Sentences with phrase «greater amount of warming»

Does the Balmaseda analysis show a greater rate of warming or a greater amount of warming with increasing depth?

To them they see it only getting colder by carefully picking out only things that represent it getting colder while ignoring the greater amount of warming.

The climate models that project greater amounts of warming this century are the ones that best align with observations of the current climate

The climate models that project greater amounts of warming this century are the ones that best align with observations of the current climate, according to a new paper from Carnegie's Patrick Brown and Ken Caldeira published...

Washington, DC — The climate models that project greater amounts of warming this century are the ones that best align with observations of the current climate, according to a new paper from Carnegie's...

Washington, DC — The climate models that project greater amounts of warming this century are the ones that best align with observations of the current climate, according to a new paper from Carnegie's Patrick Brown and Ken Caldeira published by Nature.

Not exact matches

The warm berries and honey provide the perfect amount of sweetness and the almonds and strawberries add great texture.

This warming and slightly - sweet spice is high in antioxidants and also works to help balance your blood sugar by decreasing the amount of sugar that goes into your blood stream after a high - sugar containing meal, making it a great addition for people with diabetes.

«We found that vegetation change may have a greater impact on the amount of stream flow in the Sierra than the direct effects of climate warming,» said lead author Ryan Bart, a postdoctoral researcher at UCSB's Bren School of Environmental Science & Management.

But the warming that would result from adding such large amounts of carbon to the climate system would be much greater today than during the PETM and could reach up to 10 degrees.

But unlike the lower glaciers, most of the high glaciers are located in very cold environments and require greater amounts of atmospheric warming before local temperatures rise enough to cause significant melting.

The relationship between warmer air and the greater amounts of moisture it contains is one of the most well - accepted tenets of climate science, and underpins one of the more solid projections, that warming will lead to more heavy downpours in general across the globe.

This is an especially important region of the atmosphere because climate models have forecast the deep layer of the lower atmosphere is the area where CO2 - influenced warming should occur first and by the greatest amounts.

It should be pointed out here, that the amount of change in downward heat radiation from changes in cloud cover in the experiment, are far greater than the gradual change in warming provided by human greenhouse gas emissions, but the relationship was nevertheless established.

They've got just the right amount of heel, look great with jeans and I can see myself wearing them with a cute dress on warmer days.

It's never too cold or too warm to add some denim in your everyday life, over the years the «denim» or «jeans» trend gained a great amount of loyal followers, taking it's special place to almost every wordrobe and eventually was labeled as a «closet essential».

It is such a great addition to give it just the right amount of pop to your outfit AND it keeps you so warm and cozy!

Holly Hommerding, DVM Associate Veterinarian, Clinical Toxicology Summer brings with it copious amounts of sunshine and warm weather, and with it, follows the aching need to break our cabin fever and explore the great outdoors.

Indeed, snowfall is often predicted to increase in many regions in response to anthropogenic climate change, since warmer air, all other things being equal, holds more moisture, and therefore, the potential for greater amounts of precipitation whatever form that precipitation takes.

The paper appears to conclude that if we wait 20 years to begin reducing GHG emissions, assuming a modest amount of mitigation in the short term, we will have to reduce emissions at a 3 to 7 times greater rate than if we start now in order to keep warming to a 3 degree C increase around 2100.

* & & * — if the stratosphere were optically thick and warmed at the bottom even if the whole experiences net cooling, then the stratospheric feedback adds to the initial TRPP forcing, and the end result could require warming below TRPP to change the flux at TRPP to an amount greater than the TRPP after stratospheric adjustment, because of the additional warming that would occur in the (lower) stratosphere.

-------- * & & * — if the stratosphere were optically thick and warmed at the bottom even if the whole experiences net cooling, then the stratospheric feedback adds to the initial TRPP forcing, and the end result could require warming below TRPP to change the flux at TRPP to an amount greater than the TRPP after stratospheric adjustment, because of the additional warming that would occur in the (lower) stratosphere.

The effect where, adding a «new» absorption band and increasing the absorption, there may initially be warming of the colder layers, etc, followed by a stage of upper level or near - TOA cooling — this includes the warming from absorption from increased radiation from the surface + troposphere — which will be greater when more of the spectrum, especially near wavelengths where the emitted spectral flux change is greatest, has a greater amount of absorption.

Re 346 ziarra, again: «The radiation from a cooler upper atmosphere can warm the surface because it counteracts the even greater amount of radiation in the other direction, thus reducing the net flow of heat.»

The likely cause of this remarkable CO2 growth was from the Earth's own warming, causing oceans to release ever greater amounts of CO2 - not a surprise after the lengthy freezing conditions of the Little Ice Age (LIA).

For forcing by greenhouse gases (GHGs) only, we show that there is a greater than 90 % probability that the expected warming over 1950 — 2005 is larger than the total amount (not just «most») of the observed warming.

CO2 causing warming as a guide 100 years ago would have prevented a great amount of advancement in our standards of living.

It is to my continual amazement that so many arguing for AGW / CAGW have no sense of scale, don't realise how, sorry, ridiculous they appear when they claim the «great warming power» of a insignificant amount of trace gas carbon dioxide and compare it with an «insulating blanket».

In addition, the amount of decomposition in the top 10 centimeters of soil was nearly 2 times greater in the warming condition and in the dry condition compared with controls.

NASA thought this to be erroneous, so they simply removed from the data set those buoys that were showing the greatest amount of cooling, and hey presto ARGO suggested ocean warming.

Such events are consistent with the effects of global warming, which is expected to cause more heavy precipitation because of a greater amount of water vapor in the atmosphere.»

If Climate change (or global warming) folks want to make their cause more saleable then they need to stop using has been Rock or movie stars, tired burned out politicos, and most of all persons that have invested great amounts of money in «green projects», «carbon credits» and other money making scams... errr sorry schemes.

The input of assumed anthropogenic aerosol cooling is needed because the model «ran hot»; i.e. it showed an amount and a rate of global warming which was greater than was observed over the twentieth century.

Global warming's greater than anticipated impact on permafrost will release huge amounts of methane and carbon dioxide as the soil thaws.

Even if natural gas combustion creates approaching 50 percent less CO2 equivalent per unit of energy produced, an amount which is well beyond best case on ghg emission reductions, it will not create the much greater emissions reductions necessary in the next 30 years to give any hope of limiting warming from exceeding levels that will cause catastrophic impacts.

Now, add a source at greater than 15C (like a warm earth surface) and ad long as the rate of incoming 15 um radiation is greater than the 15 um radiation rate you already measured from your hohlraum there will be disequilibrium and the temperature of the hohlraum (not just the CO2 but all of the gas) will increase until the hohlraum is again emitting the same amount of 15 um radiation as is coming in.

In arguing that the United States or other high - emitting nations need not reduce their ghg emissions to their fair share of safe global emissions based on cost, how have you considered, if at all, that all nations have agreed in international climate negotiations to take steps to limit warming to 2 degree C because warming greater than this amount will not only create harsh impacts for tens of millions of people but runs the risk of creating rapid non-linear warming that will outstrip the ability of people and nations to adapt?

Yep, no matter how one slices and dices the 5 - year average warming amounts, the modern era's warming represents an increase not even one - tenth of a degree greater than the pre-1950 warming — it is not only a statistically worthless difference, it is completely climate insignificant.

However as I continue to dig into this whole aspect of warming, and again the primary reason with me was because of my forecast protocol which is know the past, understand the present and you have a CHANCE at getting the future right, I am becoming convinced that the next great nail in the AGW coffin will be the realization that it is not possible for co2 to cause any warming, yet alone the minor amounts that are attributed to it.

Notice the heating is in the upper ocean, scienceofdoom has 4 posts with the last being the mist interesting, from several years ago also.If there is large amounts of heat being retained in the upper surface of the ocean then this warmer surface must heat the atmosphere, the ocean physics imply greater lower atmosphere heat.

Four in ten Americans (39 %) think global warming will harm the health of people in the U.S. a «moderate amount» or «great deal» over the next five to 10 years, while nearly three in ten think their own health (27 %) or the health of others in their household (28 %) will be harmed over this time period.

(IEA, 2012) Even if natural gas combustion creates a 50 percent less CO2 per unit of energy produced, an amount which is beyond best case on ghg emission reductions, it will not produce the greater emissions reductions necessary in the next 30 years necessary to give any hope of restricting warming to potentially catastrophic levels.

The agency claims the large amount of ice still present on the Great Lakes will delay the normal warming, and leave for colder winds to blow across Southern Ontario.

I've already posted on a study published in Nature Climate change that shows that the amount of extra global warming related heat in the Southern Oceans is greater than previously thought.

Similarly, 50 percent of Americans said they worried either «a great deal» or «fair amount» about global warming in November 1997.

The world uses a trillion kilowatt - hours of electricity for AC right now, and with urbanization, greater wealth, and warming, it's projected that amount will increase tenfold by 2050, far outpacing zero - carbon electricity generation.

With warming greater than 2 °C, there is a high risk of abrupt and irreversible changes to ecosystems such as forests, which would lead to «substantial additional climate change» considering that trees sequester significant amounts of carbon dioxide.

Then, perhaps in the early years of the next century, the climate could warm up a little as a result of human activity, especially the greater amount of carbon dioxide that will be released from the burning of fossil fuels.

The amount of warming 1983 - 2009 is not known, but my calculations were a valid comparison (apples with apples) which showed that the contribution from observed cloud changes over the period was nearly 10 times greater than the contribution from CO2.

A small amount of gold salted in a small area yeilds great results for speculators in the same a way a small amount of proxy warming (up to about 1960) in one or two trees in a small area like Yamal has resulted in a «gold rush» of billions of dollars in AGW business.