Sentences with phrase «many warm signals»

Straw had been privately fed up with the tone of the election campaign run by Lord Mandelson, telling friends that it had sent out too many warm signals to the Lib Dems, confusing Labour voters in Lib Dem - Labour marginals.

Places like the southern Indian Ocean that showed the strongest warming signal the soonest tend to be the areas that will see the worst affects of warming, he explained.

«We expect the first heavy precipitation events with a clear global warming signal will appear during winters in Russia, Canada and northern Europe over the next 10 - 30 years,» said co-author Dr Ed Hawkins from the National Centre for Atmospheric Science at the University of Reading, UK.

One of the few exceptions to this clear global warming signal was found in large parts of the continental United States, particularly on the Eastern coast and up through the central states.

The models showed a general increase in extreme rainfall but the global warming signal was not strong enough yet to rise above the expected natural variation.

Closer to the poles the emergence of climate change in the temperature record appeared later but by the period 1980 - 2000 the temperature record in most regions of the world were showing clear global warming signals.

The warming signal, she said, is «pretty clear.»

So this change in upper atmospheric behavior can be considered part of the «fingerprint» of the expected global warming signal in the climate system.»

«These results show that the warming signal from strategies that focus only on outdoor water - use reductions can meaningfully offset the cooling effects of a major heat mitigation strategy, such as citywide cool roof deployment,» they write.

The phenomenon lowered precipitation over the oceans in the last decade, dampening the warming signal, they said.

The results call for re-examination of long - term sea - level records to detect the true warming signal, the paper says.

For the first, Geert Jan van Oldenborgh of the Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute (KNMI) used a statistical analysis of historic rainfall observations that looked at how the frequency of such an event has changed from the past, before a warming signal clearly emerged, to the present.

To investigate cloud — climate feedbacks in iRAM, the authors ran several global warming scenarios with boundary conditions appropriate for late twenty - first - century conditions (specifically, warming signals based on IPCC AR4 SRES A1B simulations).

However, as these are areas with large year - to - year variability, the most evident warming signal has occurred in parts of the middle and lower latitudes, particularly the tropical oceans.

The problem arises because most of this sea ice will melt in future global warming scenarios and the warming signal will be taken as the difference between the control [which perhaps has too much sea - ice] and the sea - ice free future.

Our system predicts that internal variability will partially offset the anthropogenic global warming signal for the next few years.

On small timescales, the El Niño effect can amplify warming signals.

They have also concentrated on the effects on weather during winter, when the Arctic warming signal is strongest.

Although the global warming signal is relatively weak today in most of the planet (outside of the Arctic), our best science indicates that the warming will greatly increase by the end of the century.»

«Using the [cherry flavored &; >) RSS data, which Santer used in determining his 17 - yr minimum time needed for a human global warming signal, the most recent 17 - yr trend is the lowest in the entire data series.»

«Using the RSS data, which Santer used in determining his 17 - yr minimum time needed for a human global warming signal»

So it is not a surprise to me to see more snow in winter, but the global warming signal should be in the snow pack in late spring.

The hockey stick provides compelling evidence for the emergence of a human - caused warming signal from the background noise of natural fluctuations in climate.

Dan H falsely claims that cite supports his broad general statement asserting «a 17 - yr minimum time needed for a global warming signal»

The climate scientists were working on this long before a climate warming signal could begin to be detected statistically.

Ray Ladbury says that the theory predicts a warming signal and the data confirms this to high confidence.

Dr. David Bromwich — president of the International Commission on Polar Meteorology — says «it's hard to see a global warming signal from the mainland of Antarctica right now.»

Example Study of «True Global Warming Signal» Finds «Remarkably Steady» Rate of Manmade Warming Since 1979

Fundamentally, a number of physically plausible hypotheses about what else might be causing the 1950 - present warming signal are being evaluated.

I think it's worth understanding that the author is assessing climate variability from an entirely regional perspective, a scale at which the global warming signal is much harder to detect.

Finally, when I raise the possibility of some undetected threshold in the current warming signal, that doesn't mean I believe it.

A human - caused warming signal is embedded in the rich, year - to - year and decade - to - decade noise of natural internal climate variability.

This overshoot is in the process of radiatively dissipating, and the climate will return to its earlier defined, greenhouse gas - forced warming signal.

I have downloaded your combined «Yamalia» data and would agree that they show a 20th century warming signal of about 1C, noting however that a similar magnitude excursion occurred ~ 300 AD.

To sum up, in my view the strength of the method of Hay et al. is that it uses the expected «fingerprints» of the global warming signal, while the strength of Church & White is to take into account the empirical patterns of natural variability.

That the noise of natural variability can temporarily be strong enough to make the underlying warming signal seem to «disappear» for short periods is nothing new.

Also worth noting that if the the «hiatus» is so fragile that even those small changes make it disappear, so is the warming signal.

We recently published a study in Scientific Reports titled Comparing the model - simulated global warming signal to observations using empirical estimates of unforced noise.

The warming signal, by contrast, emerges from a much larger data set and accordingly offers much greater statistical significance.

I would therefore argue that for the global mean the well - mixed GHGs and the counterbalancing reflecitve aerosol effects are «first - order» — without GHGs there is no appreciable warming signal, and without the aerosols, the warming from GHGs is excessive and important changes in the diurnal cycle and cloudiness are not captured.

The first paper, Smith et al. (2007), predicted «that internal variability will partially offset the anthropogenic global warming signal for the next few years.

Can you elaborate on the complex warming signal in the Nordic Seas and Barents Sea in relation to the AMOC slowdown?

You'll note, for example, a heavy focus on developed countries, with one study of East African drought and one more of flooding rains in China (neither of which found a strong global warming signal) being the exceptions.

They assume that no action will be taken before the global warming signal will be significant in the late 1990s, so the different energy - use scenarios only start diverging after that.

Three of the four climate models used produce increasing damage with time, with the global warming signal emerging on time scales of 40, 113, and 170 yr, respectively.

Unfortunately, various commentators continue to try and blame the warming signal on natural and cyclic variability, whether it's solar cycles, the AMO, or El Nino.

Some climate denialists continue to try and argue that rather than with a steady man - made warming signal, the data are better fit with abrupt step changes caused by El Niño events, followed by flat periods.

Scientists in Canada have recorded temperatures for the 71 - year peiod from 1936 to 2006, and have seen that mean monthly temperatures have increased enough to provide what they call a «substantial warming signal.»

Therefore, the projections contain little of decadal or shorter signals of variability — we're quite confident they have the global warming signal as represented by the model (except in desert regions, where one event can define the signal).

How can one find a warming signal of a tenths of a degree among all that noise?