloud cover is extremely low at 1 % and does not vary over the course of the month.

There is some light cloud cover starting to blanket us this afternoon but I don't believe there will be any rain today.

Weather wise out there today we did have some cloud cover early this morning but that didn't last too long before the sun was powering.

Weather wise we did have some light cloud cover earlier this morning but now at 12.30 PM it's pretty much just a hot and sunny day outside.

So with the keyboard side of things covered, now it's time to check out how well Kingston can do audio with their HyperX Cloud Revolver.

Cloudy Highland is a dull and very grey stage, with a long winding road and low clouds; Industrial Complex is a fascinating maze of pipes, cranes and scaffolding underneath a brown sky; Snow Mountain is an awesomely large mountain covered in - erm, snow, with a few aqueducts and tunnels - while Ghost Forest is a stage we didn't get to see.

What I wrote was that the historical record does not rule out the possibility that at current temperatures and cloud covers, a future increase in CO2 or surface temperature may increase cloud cover.

My father is somewhat of a climate «sceptic» and insists that the prediction of 0.3 C cooling is based only on solar irradiance and does not take into account increased cloud cover caused by low sun activity (he beleives that we are going to be facing extreme global cooling over the next few decades).

On the possibility of a changing cloud cover «forcing» global warming in recent times (assuming we can just ignore the CO2 physics and current literature on feedbacks, since I don't see a contradiction between an internal radiative forcing and positive feedbacks), one would have to explain a few things, like why the diurnal temperature gradient would decrease with a planet being warmed by decreased albedo... why the stratosphere should cool... why winters should warm faster than summers... essentially the same questions that come with the cosmic ray hypothesis.

For cause and effect: You never know, but I don't think that cloud cover regulates the sun cycle... Globally, the variation of cloud cover during a sun cycle is around 2 %, which can have a substantial influence on global temperatures.

For the early Earth, Goldblatt and Zahnle have done a good job showing that you need a number of implausible changes to clouds (such as 100 % tropical cloud cover, thicker, and higher / colder clouds to make this solution a plausible one).

Note that the difference in the mean is not predictive of the difference in all regions, and while the differences do have noticeable fingerprints in clouds, ice cover etc. the net impact on sensitivity is small (2.6 to 2.7 ºC).

I haven't seen anything that very strongly supports the IRIS idea, but I do concur with one idea buried in the paper: that the parameterization of fractional cloud cover in GCM's is not based on very clear physical principles, and could operate in many different ways — some of which, I think, could make climate sensitivity considerably greater than the midrange model of the current crop.

For example, nearly all recent model intercomparisons show that AOGCMs poorly reproduce precipitation in 30 ° S - 30 ° N, they still diverge for cloud cover evolution at different levels of the vertical column, and I don't clearly understand for my part how we can speculate on long term trends of tropospheric T without a good understanding of these convection - condensation - precipitation process.

Still unanswered was my main question, which was what evidence do we have that warming will lead to reduced cloud cover?

In the same report (cited above) INPE emphasizes, «Because of cloud cover varies from one month to another and also the resolution of the satellite, INPE does not recommend comparing data from different months and years obtained by DETER.»

The cloud effects do need to be re-examined in this problem, particularly in a GCM that could do something with fractional cloud cover.

However, what evidence do we have that the increased precipitation efficiency will lead to less (not more) cloud cover?

What they find is that, even though cloud cover is reduced as the climate warms, it does not generate a strong negative cloud feedback.

And models don't reflect SST / outgoing IR / cloud cover variations over the last decades, even not over the 60N - 60S latitude band (leaving not much area to be checked...).

One thing we do know is that plankton blooms have been linked to increased cloud cover, which leads to cooling.

Finally I attempt a suggestion that perhaps one solution to the problem that the solar impact on climate is underestimated by models might be because EBM and GCM, like GISS, do not contain CO2 and CH4 cycle mechanisms that might be partially effected by the Sun, and other mechanisms are missing or uncertain (water vapor, cloud cover, vegetation, bacteria respiration, UV radiation, cosmic ray effects etc.).

Cloud cover data from ship observations over the North Atlantic, where measurements are denser, did not show any relationship with solar activity over the period 1953 - 1995, though a large discrepancy exists between ISCCP D2 data and surface marine observations.

During the La Niña, does an increase in the strength of the North Atlantic trade winds also reduce cloud cover over the tropical North Atlantic?

And that is the simple case: knowing the change in cloud cover, which is addressed in the featured paper, is even harder, but it is important as well — don't you agree, and if not why not?