Sentences with phrase «ice core records going»

@ Michael Lewis (not that he's still listening) «Ice core records go back thousands of years, but are not helpful in the past 2,000 years.»

-LSB-...] see this again in the ice core record going back thousands of years (as I noted in this post).

«Carbon dioxide is higher now in the atmosphere than it has been for millions of years and the rate of increase has not been seen, certainly not in the ice core record going back 800,000 years,» Tans told Mashable.

Not exact matches

Current research methods such as ice - core drilling can produce high - quality records of aerosols and soot going back centuries and even millennia, he says, and «these written accounts provide a good complement» to the data.

Understanding how that would affect the climate will require going beyond historical records of climate change, or even the information encoded in tree rings or ice cores, to what scientists call «deep time» records of conditions on Earth, according to a new NAS analysis.

Readers can look for themselves at the Greenland ice core record and decide whether there's anything of consequence going on around 41K before present that looks any different from other glacial - interglacial cycles.You can look at the GISP data yourself by downloading

Methane changes much more quickly than CO2 in the ice core records, through the Younger Dryas for example, which lasted 1000 years, methane goes back to glacial values while CO2 sort of hovers in place.

Had he done so, he would have drawn a line that went up only 1/3 of the distance implied by the simple correlation with CO2 shown by the ice core record.

In any event, there is unequivocal geologic evidence for parts of the GIS still in tact during the last interglacial, and Northern Hemisphere ice core records (see NEEM) now go back that far, which rules out ice - free conditions at the time in the NH.

Methane changes much more quickly than CO2 in the ice core records, through the Younger Dryas for example, which lasted 1000 years, methane goes back to glacial values while CO2 sort of hovers in place.

Now the locations of avaialble proxy data (tree rings, ice cores, ocean sediment records, corals etc.) are not necessarily optimally spread out, but the spatial sampling error is actually quite easy to calculate, and goes into the error bars shown on most reconstructions.

And scientists can sample ice cores, permafrost records, and tree rings to make some assumptions about the sea ice extent going back 1,500 years.

YES — CO2 HAS BEEN ON AN UPWARD CLIMB, to levels above those seen for the last few ice ages (with the proviso that ice cores records have poorer resolution the further back in time one goes; there may have been short - lived CO2 spikes that we can not see); is all of that human - driven, or is there a natural warming trend driving the release of biotic CO2?

There are temperature records from ice cores going back almost a million years.

This method allowed them to see further back than the precision records preserved in cores of polar ice, which go back only 800,000 years.

Temperature has gone up and down but it is difficult to measure precisely with the proxy records of ice cores the Anarctic and Greenland and sediment cores in the ocean.

However, an improved calibration isn't going to change the first order conclusion that ice core CO2, like other gas analyses, is heavily low pass filtered, and should not blend smoothly into the instrument record, even as it has been subjected to heavy - handed processing to produce the Keeling Curve.

Paleoclimatological records are studies of past climate from records that are from proxy data, from ice cores, tree rings, sediments, and they go back thousands of years in the past.

There are ice core records with 50 - year resolution going back to 1000AD: http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/co2/graphics/lawdome.gif.

Your example does not explain where the 30 billion tons of human emissions goes, it doesn't explain why CO2 is rising, it doesn't explain why the rise has accelerated, and it requires the ice core records to be wrong.

There are a host of other problems with Salby's «model», such as the ice core record, and where the warming came from in the first place, but there's no need to go into these details when the fundamental premise of Salby's argument is so clearly wrong.

Hansen's climate analyses have been based not only on the very basic physics that goes into climate model design, but on the detailed studies of the geological ice core and isotope records that are used to constrain and confirm climate model sensitivity.

Spectrum: From ice cores, we have a pretty accurate temperature record going back about a million years.

As another general comment about your line of reasoning, the fact that the ice core record does not conslusively rule out huge and erratic jumps and dips in CO2 on decadal scales is not evidence that it was going on either.

So like tree rings and ice cores, the geologic record should contain all ~ 165 405Kyr cycles going back to the demise of the dinosaurs ~ 65Mya (which I conjecture, is what Laskar is really trying to get to, a more definitive dating of that exnction event).

Readers can look for themselves at the Greenland ice core record and decide whether there's anything of consequence going on around 41K before present that looks any different from other glacial - interglacial cycles.You can look at the GISP data yourself by downloading

Recall that Bradley had complained that that Jones and Mann had failed to consider what went into the Yang composite «2 ice core delta 18O records of dubious relationship to temperature».

You really should consider what went into this — 2 ice core delta 18O records of dubious relationship to temperature (one is cited as correlating with NW China temperatures at r = 0.2 - 0.4), 3 tree ring series, one of which is a delta C - 13 record of questionable climatic significance (to be generous).