Sentences with phrase «measure global mean»

Are long tide gauge records in the wrong place to measure global mean sea level rise?

Regarding your second comment, in point of fact temperature increase is linear with logarithmically increasing CO2: climate sensitivity, you may recall, measures global mean surface temperature increase per doubling of atmospheric concentration of CO2.

Regarding your second comment, in point of fact temperature increase is linear with logarithmically increasing CO2: climate sensitivity, you may recall, measures global mean surface temperature increase per doubling of atmospheric concentration of CO2.

Not exact matches

When central banks around the world cut rates after the recession, it was meant to be a temporary measure to help stimulate the global economy.

«If you were to try to measure global precipitation on the ground — I mean currently I can fit all of the rain gauges on the globe in the area of about a basketball court,» he said.

That some of the forces governing capital flows and asset values are driven not by market - determined expected return but by policy measures directed at, for example, an exchange rate objective means that at least some of what we observe in global capital markets may be attributed to these distortions.

Despite what officials described as a warm meeting, China and the European Union could not agree on a broader final communique meant to focus on a range of other issues discussed at the talks, including a commitment to free trade and measures needed to reduce a global steel glut.

During the middle of the 18th Century and well into the beginning of the 19th Century India produced far more textiles — and usually much cheaper and of better quality — than did England, but a number of measures aimed at undermining Indian textile producers and protecting British textile producers (tariffs that almost always exceeded 50 %, for example, and by 1813 were as high as 85 %) meant that at some point in the first half of the 19th Century the British textile industry had become the most efficient in the world and was able largely to eliminate the Indian textile industry from global competition.

And, of course, those commitments and associated domestic measures are just Canada's means to achieve the ends of contributing to reducing global greenhouse gas emissions to a level that avoids the dangerous climate change, the shared goal set out in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and reiterated in the Paris Agreement.

Manchester United have beaten Bayern Munich and Real Madrid to reclaim their position as the biggest brand in world football, becoming the first club to pass the $ 1billion mark.The brand Finance, which measures a team's «brand power» and its ability to monetise its global recognition, shows United as top of the pile despite two trophyless seasons at Old Trafford.I mean how is that even possible?

Baby Milk Action also pointed out that the Assembly adopted the Code as a «minimum requirement», that human rights are meant to be universal and that the Nestlé «protect» marketing strategy is global, hence the need to invoke measures at an international level.

In turn, sharing scientific and indigenous predictive capabilities is meant to improve coastal ice interpretation and prediction based on satellite imagery, assist communities refining public safety measures, and to add local sea ice to parameters used in assessing global climate change in the Arctic.

Research investment in these diseases has been poorly documented and global R&D investments are not systematically measured or tracked, meaning there are few cross-funder analyses that show the impact and relevance of funding decisions.

To reach further back in time and provide a long - term record that can inform global climate models, scientists are turning to other means of measuring ice mass.

One common measure of climate sensitivity is the amount by which global mean surface temperature would change once the system has settled into a new equilibrium following a doubling of the pre-industrial CO2 concentration.

The global mean temperature rise of less than 1 degree C in the past century does not seem like much, but it is associated with a winter temperature rise of 3 to 4 degrees C over most of the Arctic in the past 20 years, unprecedented loss of ice from all the tropical glaciers, a decrease of 15 to 20 % in late summer sea ice extent, rising sealevel, and a host of other measured signs of anomalous and rapid climate change.

In this study, the primary cognitive end - points measured were the mean change from baseline in the AD Assessment Scale - Cognitive subscale, and global scores in the AD Cooperative Study — Clinical Global Impression of Change (Henderson et al., global scores in the AD Cooperative Study — Clinical Global Impression of Change (Henderson et al., Global Impression of Change (Henderson et al., 2009).

When central banks around the world cut rates after the recession, it was meant to be a temporary measure to help stimulate the global economy.

The surface temperature increase that partially gave rise to concerns about global warming coincided with a move to tethered electronic measuring devices (um, I think that means thermometers) that forced the movement of many stations closer to buildings and developed areas, causing warming that may not have been corrected for.

What we mean by premature is that there is no evidence in the literature to support a claim that global warming has resulted in demonstrable effects on hurricane impacts, whether they are measured in terms of economics or otherwise.

The IPCC claims the models» global (wide) mean annual temperatures is highly correlated (0.98) with measured actual (ignoring for now the question of the validity and reliability (noise) of the measurements themselves).

If you're talking about global mean temperature I would advise you to compare the projections of the IPCC to the actual measurements of GISS as well as HadCRUT, RSS MSU, and UAH MSU measured data.

Indeed, there's a world of difference between citing one paper that has done something that MIGHT rebalance the global mean temperature data — as Joe's post suggests — and then assuming that the problem is fixed and the indicator remains the first best only way to measure global goals despite the fact that natural variability in the global mean surface temperature will also make that a sluggish measure.

So far, the data suggest it is a more responsive measure, but of course OHC alone is inadequate — not least because of coverage issues that are even worse than the GMT [global mean temperature] data sets.

I thus believe that to this day global mean temperature can not be measured but only inferred.

To the contrary, they are at pains to point out that «difficulties in measuring clouds means it is unclear how global cloud properties have changed over [the past 30 years]», and suggest that «the [ISCCP] dataset contains considerable features of an artificial origin.»

By taking concrete measures to enact ample reform, emulating the precedent created by Brazil after the assassination of Chico Mendes, Peru and the global community can honor Edwin Chota and other martyrs, giving some meaning to this tragedy

Mark, by «VERY GOOD» do you mean the reliability, variances and error bars of measuring average global mean temperatures and CO2 mixing ratios over the past 150 years is about as good as measuring your height over the past 30 years?

One common measure of climate sensitivity is the amount by which global mean surface temperature would change once the system has settled into a new equilibrium following a doubling of the pre-industrial CO2 concentration.

I fully understand your desire to move on from the global mean temperature as the sole metric being considered (and I think that most of the community is moving in a similar direction), but for better or for worse, it is still, and will likely remain, an important measure.

But stringent fuel - efficiency measures for cars and trucks, and a shift which sees one - in - four cars being electric by 2040, means that China is no longer the main driving force behind global oil use — demand growth is larger in India post-2025.

If global temperature has no agreed scientific meaning, it is meaningless, then measuring it seems pointless.

Closing Note: The additional problems with measuring and calculating global mean sea surface temperature are discussed at length in numerous posts at ClimateAudit and in the papers that are the subjects of or the references used for those posts.

Being off by 100 % means that global warming will not be a problem at all and the sensitivity measure is vastly overstated.

The Heartland Institute) that NASA satellite mean global temperature levels for the last ten years have not measured any increse; in fact a non-statistically significant increase has been measured.

I never undestood why people admitted so easily that global temperature was a way to measure energy gain of the climate system... you have to assume first that the climate system is a very stable machine first... By saying «we can measure yet» it means their assumption were..

Second, I haven't said that «global mean (surface) temperatures aren't actually a measure of global warming.»

In case you're interested in knowing what I think (as someone not smart enough or knowledgeable enough to debate the science)-- I would say that global mean (surface) temperatures are an indicator (or measure) of global warming — but they are only one measure of such, but not sufficient as a complete measurement.

It means you can quantitatively MEASURE the effect that CO2 has on global temperatures against the background on natural noise variations.

It was only when «global warming» stopped that he and others started saying global mean (surface) temperatures weren't actually a measure of global warming.

Our study suggests that these patterns may also exist in deseasonalized monthly means of the measured temperature record in the post industrial era, a period that is normally associated with global warming and climate change.

Besides I strongly oppose (like R.Pielke and many others) the idea that the «global time average of the surface temperature» has any physical meaning or is a valid metrics to measure the «climate» and I can't see the beginning of a valid reason why it should correlate to any relevant dynamical parameter.

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).

Global mean sea level is measured using tide gauge records and also, since 1993, satellite data.

The historical responsibility is not based on cumulative emissions but instead measured in terms of the countries» estimated contribution to the increase in global - mean surface - air temperature.

Offsetting through our integrated Climate + Care projects means you not only fund emission reductions to address your unavoidable carbon footprint, but deliver measured outcomes which can contribute to the UN Global Goals and your other business objectives.

Also, the «global mean temperature» is a misnomer for a temperature is an example of a measure but this «temperature» lacks the property of a measure that is known as «additivity.»

If your null hypothesis is that some measure of global average temperature hasn't changed since 1979, then I'm reasonably certain that having the same temperature in 2008 as 1979 means you can not reject that hypothesis.

Then there are the much more accurate and comprehensive satellite measurement systems, RSS / UAH, which measure 24/7 the average temperature of every cubic inch of the lower troposphere — the exact place where global warming is meant to occur, according to the theory.

54 % «believe» the warming measured over the last 100 yrs is NOT «within the range of natural temperature fluctuation» [means that 46 % thinks that it is within the Natural Range]-- 56 % see a 50 - 50 chance that global temps will rise 2 * C or more during the next 50 to 100 yrs.