climate impacts on
decadal scale less important than population, land use and degradation (and how do you separate the four????); regions that adapt to current weather extremes and population will be better able to deal with any additional stresses from climate changes (apparently current stresses have nothing to do with climate)»
Not exact matches
So apparently you're suggesting that
decadal -
scale precipitation patterns (more,
less rainfall) and temperature changes are better explained by atmospheric CO2 concentrations.
Ice - sheet responses to
decadal -
scale ocean forcing appear to be
less important, possibly indicating that the future response of the Antarctic Ice Sheet will be governed more by long - term anthropogenic warming combined with multi-centennial natural variability than by annual or
decadal climate oscillations.»
When used to generate electricity, the shale - gas footprint is still significantly greater than that of coal at
decadal time
scales but is
less at the century
scale.
This
scaling assumed that brighter Sun ‐ like stars (of similar age and chemical abundance to the Sun) show a
decadal ‐
scale activity cycle and are analogous to the present ‐ day Sun, whereas the
less bright stars were found to be noncyclic and are analogous to the Sun during its Maunder Minimum state.
The Arctic Oscillation was fairly stable until about 1970, but then varied on more or
less decadal time
scales, with signs of an underlying upward trend, until the late 1990s, when it again stabilized.