Sentences with phrase «detail atmospheric changes»

Geisert's fine etchings detail atmospheric changes and human responses.

Not exact matches

The new study covers the entire U.S. West, from the High Plains states to the Pacific coast, and provides the first detailed look at how groundwater recharge may change as the climate changes, said senior author Thomas Meixner, UA professor and associate department head of hydrology and atmospheric sciences.

By analyzing boron in shells accumulated over more than 2 million years, Hönisch was able to reconstruct in unprecedented detail how atmospheric carbon dioxide levels have changed over time.

Climate change could mean England is in for more such extreme rainfall events because of increasing moisture in the atmosphere and changes in atmospheric weather patterns, a new study detailed online Monday in the journal Nature Climate Change change could mean England is in for more such extreme rainfall events because of increasing moisture in the atmosphere and changes in atmospheric weather patterns, a new study detailed online Monday in the journal Nature Climate Change Change finds.

Cutting Edge Open World Tech: Stunningly detailed forests, imposing mountains, and atmospheric ruins of a bygone civilization meld together in a landscape that is alive with changing weather systems and a full day / night cycle.

Travel through stunningly detailed forests, imposing mountains and the atmospheric ruins of a bygone civilization, all brought together in a world that is alive with changing weather systems and a full day / night cycle.

Graphically the game is good with detailed atmospheric backgrounds and scenery which change throughout the game to represent the tribes.

The nearest I have come to thinking I'm seeing deep space in abstract painting (aside from no - account atmospheric stuff) is in Anne's work from 3 years ago, where the difference between the larger areas contrasted with other incredibly detailed areas, so that the focus of the work seemed to change, to pull the viewer (well, me) in and out, like a kind of sucking in and pulling out, This is my punt, and I'm still unsure about it.

Paleoclimatology itself has lots of unclear questions, but whether all details are understood or not earth responds to changes in atmospheric CO2.

Temperature measurements retrieved from the hundreds of balloon - borne radiosonde instruments that are released each day by the various national weather services provide much more detailed information on the vertical structure of atmospheric temperature changes than is available from satellites.

Detailed analysis of the paleo record shows atmospheric CO2 levels have increased and decreased with no change in planetary temperature.

Unfortunately, there is no detailed instrument record of subsurface changes in Gulf Stream heat transport into the region over the past decades, so it's hard to say — and the atmospheric component?

How atmospheric and ocean circulation responds to various changes in forcing would need to be detailed if someone wanted to «prove» anthropogenic forcing is involved other than a minor increase in the average surface temperature.

Tim Lambert links to this article by Eric Pooley in Slate's The Big Moneye which points out that, for all the disagreement among economists regarding the details of climate change policy, there is substantial consensus on the following main points (i) the cost of action to stabilise atmospheric concentrations of CO2 and other greenhouse gases will be of the order of 1 per cent of GDP (ii) a strong mitigation policy is preferable to business as usual

The ability to hindcast the detailed changes in atmospheric composition over the past decade, particularly the variability of tropospheric O3 and CO, is limited by the availability of measurements and their integration with models and emissions data.

Motivated by findings that major components of so - called cloud «feedbacks» are best understood as rapid responses to CO2 forcing (Gregory and Webb in J Clim 21:58 — 71, 2008), the top of atmosphere (TOA) radiative effects from forcing, and the subsequent responses to global surface temperature changes from all «atmospheric feedbacks» (water vapour, lapse rate, surface albedo, «surface temperature» and cloud) are examined in detail in a General Circulation Model.

As we still don't know how nature put us in ice ages (yes we have the overall picture, but not the details for a model) or get us out again, and what other effects there are from altered atmospheric chemistry we really do not know how the mean of the chaotic process might change in the future.

But now, to make sense of the precise link between greenhouse gases and climate change, researchers must first understand in much greater detail how the oceans and the land absorb atmospheric carbon, and in what quantities.

On an annual basis, as detailed in Paul Vaughans post today, there is a big exchange of angular momentum betwen the Earth's crust and the atmosphere causing changes in atmospheric angular momentum and length of day.

Models used in the most recent Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report can «see» in finer detail and are better at representing atmospheric pollutants and their interaction with clouds compared to their predecessors, for example.

I haven't yet studied the article in detail but my thoughts are that the relative uncertainties are high, as expected since the atmospheric CO2 level at a given time is the response of the complex carbon cycle to the net anthro increase (6 Gt from fossil + est 2 Gt from land use change), small but not negligible compared to the gross carbon cycle fluxes (90 Gt to / from ocean, 120 Gt to / from biosphere).