Sentences with phrase «global reconstruction which»

But I'm less concerned now that I have read the paper over more carefully, because I think that Figure 1a and 1b give a pretty good sense of what features of higher resolution reconstructions (specifically, our ’08 global reconstruction which is shown) are potentially captured.

The NIPCC report ignores actual northern hemisphere and global reconstructions which would show their claim to be unsupportable.

Not exact matches

Building on this study, the team intend to produce a new reconstruction of global ice volume across the last glacial cycle, which will help to validate their proposition that certain boundaries can define windows of instability within the climate system.

Some studies have attempted to estimate the statistical relationship between temperature and global sea level seen in the period for which tide gauge records exist (the last 2 - 3 centuries) and then, using geological reconstructions of past temperature changes, extrapolate backward («hindcast») past sea - level changes.

He helped coordinate an international consortium that assembled «A global multiproxy database for temperature reconstructions of the Common Era», which was published on 11 July in the journal Scientific Data.

A recent reconstruction from proxy temperature data [55] concluded that global temperature declined about 0.7 °C between the Holocene maximum and a pre-industrial minimum before recent warming brought temperature back near the Holocene maximum, which is consistent with our analysis.

They vary from an attempt at reconstruction (When Attitudes Become Form, Venice, 2013), which entails the impossible endeavor of providing the viewer with an authentic experience in the form of an archival documentation exhibition with the aim of updating our (own) past (Recollections), to a much more multifaceted or «corrected» image of the original, such as Jens Hoffman's Other Primary Structures, which also included sculptures by artists working in the 1960s in Asia, Latin America, the Middle East, Eastern Europe, and Africa, and which reexamined the exhibition of 1966 from a global point of view.

Titus (re: # 36), you're seriously offering us schematics from 30 years ago when there was no global or even hemispheric reconstructions available, a schematic which is well known to be inaccurate and totally obsolete...

As far as this historic period is concerned, the reconstruction of past temperatures based on deep boreholes in deep permafrost is one of the best past temperature proxies we have (for the global regions with permafrost — polar regions and mountainous regions)-- as a signal of average temperatures it's even more accurate than historic direct measurements of the air temperature, since the earth's upper crust acts as a near perfect conservator of past temperatures — given that no water circulation takes place, which is precisely the case in permafrost where by definition the water is frozen.

The same holds for the specific global mean EIV temperature reconstruction used in the present study as shown in the graph below (interestingly, eliminating the proxies in question actually makes the reconstruction overall slightly cooler prior to AD 1000, which — as noted in the article — would actually bring the semi-empirical sea level estimate into closer agreement with the sea level reconstruction prior to AD 1000).

In 1998 MBH decided that there was enough paleo evidence to do a reconstruction which stretched back to 1400 CE on a global scale.

Previous studies have focused on hemispheric or global - scale temperature reconstructions, which are useful for understanding overall average conditions, but can overlook important differences at regional scales.

Firstly paleoclimate is not driven in any way by CO2 but by the proximity of planet Earth to supernova which Svensmark has helpfully converted into a nice graph that is a remarkable fit to global temperature reconstructions.

If one takes the MBH98 / 99 reconstruction as base, the variation in the pre-industrial period was ~ 0.2 K, of which less than 0.1 K (in average) from volcanic eruptions, the rest mostly from solar (I doubt that land use changes had much influence on global temperatures).

-- According to several Antarctic ice cores, there was a ~ 10 ppmv drop in CO2 between the MWP and LIA, this points to a ~ 1 K drop in global temperature, which is more in line with the higher variable reconstructions.

In fact, we do in fact have NH and global temperature reconstructions over that period, which show the twentieth century warming to be much faster than the prior warming as the Earth exited the LIA.

However, models would need to underestimate variability by factors of over two in their standard deviation to nullify detection of greenhouse gases in near - surface temperature data (Tett et al., 2002), which appears unlikely given the quality of agreement between models and observations at global and continental scales (Figures 9.7 and 9.8) and agreement with inferences on temperature variability from NH temperature reconstructions of the last millennium.

All of this work will soon be advanced enormously by a major new collaborative international working group led by Kathleen Morrison, Land Use 6000 (LU6K), which aims to provide empirical global reconstructions of land use and land cover over the past 6000 years and earlier as part of the Land Cover 6000 project (LC6K) of PAGES.

Abstract The rate at which global mean sea level (GMSL) rose during the 20th century is uncertain, with little consensus between various reconstructions that indicate rates of rise ranging from 1.3 to 2 mm ⋅ y − 1.

Unfortunately, it now appears that there are problems with the data used and the statistical method used, which means that the MBH98 reconstruction is almost certainly an artefact entirely unrelated to global temperature.

Which brings me back to my issue with Global versus regional paleo reconstructions.

The latest massive effort in paleoclimatology is the PAGES 2k project which has produced a global temperature reconstruction for the past two millennia - check out my article on it here: http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2013/07/08/2261531/most-comprehensive-paleoclimate-reconstruction-confirms-hockey-stick/ Their results look identical to the original «hockey stick» reconstruction of 1999.

«However, Fig. 15 and the associated uncertainties discussed in Section 3.4 show that long term estimates of time variable sea level acceleration in 203 year global reconstruction are significantly positive, which supports our previous finding (Jevrejeva et al., 2008a), that despite strong low frequency variability (larger than 60 years) the rate of sea level rise is increasing with time.»

My position is the following: 1) the extent of past human interference with global climate is likely somewhat exaggerated, 2) the dangers of future human - induced climate change are greatly exaggerated (for example, I heard Ira Flatow a couple of weeks ago talking about the East coast being under water in 50 years — which is complete piffle), 3) the numerical global climate do a poor job of past reconstruction and are unlikely to be very reliable in predicting the consequences of future human activity.

I notice the complete failure of the NIPCC report to show any global or hemispheric temperature reconstructions apart from the «spaghetti graph» ones which show temperatures currently are more likely warmer the MWP.

One of the main limitations of Cowtan and Way (in press), which we highlighted in the paper and has been echoed by others, is that the global temperature reconstruction was performed on the blended land - ocean data.

«long term estimates of time variable sea level acceleration in 203 year global reconstruction are significantly positive, which supports our previous finding (Jevrejeva et al., 2008a), that despite strong low frequency variability (larger than 60 years) the rate of sea level rise is increasing with time.»

In fact, the assumed 60 year cycle which was the basis of the L&S model doesn't even show up in Loehle's own millennial global temperature reconstruction - a glaring contradiction.

To compare our Standard 5X5 reconstruction with modern climatology, we aligned the stack's mean for the interval 510 to 1450 yr B.P. (where yr B.P. is years before 1950 CE) with the same interval's mean of the global Climate Research Unit error - in - variables (CRU - EIV) composite temperature record (2), which is, in turn, referenced to the 1961 — 1990 CE instrumental mean (Fig. 1A).»

«To compare our Standard5 × 5 reconstruction with modern climatology, we aligned the stack's mean for the interval 510 to 1450 yr B.P. (where yr B.P. is years before 1950 CE) with the same interval» smean of the global Climate Research Unit error - in - variables (CRU - EIV) composite temperature record (2), which is, in turn, referenced to the 1961 — 1990 CE instrumental mean (Fig. 1A).»

Moreover, the 20th century rapid warming was not obvious in our RLST reconstruction, which implies that mean maximum temperature, as a unique temperature indicator, might play an important and different role in global change.

Averaging the reconstructed temperature patterns over the far more data - rich Northern Hemisphere half of the global domain, they estimated the Northern Hemisphere mean temperature back to AD 1400, a reconstruction which had significant skill in independent cross-validation tests.

In response to Jim Hansen's comments I would like to note that our 2011 paper (Schmittner et al., 2011, http://science.sciencemag.org/content/334/6061/1385), which was also not cited by Snyder, did not claim to be the best LGM global mean temperature reconstruction.