Sentences with phrase «greater than the average temperature»

These are impulsive heating bursts that individually reach incredibly hot temperatures of some 10 million Kelvins or 18 million degrees Fahrenheit - even greater than the average temperature of the corona - and provide heat to the atmosphere.

Not exact matches

A recent report by two leading nonprofits, the Rocky Mountain Climate Organization and the Natural Resources Defense Council, details how the 11 U.S. western states together have experienced an increase in average temperature during the last five years some 70 percent greater than the global average rise.

The hottest part of the region has been drought - stricken Arizona, where average temperatures have risen some 2.2 degrees Fahrenheit — 120 percent greater than the global rise — between 2003 and 2007.

Imagine a world where the average daytime temperature is -179 °C, and torrential rains of liquid methane fall from the skies, forming vast but shallow pools that cover an area larger than the Great Lakes.

Already, the planet's average temperature has warmed by 0.7 degree C, which is «very likely» (greater than 90 percent certain) to be a result of the rising concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, according to the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

Currently, summers with temperatures 1.6 degrees Celsius (2.9 degrees F) greater than the historical average now happen every five years, rather than every 52 years like before.

For example, the global temperature change when we recovered from the last ice age averaged only about 0.1 C per century (and descent into an ice age tended to be even slower)... whereas we are now looking at changes greater than that happening in one decade.

Now, admittedly, the temperature increases in the last two decades were greater than any previous, taking the decadal averages above 10 degrees for the first time.

* However, the same panel then concluded that «the warming trend in global - mean surface temperature observations during the past 20 years is undoubtedly real and is substantially greater than the average rate of warming during the twentieth century.

... Polar amplification explains in part why Greenland Ice Sheet and the West Antarctic Ice Sheet appear to be highly sensitive to relatively small increases in CO2 concentration and global mean temperature... Polar amplification occurs if the magnitude of zonally averaged surface temperature change at high latitudes exceeds the globally averaged temperature change, in response to climate forcings and on time scales greater than the annual cycle.

Many recent studies (e.g. Hansen & Sato) have claimed that future rise in global average temperature (GAT) will create a much greater effect on sea level than IPCC AR4 predicts.

El Niño: A phenomenon in the equatorial Pacific Ocean characterized by a positive sea surface temperature departure from normal (for the 1971 - 2000 base period) in the Niño 3.4 region greater than or equal in magnitude to 0.5 degrees C (0.9 degrees Fahrenheit), averaged over three consecutive months.

Warming as measured by increased global heat, (heat in greater than heat out) and warming measured as increased globally averaged temperatures are closely linked but are still different things.

Their work is a big step forward in helping to solve the greatest puzzle of current climate change research — why global average surface temperatures, while still on an upward trend, have risen more slowly in the past 10 to fifteen years than previously.

However, based on the variation in the distance to the sun, the variation in global average temperature should be much greater than 0.5 degrees.

On a seasonal basis the ranges between the daily maximum, minimum and average are all listed and the lowest ratio is that the daily minimum temperature range over the year is 77,000 times greater than the temperature difference that would result from the proposed 30 % reduction in emissions.

My understanding is that an Anomaly is the average temperature variation over a period relative to a baseline, if the temperature is greater it results in a positive anomaly, if it is equal to the baseline then there is zero anomaly and if it is less than the base line it is a negative anomaly.

Averaged out over a year, temperatures in greater urban areas, cities and megacities all across the world are now one to two Kelvin higher than in the surrounding rural areas.

In contrast, global warming warms nights faster (although the effect is slight) and winters faster than summer (which effect is not slight) so that modern US annually averaged temperatures are greater than those of the 1930s.

These facts were enough for an NAS panel, including Christy, to publish a report Reconciling Observations of Global Temperature Change which concluded that «Despite differences in temperature data, strong evidence exists to show that the warming of the Earth's surface is undoubtedly real, and surface temperatures in the past two decades have risen at a rate substantially greater than average for the past 100 yTemperature Change which concluded that «Despite differences in temperature data, strong evidence exists to show that the warming of the Earth's surface is undoubtedly real, and surface temperatures in the past two decades have risen at a rate substantially greater than average for the past 100 ytemperature data, strong evidence exists to show that the warming of the Earth's surface is undoubtedly real, and surface temperatures in the past two decades have risen at a rate substantially greater than average for the past 100 years»

This mantra refers to a complex non-linear dynamic system with annual variation in forcing greater than 80Wm - 2 (20Wm - 2 for the guys that can only think in terms of averages) repeated by «scientists» so inept at thermodynamics and statistics that they confuse confidence intervals based on temperature anomalies with actually uncertainty of energy flow based on T ^ 4 relationship of the real T not the imaginary T anomaly.

Commentator of your experience should realize that variability in averaging few tens of stations (CET) is greater than variability of many thousands (global temperatures) but the trends and the correlation are there http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/GTCet.htm The rest are wishy - washy excuses.

(1) According to the summary, there is a greater than 90 percent likelihood that increased concentrations of man - made heat - trapping gases caused most of the observed increase in global average temperatures since 1950.

One reason for this is that «global temperature» varies significantly over the months of the year due to seasonally varying Earth / sun geometry and the greater land mass in the Northern Hemisphere, so that any global average of absolute temperature, not anomalies, will be considerably higher in NH summer than SH summer, and this will be true even in an unchanging climate.

The first difference arises because annual average temperature change is greater than summer temperature change at high latitudes, but the mass balance sensitivity is greater to summer change.

Most of the observed increase in global average temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely [greater than 90 % likelihood] due to the observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations.

In the opinion of the panel, the warming trend in global - mean surface temperature observations during the past 20 years is undoubtedly real and is substantially greater than the average rate of warming during the twentieth century.

Based on current knowledge, however, it appears that achieving a high probability of limiting global average temperature rise to 2C will require that the increase in greenhouse - gas concentrations as well as all the other warming and cooling influences on global climate in the year 2100, as compared with 1750, should add up to a net warming no greater than what would be associated with a CO2 concentration of about 400 parts per million (ppm).

But many concerns appear: (1) error bars should be growing as long as we move to the past, (2) error bars should be much greater than they are, (3) the estimated value for averaged temperature anomaly is basically fictitious.

Well then it would be like the passive solar hot water system that does not have a defined lapse rate but does convect under a varying heat source and averages a greater temperature than the ambient local temperature (which has the GHG effect included already).

In fact, our research suggests that with 2 ℃ of global warming, the future average sea temperatures around the Great Barrier Reef would be even hotter than the extremes observed around the time of the 2016 bleaching.

• When comparing the differences between the lowest to highest 10 - year average temperature for each warming period, the modern change was less than one - tenth degree greater.

Figure 16.2: Projected number of days per year with a maximum temperature greater than 90 °F averaged between 2041 and 2070, compared to 1971 - 2000, assuming continued increases in global emissions (A2) and substantial reductions in future emissions (B1).

For NOAA to call an El Niño, it requires the temperature in a certain section (the Niño 3.4 region) of the tropical Pacific to be greater than 0.5 degrees Celsius more than average, for a period of 5 months.

Since the ocean surface temperature is always greater than the deep ocean temperature, no change in «surface» forcing is required to change the rate of ocean heat uptake, just changes in «average» circulation factors.

The simple fact of the matter is that geologically, the climate is capable of average temperature variation at least the same order as not only that expected from the observed forcing but much greater than the (so far) observed forcing, on similar timescales.

If the actual temperature as represented by mesurement A is just as likely to be too high as too low then the data is unbiased and we can average it with other measurements and, given enough such measurements we can even come up with averages of greater accuracy than the individual measurements (though that's tricky and requires further examination of what sort of unbiasness we're dealing with.)

22 Land areas are projected to warm more than the oceans with the greatest warming at high latitudes Annual mean temperature change, 2071 to 2100 relative to 1990: Global Average in 2085 = 3.1 o C

Most of the observed increase in global average temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely [i.e. with greater than 90 % likelihood] due to the observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gases.

See a simple equation, having two naturally occurring independent variables, that calculates average global temperatures since before 1900 with R ^ 2 greater than 0.9 at http://agwunveiled.blogspot.com.

There are two prominent and undeniable examples of the models» insufficiencies: 1) climate models overwhelmingly expected much more warming to have taken place over the past several decades than actually occurred; and 2) the sensitivity of the earth's average temperature to increases in atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations (such as carbon dioxide) averages some 60 percent greater in the IPCC's climate models than it does in reality (according to a large and growing collection of evidence published in the scientific literature).

A hot - humid climate is defined as a region that receives more than 20 inches (50 cm) of annual precipitation with approximately 6,300 cooling degree days (50 degrees F basis)[3,500 cooling degree days (10 degrees C basis)-RSB- or greater and where the monthly average outdoor temperature remains above 45 degrees F (7 degrees C) throughout the year.

29 LA NINA Surface temperatures in the Eastern Pacific are colder than average Hurricanes damage greater in La Nina times HERE?

A hot - dry climate is defined as region that receives less than 20 inches (50 cm) of annual precipitation with approximately 6,300 cooling degree days (50 degrees F basis)[3,500 cooling degree days (10 degrees C basis)-RSB- or greater and where the monthly average outdoor temperature remains above 45 degrees F (7 degrees C) throughout the year.

That's what I meant to say, that the the increase in land temperature, in other words the anomaly, was 50 % greater than the average and twice the SST, not the shorthand which was misinterpreted as an absolute temperature.

In case you need reminding, these higher than normal ocean temperatures fit solidly into the broader global trend towards warmer temperatures — though regionally they are much greater than the global average (as the chart at top shows, with the red areas being up to 5 °C above normal).

At 600ppm, global average temperature rise could be in the range of 3 - 4Â °C — which means greater sea level rise than predicted, glaciers melting and constraining water supply throughout large areas of Asia, agriculture being severely stressed in many places, greater storm intensity, reduced biodiversity, the end of coral reefs.

After all, this rise in temperature is less than the average daily temperature difference between New York City and Atlanta, Georgia, or between Paris and Naples, and there is little evidence of greater risk to people who now live in the warmer southern climate.

[2] The Historical simulations have an average temperature anomaly of 0.84 °C for 1996 — 2005 relative to 1850, whereas HadCRUT4v4 shows an increase of 0.73 °C from 1850 — 1859 to 1996 — 2005, and Figure 7 of Miller et al. 2014 shows consistently greater warming for GISS - E2 - R than per GISTEMP since 2000.

Paragrap 17 «Notes with concern that the estimated aggregate greenhouse gas emission levels in 2025 and 2030 resulting from the intended nationally determined contributions do not fall within least - cost 2 ̊C scenarios but rather lead to a projected level of 55 gigatonnes in 2030, and also notes that much greater emission reduction efforts will be required than those associated with the intended nationally determined contributions in order to hold the increase in the global average temperature to below 2 ̊C above pre-industrial levels by reducing emissions to 40 gigatonnes or to 1.5 ̊C above pre-industrial levels by reducing to a level to be identified in the special report referred to in paragraph 21 below;»