Sentences with phrase «how small changes in temperature»

Epstein and Ferber describe how small changes in temperature can lead to large changes in malarial dynamics.

Not exact matches

At the moment the company is working with NASA to develop technology that would predict how small - scale, seasonal shifts in temperature as well as large - scale climate change influence the presence of bacteria in the soil, air and water around crops.

Indeed, the main quandary faced by climate scientists is how to estimate climate sensitivity from the Little Ice Age or Medieval Warm Period, at all, given the relative small forcings over the past 1000 years, and the substantial uncertainties in both the forcings and the temperature changes.

Program fellows from the 2009 — 2014 grant tackled problems of interest to Kansans such as the expansion of woody vegetation in rangelands, disease outbreaks in small mammal populations, or how insects respond to temperature change.

Also connect with problem areas and things that may seem counterintuitive or unimaginable to people's lived experience — like scales for instance: of time, of large magnitudes and finiteness, of how seemingly small percentages of compounds or changes in temperature can have large impacts.

Indeed, the main quandary faced by climate scientists is how to estimate climate sensitivity from the Little Ice Age or Medieval Warm Period, at all, given the relative small forcings over the past 1000 years, and the substantial uncertainties in both the forcings and the temperature changes.

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)...

As for how this could be — and in light of the findings of the references listed above — Rankl et al. reasoned that «considering increasing precipitation in winter and decreasing summer mean and minimum temperatures across the upper Indus Basin since the 1960s,» plus the «short response times of small glaciers,» it is only logical to conclude that these facts «suggest a shift from negative to balanced or positive mass budgets in the 1980s or 1990s or even earlier, induced by changing climatic conditions since the 1960s.»

This may seem like a small number compared to changes in daily temperature however to put it into comparison how small global temperature changes can have a large effect, if the Earth's surface temperature was lowered by 5 ⁰ C it would be in a full ice age.

Once I do some double checking, you should be able to «see» how the slow and relatively small changes in SST are amplified by the lower capacity land masses and the atmospheric effect, to produce larger temperature swings with the same energy.

OK, the earth gets hotter — how much is not said but let's assume the temperature rise doesn't appreciably change the spectral distribution of the energy radiated by the earth (the body enclosed by the glass)-- that is, the temperature rise is small enough that the radiated energy is still predominately in the IR band.

To point out just a couple of things: — oceans warming slower (or cooling slower) than lands on long - time trends is absolutely normal, because water is more difficult both to warm or to cool (I mean, we require both a bigger heat flow and more time); at the contrary, I see as a non-sense theory (made by some serrist, but don't know who) that oceans are storing up heat, and that suddenly they will release such heat as a positive feedback: or the water warms than no heat can be considered ad «stored» (we have no phase change inside oceans, so no latent heat) or oceans begin to release heat but in the same time they have to cool (because they are losing heat); so, I don't feel strange that in last years land temperatures for some series (NCDC and GISS) can be heating up while oceans are slightly cooling, but I feel strange that they are heating up so much to reverse global trend from slightly negative / stable to slightly positive; but, in the end, all this is not an evidence that lands» warming is led by UHI (but, this effect, I would not exclude it from having a small part in temperature trends for some regional area, but just small); both because, as writtend, it is normal to have waters warming slower than lands, and because lands» temperatures are often measured in a not so precise way (despite they continue to give us a global uncertainity in TT values which is barely the instrumental's one)-- but, to point out, HadCRU and MSU of last years (I mean always 2002 - 2006) follow much better waters» temperatures trend; — metropolis and larger cities temperature trends actually show an increase in UHI effect, but I think the sites are few, and the covered area is very small worldwide, so the global effect is very poor (but it still can be sensible for regional effects); but I would not run out a small warming trend for airport measurements due mainly to three things: increasing jet planes traffic, enlarging airports (then more buildings and more asphalt — if you follow motor sports, or simply live in a town / city, you will know how easy they get very warmer than air during day, and how much it can slow night - time cooling) and overall having airports nearer to cities (if not becoming an area inside the city after some decade of hurban growth, e.g. Milan - Linate); — I found no point about UHI in towns and villages; you will tell me they are not large cities; but, in comparison with 20-40-60 years ago when they were «countryside», many small towns and villages have become part of larger hurban areas (at least in Europe and Asia) so examining just larger cities would not be enough in my opinion to get a full view of UHI effect (still remembering that it has a small global effect: we can say many matters are due to UHI instead of GW, maybe even that a small part of measured GW is due to UHI, and that GW measurements are not so precise to make us able to make good analisyses and predictions, but not that GW is due to UHI).

Because of the small number of species involved in small areas over different studies, Kharouba's team could not find a statistically significant link between temperature and changes in how species sync together.

Re # 3 The Basics should explain how small change in average global temperature will have very serious consequences.

One important question oceanographers are trying to answer is how small changes in the placement, temperature, speed and volume of currents might result in large or abrupt changes in Earth's long - term climate.