Sentences with phrase «evidence shows a warming»

That's because newly described fossil evidence shows the warm waters of the time were home to a toothy apex predator that chomped its prey like a modern shark.

Evidence shows no warming over 16 to 18 years, steeply rising CO2.

Though about 97 percent of working scientists agree that the evidence shows a warming trend caused by humans, public understanding of climate change falls along political lines.

Not exact matches

Evidence from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) shows that global sea levels in the last two decades are rising dramatically as surface temperatures warm oceans and...

The paleontologistS tell us that the earth was much warmer hundreds of millions of years ago shown by evidence of the antarctic being forested.

Hacked e-mails from the Climate Research Unit (CRU) at England's University of East Anglia (UEA) showed that CRU researchers were defending the thesis that humans are causing global warming by suppressing contrary evidence... Continue Reading

Evidence for these rapid warming events, on the order of 10 degrees Celsius in just 30 or so years, has shown up in the Greenland ice core, said Kim Cobb, the paper's second author.

Changes in three important quantities — global temperature, sea level and snow cover in the Northern Hemisphere — all show evidence of warming, although the details vary.

But evidence shows they may be connected in another way — the physical footprint of oil and gas development on the landscape may not only contribute to global warming, it may also affect an ecosystem's ability to withstand it.

The study also provides new evidence for just how sensitive glaciers are to temperature, showing that they responded to past abrupt cooling and warming periods, some of which might have lasted only decades.

For example, if a proxy record indicated that a drier condition existed in one part of the world from 800 to 850, it would be counted as equal evidence for a Medieval Warming Period as a different proxy record that showed wetter conditions in another part of the world from 1250 to 1300.

As well warming direct from the sun, recent evidence shows that increasing amounts of heat energy are being transported from the tropics to the Arctic (Nature DOI: 10.1038 / nature06502).

Not long after potent evidence began to emerge in the 1980s and 1990s that global warming is happening and that human fingerprints are all over it, countervailing forces showed up to deny it, she said.

The octopuses that the scientists observed (both in - person and via hours of video footage from an ROV) showed evidence of severe stress, and they could only guess that the 186 eggs that were attached to the rocks leaking warm, low oxygen fluid had it worse.

The research, published last June in the journal Science, concluded that an improved record of surface temperatures no longer shows evidence of a slowdown in global warming.

Therefore studies based on observed warming have underestimated climate sensitivity as they did not account for the greater response to aerosol forcing, and multiple lines of evidence are now consistent in showing that climate sensitivity is in fact very unlikely to be at the low end of the range in recent estimates.

Far from just inverting the burden of proof, with IPCC's statements, Trenberth has to show far beyond just «statistical evidence» of «anthropogenic global warming» AGW.

As we've said many times, evidence continues to show weaknesses in climate models used to predict future warming.

and «Does the evidence show that burning fossil carbon for energy causes warming, or not?»

When climate scientists discuss the evidence with each other, the questions that matter to them are «Does the evidence show that the Earth's climate is warming, or not?»

Reminds me of global warming deniers, ultra sensitive on their own websites about a peep showing evidence, but full of deliberately misleading and even rude posts on websites concerned with addressing AGW, whose regulars bend over backwards to respond both factually and super duper sensitively.

This analysis has shown that performance improvements can be demonstrated after completion of adequate warm - up activities, and there is little evidence to suggest that warming - up is detrimental to sports participants.

Glaciers retreating in western Canada have revealed evidence of previous forests, showing that warming and cooling cycles do indeed occur, even without SUVs.

# 36 not this figure neither the narrative shows any evidence that the onset of global warming was pre industrial, you are phantasising.

He replied with graphs ready showing global warming, but he could not supply such evidence for AGW.

Merely showing anecdotal evidence of AGW (melting glaciers, hot summers, warm winters, etc.) does not prove that warming is caused by human emitted CO2.

When climate scientists discuss the evidence with each other, the questions that matter to them are «Does the evidence show that the Earth's climate is warming, or not?»

re: 9,» Merely showing anecdotal evidence of AGW (melting glaciers, hot summers, warm winters, etc.) does not prove that warming is caused by human emitted CO2.»

Evidence from most oceans and all continents except Antarctica shows warming attributable to human activities.

I think the balance of evidence currently shows that there has been some anthopogenic global warming and that it will continue and grow.

Personally I got convinced that warming was underway in the late 1990s after borehole measurements in rocks around the world, far away from civilization, showed unmistakable evidence of warming over the past century... if you log temperature down the hole, you find that extra heat has been seeping down from the surface.

And I've shown you evidence repeatedly, evidence indicating that there has been no long - term warming trend, evidence that the current spate of extreme weather events is nothing new.

Dr. Easterling said that the new analysis shows that the adjustments that are made to account for shifting patterns of climate - data collection (the same adjustments are among the targets of those challenging global warming evidence) are robust.

Unfortunately, some of my coauthors have been portrayed as trying to «dig» for evidence of «cooling», as if by way of showing a cooling Antarctic, the demon of anthropogenic global warming would be banished.

While both studies show statistically significant warming in Ellsworth Land (which is what RealClimate seems to be focused on right now, as a way of saying our work «confirms» S09), evidence that Ellsworth Land was warming rather significantly was already present in the literature (e.g., Shuman and Stearns, 2001; Kwok and Comiso, 2002; King and Comiso, 2003; Chapman and Walsh, 2007).

Skeptics have long cited Doran's research to show that global warming is a flawed theory motivated by alarmist scientists more interested in scaring up huge research grants than in pursuing the evidence with honesty and integrity.

He starts to address this question in his post, but dribbles off and shifts the focus to a couple of surveys that show people deeply care about global warming — even when there's abundant evidence that much of public attitude on climate is, as I've been saying, the equivalent of water sloshing in a shallow pan — lots of fluctuations, little depth or commitment (particularly when money is involved).

Therefore studies based on observed warming have underestimated climate sensitivity as they did not account for the greater response to aerosol forcing, and multiple lines of evidence are now consistent in showing that climate sensitivity is in fact very unlikely to be at the low end of the range in recent estimates.

Further, I take RiHo08's point to have been that the evidence showed the 2010 Russion heatwave was not atypical, and that therefore the heatwave was not, by itself, evidence of Global Warming.

That it is possible to construct a metric that doesn't show regional warming in a certain roughly specified region on a certain unspecified time scale with a certain unspecified statistical technique in no way contradicts the assertion that the balance of observational evidence shows unusual recent global warming, in first order agreement with theoretical, computational, and paleoclimate evidence.

Here's the second (and final) installment from Andrew A. Lacis of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies providing more detail on his view of the evidence showing a human warming influence on the climate.

The IPCC report does not show empirical evidence for the amounts of warming predicted by the models.

[14] Although there is an extreme scarcity of data from Australia (for both the Medieval Warm Period and Little Ice Age) evidence from wave built shingle terraces for a permanently full Lake Eyre during the ninth and tenth centuries is consistent with this La Niña - like configuration, though of itself inadequate to show how lake levels varied from year to year or what climatic conditions elsewhere in Australia were like.

They mentioned that the surrounding areas had been deserts and evidence for this came from some clay pits in the Czech area which showed that about every 7000 years dust had blown from the deserts east of the Black sea to these clay pits and this could represent global warming happening every 7000 years.

In the November 21st Op - Ed, «The Truth on Tornadoes,» Professor Richard Muller writes «the scientific evidence shows that strong to violent tornadoes have actually been decreasing for the past 58 years, and it is possible that the explanation lies with global warming.»

But the evidence shows this can't be true; temperature changes before CO2 in every record of any duration for any time period; CO2 variability does not correlate with temperature at any point in the last 600 million years; atmospheric CO2 levels are currently at the lowest level in that period; in the 20th century most warming occurred before 1940 when human production of CO2 was very small; human production of CO2 increased the most after 1940 but global temperatures declined to 1985; from 2000 global temperatures declined while CO2 levels increased; and any reduction in CO2 threatens plant life, oxygen production, and therefore all life on the planet.

Although there are multiple lines of evidence and well - understood physics that show humans are dramatically warming the planet, climate science contrarians have seized upon the stick as being the single pillar that holds up the entire climate science edifice.

Nope, no empirical evidence there that empirically shows that the late 20th century warming was human - caused.

I've challenged you over and over to cite your empirical evidence from peer reviewed science that shows that anthropogenic CO2 has been the primary cause of the late 20th century warming and you have FAILED to be able to cite a single peer reviewed paper that does so.

The trouble is that there remains little empirical evidence to support the idea, as we were surprised to find out when we talked to UC San Diego atmospheric physicist Veerabhadran Ramanathan about his research showing that another type of aerosol — black carbon — had a significant warming effect: