Sentences with phrase «if warming leads»

(In the real - world, of course, if warming leads to more water vapor and if that leads to more daytime clouds, possibly more precipitation and thunderstorms and so on, the additional warming will be reduced, but, there will still be some warming with increased GHGs).

Snow and ice reflect heat very effectively (which is why patches of snow survive long after temperatures rise above freezing), so if warming leads to less snow, then more heat will be absorbed, which warms the planet further.

Not exact matches

It's predicted that a properly optimized website should see a conversion of 1 - 5 %, so if you're receiving 3,000 visits a day, you could convert as many as 30 - 150 of your daily visitors into inquiries or warm leads.

Perhaps too warm: After taking a 1 - 0 lead early in Game 5, the Sharks sat back and played as if they were content to let Nabokov snatch another win for them.

I am pissed today hearing about Olivier Giroud three year contract and salary he is earning.That is unfair because Giroud does not deserve it.He has not worked to show that he deserves it.We should look at the quality snd output of our players before paying them.Well its too late now so we should look forward.We do nt need stats to even tell us that Girouf is usually average for arsenal than good at most times.I would have sold him if i was Wenger because he does not deserve to be leading the line still after 3 years and i doubt he will like to warm the bench.He is very lucky to have Wenger as a coach of arsenal london fc.Arsenal has not moved forward because we think getting rid of players is a bad thing.We always hesitate when it comes to selling players we do nt need.Arsenal need a world class cf not a world class cf.Its is time to move forward by addressing our mistakes.Since Van persie left we have needed a cf and ifBenzema is available we need to get rid of who we do nt need so that we move forward.Arsenal do not need Giroud though many may be against my speech.Once the premier league starts and Giroud is our main cf it shows that Wenger has not learnt from his mistakes.Just as we got Cech who to me was a need he needs to just find as a reliable and clinical cf.

(It has gotten so ridiculous that many managers let the possibility of the stopper gaining a save dictate their strategy: A closer who is warming up to start the ninth inning with a three - run lead will often sit back down if his team goes up by four.)

If Huddersfield's misery had been increased by the first - half injuries suffered by Quaner and Pritchard, the latter against his former team, another picked up by referee Mike Jones during the warm - up had earlier led to fourth official Kevin Friend instead taking charge.

The path leading up to your home is another great point of focus if you want to create a warm welcome.

«If anyone was waiting to find out whether Antarctica would respond quickly to climate warming, I think the answer is yes,» says the lead author of one of the reports, Ted Scambos of the National Snow and Ice Data Center in Boulder, Colo. «We've seen 150 miles of coastline change drastically in just 15 years.»

They found that stabilising the increase at 1.5 °C would lead to seas rising less, and more slowly, than if the planet was allowed to warm by 2 °C.

If global warming leads to an increase in monster storms, MacAyeal adds, then the entire Antarctic ice skirt could be in jeopardy: Larger sea swells could pulverize its huge icebergs and floating ice shelves.

Stable atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases would lead to continued warming, but if carbon dioxide emissions could be eliminated entirely, temperatures would quickly stabilize or even decrease over time.

The letter notes that «Stable atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases would lead to continued warming, but if carbon dioxide emissions could be eliminated entirely, temperatures would quickly stabilize or even decrease over time.

[Response: Note also that more low clouds would unambiguously mean a cooling effect, but more high clouds could lead to either a warming effect or a cooling effect, depending on the altitude of the clouds and the typical particle size in the GCR - induced clouds (if any).

Regardless of how much warming is natural vs anthropogenic, if the warming rate is half, one - third, or an even smaller fraction over the past 25 yrs than you have been led to believe it was, would that not be cause for serious reflection?

This week 2,500 of the world's leading environmental scientists warned politicians of the drastic global warming which will result if governments fail to reduce greenhouse gases.

If the Earth warms by just two degrees Celsius, the scientists predict it will lead to a sea level rise of 4.6 metres for Copenhagen.

If you fail to warm up adequately, your muscles would suffer trauma leading to leg cramps and strained ligaments because they were unprepared.

If your sales team has categorized the contacts made at the Show using some hierarchy — A, B and C levels or hot, warm and cold leads — you should be able to categorize how quickly to follow up with each one.

You can categorize how quickly to follow up with each lead if your sales team has used some type of grading system to sort the contacts made at the Show — A, B and C levels or hot, warm and cold leads.

Many pets won't drink the water in their bowls if it's too warm, and that can lead to dehydration.

But since it is linear, if the temperature rises then the water vapour will run away, because the higher temperature leads to more water vapour which causes more greenhouse warming which leads to higher temperatures.

Furthermore, if peatlands emit more methane when they are wet and a warmer world mean a wetter world, this implies that warming leads to more methane emissions.

Only if this is wrong, and the true value is lower, can we escape the fact that unabated emissions of greenhouse gases will lead to the warming projected by the IPCC.

DR PETER COX: «2040 it could be four degrees warmer, the climate change could have led to big drying particularly in the Amazon Basin, that would make the forest unsustainable, we'd expect the forest to catch fire probably, turn into savannah and maybe ultimately even desert if it gets really really dry as our model suggests.»

Althouh IPCC 4th meeting pointed out global warming is very dangous, if we do not action, the White House still so dull and not like a top country in the world to lead world agaist global warming.

I understand 5.8 is a possibility, not a high probability, but if such warming were to happen, could this lead to runaway global warming?

If this is true, should» nt global warming lead to a more La Nina like state?

But as a starting point, I'll propose now — and I'll change this if they disagree — the names of some leading scientists in this field who would NOT say there is sufficient evidence to conclude that human - caused global warming IS the main cause of increasing summer retreats of sea ice (although they would say there is strong likelihood that it will eventually dominate):

I am sure if the Argo system had brought back data that showed warming of the oceans it would have been your lead story.

[Response: If it were indeed true that CO2 always lags temperature changes, never leads (which I don't believe) then what you would have proved is that past analoges are of limited value to assessing the present warming, because in this case we do know that the forcing if from GHG's, since we know the CO2 increase is anthro — WilliaIf it were indeed true that CO2 always lags temperature changes, never leads (which I don't believe) then what you would have proved is that past analoges are of limited value to assessing the present warming, because in this case we do know that the forcing if from GHG's, since we know the CO2 increase is anthro — Williaif from GHG's, since we know the CO2 increase is anthro — William]

In order to find out if these plumes are the result of that recent warming or are simply a feature of the area, a team of researchers led by Christian Berndt of Germany's GEOMAR Helmholtz Centre for Ocean Research Kiel used a submersible to get a look at the seafloor where the methane is bubbling up.

Northern Hemisphere mean temperatures do appear to have cooled over that period, and that contrasts with a continuing increase in CO2, which if all else had been equal, should have led to warming.

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)...

«(d) even if anthropogenic warming should turn out to be pronounced as projected, it will sure be good for us, leading to abundant crops and a healthy environment, and»... lots of nice new butterflies.

As long as the collapse of civilization is a potential (if unlikely) consequence of global warming (climate change leads to agricultural collapse leads to war leads to the end of civilization), it's worth paying those premiums.

And, if the Times won't tell the oil - and - Exxon story as it relates to global warming, comprehensively and without kid gloves, then people (including me) will have to ask the BBC or other media outlets to take the lead.

If I am right, then correct processing of the data used in Forest 2006 would lead to the conclusion that equilibrium climate sensitivity (to a doubling of CO2 in the atmosphere) is close to 1 °C, not 3 °C, implying that likely future warming has been grossly overestimated by the IPCC.

And if Skolnick is accurate in his claim that «Pete Ridley is a global warming denier who argues that the «global warming hoax» is being perpetrated by the International Jewish Banking conspiracy led by the Rothschilds», then you should be thoroughly ashamed of yourself... however politically charged this issue, such anti-Semite views are disgusting.

If future global emissions are not curbed, human - driven global warming could cause further large declines in long - term temperature variability, the lead author tells Carbon Brief, which may have far - reaching effects on the world's seasons and weather.

John Carter August 8, 2014 at 12:58 am chooses to state his position on the greenhouse effect in the following 134 word sentence: «But given the [1] basics of the greenhouse effect, the fact that with just a very small percentage of greenhouse gas molecules in the air this effect keeps the earth about 55 - 60 degrees warmer than it would otherwise be, and the fact that through easily recognizable if [2] inadvertent growing patterns we have at this point probably at least [3] doubled the total collective amount in heat absorption and re-radiation capacity of long lived atmospheric greenhouse gases (nearly doubling total that of the [4] leading one, carbon dioxide, in the modern era), to [5] levels not collectively seen on earth in several million years — levels that well predated the present ice age and extensive earth surface ice conditions — it goes [6] against basic physics and basic geologic science to not be «predisposed» to the idea that this would ultimately impact climate.»

I will note that this is also a very different level of certainty from the «it is likely that increased CO2 will lead to sufficient warming to cause problems for humanity and ecosystems», which I will posit is likely, but if CO2 went up to 600 ppm and temperatures in 2100 only increased by a degree or so, I would be very surprised but would not feel like the laws of physics had been repealed.

If our emissions of carbon dioxide are causing the world to warm and lead into possibly difficult times in the future, it is important also to establish the upsides of such emission.

They reported that «no catastrophic hurricane of category 4 or 5 intensity has made landfall in the Western Lake [northern Florida] area during the last 130 year documentary record» but «If future climatic changes, whether or not related to the anticipated greenhouse warming, lead to a return of a «hyperactive» hurricane regime characteristic of the first millennium A.D., then the northeastern Gulf Coast is expected to experience a dramatic increase in the frequency of strikes by catastrophic hurricanes.»

; what leads you to believe that the physical and biological trends we've seen / measured are likely to reverse within a mere 20 years, especially if / as we enter a solar upswing; how have you accounted for warming - driven methane release; what credible peer reviewed literature on «the other side» are you describing; what supports your confidence that there is little to no probability that the AGW that you do accept will change weather patterns enough to disrupt crop planting / growing / harvesting / production severely (or do you classify famine as a natural phenomenon?)?

When a temperature anomaly of ~ 0.1 degrees Celsius (the difference between 2015 and the previous global heat record of 2014 — please note the above graph is in Fahrenheit, not Celsius) can lead to such an extreme carbon feedback response, we know we can expect a lot more feedback - induced CO2 now that world leaders are about to seal a 3.5 degrees warming deal — if at least 2030 pledges are not raised before the start of COP21, the Paris climate summit.

I've never challenged the notion that, if it exists, greenhouse warming of the atmosphere could lead to more heat being RETAINED by the oceans, which is not nearly the same thing as a DIRECT transfer of heat energy FROM the atmosphere, TO the oceans.

If you're not a global warming geek, the point of the material is that we have apparent — and I only say apparent at this point — written admissions of cooking the books, among other nastiness, by the leading names in the global warming alarmist movement.

At the latest ECS estimates of around 1.5 °C, this could lead to 2 °C warming; at the old IPCC estimate of around 3 °C, this could lead to 4 °C warming — both as an asymptotic maximum ever attainable if and when all fossil fuels are 100 % used up some 200 - 300 years from now.

If this were not true, we would not have this whole UN led global warming scare, would we?