Sentences with phrase «heat of our planet increases»

As time goes on, and the overall heat of our planet increases, the likelihood of more and more powerful storms increases as well.

Not exact matches

The first is that our planet's oceans act as a massive watery heat - sink, and currently absorb more than 90 percent of increased atmospheric heat that are associated with human activity.

Everyone, the researchers say, is already starting to feel the effects of a warming planet, via heat waves, increased air pollution, drought, or more intense storms.

For example, added water vapor pumped into the upper atmosphere from the chimney increases the amount of energy trapped there, in turn heating the planet further.

From the basic physics of the atmosphere, scientists expect that as the planet heats up from ever - mounting levels of greenhouse gases, net global precipitation will increase because a warmer atmosphere holds more moisture.

A better understanding of the constituents of the atmosphere, as well as various natural processes on Earth and on the sun, has allowed scientists to sum the various forcings — factors that can increase or decrease the retention of heat on the planet — for the first time.

Co2 is.04 % of all green house gas and increased levels are the result of the sun heating up, as evidence points to the other planets and moons heating up at the same rate.

It will also increase vital heat transfer about the planet too, helping resist atmospheric collapse likely on the permanently cold night side of any synchronous planet.

But over the long term, as the planet continues to warm from the increase in greenhouse gases, extended streaks of heat are

Given that there is continual heating of the planet, referred to as radiative forcing, by accelerating increases of carbon dioxide (Figure 1) and other greenhouses due to human activities, why is the temperature not continuing to go up?

The fact that you don't understand the mechanisms of how increased CO2 warms the oceans is irrelevant, since the heat content of the oceans is increasing (and, thus, the planet, as a whole has continued warming despite your «hiatus»).

Increasing the height of the convection cell doesn't generally help the planet radiate away heat, since the higher the tropospause (loosely the height of convection) goes, the colder it gets, inhibiting radiation.

Re 392 Chris Dudley — I don't understand what you mean by R ^ 2T ^ 4 — and there should be something about how optical depth is proportional to R, and also, if you're going a significant distance toward the center of such an object, there is the issue of spherical geometry; if the optical thickness is large enough across small changes in radius, then you don't need to account for the spherical geometry in the calculation of the flux per unit area as a function of the temperature profile and optical thickness; however, the flux per unit area outward will drop as an inverse square, except of course within the layers that are being heated through a different process (SW heating for a planet, radioactivity, latent and sensible heat loss associated with a cooling interior, gravitational potential energy conversion to enthalpy via compression (adiabatic warming) and settling of denser material under gravity (the later both leads to compression via increased pressure via increased gravity within the interior, and also is a source of kinetic energy which can be converted to heat)...

In the case where there is a skin temperature that only depends on solar heating of the planet with no solar heating above the troposphere, an increase in GHG forcing would still result in upper atmospheric cooling, but this cooling would only be transient.

While there's evidence that increasing greenhouse heating of the planet is exacerbating hot spells and extreme downpours, and may be related to hurricane intensity (but not frequency), a combination of imprecise records and deep complexity in the mix of forces that generate killer tornadoes has clouded any link to global warming.

The «so called science» has so far proven remarkably accurate in its predictions of a warming planet, increasing heat waves, fires, melting ice caps, loss of sea ice, species migration and variable rainfall.

Human activities, such as burning coal and oil and cutting down tropical forests, have increased atmospheric concentrations of heat - trapping gases and caused the planet to warm by 1.4 degrees Fahrenheit since 1880.

If you reduce the rate of heat flux from the the planet to space by increasing the density of greenhouse gases and thus altering the thermal gradient, less heat will flow from the heat sink (ocean) to space.

It cools the atmosphere by absorbing some heat — heat flows from warmer to cooler — and by increased cloud cover that changes the energy budget of the planet.

Since 1980, the planet has experienced a 50-fold increase in the number of places experiencing dangerous or extreme heat; a bigger increase is to come.

However a square metre is a miniscule portion of the surface of the planet so that even a tiny increase or decrease in the heat being received on average over each such tiny area translates into a huge change in total heat budget for the entire planet.

At the moment, Lindzen is pursuing a theory that says increased amounts of water vapor — from warming surface temperatures — will reduce heat - trapping high - cirrus clouds, which will help balance the planet's temperature.

He says the entire basis for the doomsday climate change scenario so beloved of politicians and scientists is the hypothesis that increased atmospheric carbon dioxide due to fossil fuel emissions will heat our planet to temperatures that would make it uninhabitable.

The increased effective radiating surface area of atmospheric CO2 would also act like a stepping stone for heat to leave the planet but how much cooling these effects have is anyones guess.

«We can confidently say that the risk of drought and heat waves has gone up and the odds of a hot spot somewhere on the planet have increased but the hotspot moves around and the location is not very predictable.

By the way, because it takes a tremendous amount of heat to melt ice, melting of arctic ice provides a natural thermostat for the planet, so temperature increase is not as high as it would be without ice.

Basic physics, more simply stated the actual physical properties of how things work, indicates that an accumulation of heat - trapping greenhouse gases is warming the planet, resulting in an increase in energy and water vapor and particularly in an increase of extremes.

Anyway, it tries to prove something that flies in the face of the evidence that CO2 keeps us warm, and more CO2 heats up the planet (as can be seen in the nice curves that are not believed by a majority of bloggers in attendance, let alone the obvious increase in average temperatures over the last decades).

It is still a matter of debate whether climate change will increase the number of hurricanes, but it is more and more clear that human - caused heating of the planet will boost their severity.

Tropical cyclone activity and intensity increasing Record droughts, floods, heat waves, cold spells, high tides occurring Unequivocal warming of the climate system observed with very high confidence that human activities are to blame Temperature rising even more dramatically in Arctic, threatening ice loss and extinction of species Halving human CO2 emissions immediately might save the planet from catastrophe.

The enormous thermal mass of the ocean, not to mention the heat of fusion of the polar ice caps, damps the temperature response of the planet to any increase in heat input.

But if you accept that the greenhouse effect is real, and that CO2 is a GHG, and that CO2 has increased (along with other GHGs), you have to accept the merit of my point: that solar, volcanoes, ocean currents and other natural variations do their thing, they vary, but GHGs exert a steady, constant upward forcing on temperature, which upward forcing is only offset by increased heat losses to space from a warmer planet.

As the planet warms, increasing levels of water vapour in the atmosphere caused by higher evaporation levels form more clouds and snow increasing the albedo of the planet, reflecting heat back into space more efficiently, thus working to regulate the temperature downward.

The fact is, we are the ones on this planet with the highest energy consumption and the end result of all this energy consumption is a steady increase of heat, carbon dioxide and other by - products into the atmosphere produced by us that is causing gradual increases in the average temperature of the earth's atmosphere from year to year.

As the name suggests, climate sensitivity is a measure of how sensitive the climate is to this build - up in heat - how much the planet will warm in response to an increase in the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.

Dennie: I am slowly coming to the realization that the planet is heating up not only from greenhouse gasses and aerosol particulates holding in heat, but that the major cause of the increased atmospheric heat is due to microwave technology and the exponential increase in its saturation of the entire global atmosphere.

Another mechanism for positive feedback: Atmospheric CO2 increases (due to burning of fossil fuels), so the enhanced greenhouse effect heats up the planet.

(i) The planet is warming due to increased concentrations of heat - trapping gases in our atmosphere.

The atmosphere is really part of the active cooling system of the planet, and increasing CO2 increases the rate of cooling because the sun - heated atmosphere is hotter than the bulk of space and the higher emissivity of the CO2 helps cool the atmosphere.

«The ocean is the biggest reservoir for heat in the climate system, so as the planet warms, we're finding that 80 to 90 percent of the increased heat ends up in the ocean.»

One of the key drivers of tropospheric temperatures is sensible and latent heat flux from the largest climate energy source on the planet - the ocean — thus, the so - call hiatus tells us more about ocean cycles (ENSO & PDO) than about climate sensitivity to increasing GHG's.

The planet does not respond instant; y to increases in forcing — mainly due to the heat capacity of the ocean which requires decades (and more) to rise.

But it was cold this winter and C02 is plant food and only a trace gas and the greenhouse effect has been disproved anyway and even if the greenhouse effect does exist, C02 has negligible impact compared to water vapour and our only source of heat is the sun so it must be the sun, unless it is due to the C02 from volcanoes, but C02 follows warming so it can't be the C02 and the medieval warm period was warmer anyway and all the temperature reconstructions that show this not to be true are produced by corrupt scientists being paid by corrupt governments that have colluded to create an excuse to form a one world unelected social - ist government and even if the scientists are not that corrupt, although the e-mails prove they are, they have still got it wrong as the climate sensitivity is not as high as they think it is because it is basically the planets orbits and cosmic rays so we can say for a fact that the warming that probably does not exist is definatley not due to humans and even if it was the evidence is not sufficient to make drastic changes to the economy and increase taxes so that the politicians and scientists and business leaders get rich and leave us all poor — do they think we are stupid or something?

OTOH it is pretty obvious to me that so long as we increase the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere the planet is going to heat up, until it becomes unbearable.