Sentences with phrase «measuring temperature even»

The thermometer has easy backlight screen that makes it possible to measure the temperature even at night.

To his great surprise, he measured a temperature even higher than that within any of the visible rays.

Not exact matches

I even used an oven thermometer to check the oven temperature and a ruler to measure out the width of the cookie slices.

We sat down and figured out a solution that worked by creating a bracelet that monitors GPS, measures Heart Rate and Ambient Temperature and even more.

Furthermore, you don't even need to touch your baby to measure the temperature.

What's good about this thermometer is that when you use them, you don't have to touch your baby's skin and in fact, you can measure his / her temperature even if the baby is sleeping.

You will need a basal thermometer to measure your basal body temperature, and you'll need take your temperature before you even get up out of bed in the morning.

TESS» big brother will have the power to measure the temperature and composition of many of the TESS planets — even to monitor their weather.

They measured the participants» core body temperature, which normally falls at night, as well as blood concentrations of melatonin and of a stress hormone called cortisol that drops in the evening.

Even by Antarctic standards, it is a brutal place, with the dubious honor of holding the record for the lowest measured temperature anywhere on the planet, a mind -(if not body --RRB- numbing — 129 degrees Fahrenheit -LRB--- 89 degrees Celsius).

For the first time, using sophisticated tools to measure skin color, blood flow, and temperature, researchers found that patients on the drug who had a very rapid onset of flushing — redness, pain, swelling, and heat to the face — rated the experience far more harshly than patients whose skin changed gradually, even to the point of extreme redness or change in temperature over time.

This past July researchers examining data from Cassini's mass spectrometer announced that the icy debris contains ammonia, a potent antifreeze that could keep water in a liquid state even at the deep - freeze temperatures -LRB--- 136 degrees Fahrenheit) measured near the vents.

Matei Georgescu, associate director of the School of Geographical Sciences and Urban Planning at Arizona State University, explains that even though satellite - measured land surface temperatures may not be an ideal indicator, this limited data can still help answer research questions.

By taking a few special measures you can ensure you have a safe, enjoyable and highly productive workout even when the temperature soars.

That said, even if the Shiraseru Am doesn't fulfill its main goal of understanding your pet's emotions, it's still a pretty nifty gadget that helps to measure your furkid's temperature to avoid heat exhaustion, analyse its calorie intake and loss, as well as keep track of its movements.

Ticks can survive in cold temperatures, even snow, so if you have an outdoor pet, preventative measures against ticks are in order.

Or, even worse, finding a thermometer to measure temperature in the first place.

For a long time now climatologists have been tracking the global average air temperature as a measure of planetary climate variability and trends, even though this metric reflects just a tiny fraction of Earth's net energy or heat content.

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.

Even if you leave climate science completely out of it and just measure extreme temperatures, the statistical record of global temperatures shows that three - standard deviation events have increased from 0.25 % of the time (from 1951 - 1980) to 10 % of the time now.

What surprised me was that such a significant effect was unrecognized in all the years that the pan evaporation rate had been measured, even though it has been affecting global temperatures.

For one thing, they are not measuring temperature, and not even measuring a surface temperature proxy, but rather a tropospheric temperature.

Even if you measure a temperature it COULD manage, you need a different instrument to measure temperatures in a range.

If, for the sake of discussion, measuring the year - by - year temperatures and coming up with anamolies that add up to 0.7 degrees over 100 years or so is dicey, measuring reliably the even finer temperature gradient one meter, five meters, 100 meters, whatever, has to be damn near physically impossible, is it not?

But even if you have a thermometer that is effectively 100 % accurate, you haven't measured the global temperature, you've just read one very small segment of the global atmosphere.

[Response: The changes being measured are much larger than 0.04 C since the variations in temperature are not even in space and time.

Even EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy admitted the fact when she told Congress that EPA can not measure the impact of the proposed Clean Power Plan on global temperatures, because it would likely be incredibly small.

Most of these things increase the temperature at the measuring instrument at least part of the year: pavement and walls reflect heat towards it, heated buildings radiate heat, and there are even airconditioning units venting hot air at the instruments at some sites.

We can't even measure the temperature for October, 2008, so one might be skeptical of 5 million years: — RRB -.

Surface temperatures over land haven't gone up much, but that's not the only or even the best way to measure the amount of warming.

Jim Cripwell:» Even if you succeed in measuring the radiation «budget», there is still the problem of how you go from a change in radiative forcing to a change in global temperature.»

I have looked at the physics that claims that this can be done, and I am as certain as I can be that there is no proper physics that allows us to even estimate, let alone measure, how much global temperature changes as a result of a change in radiative forcing.

* There is too much conflicting evidence about climate change to know whether it is actually happening * Current climate change is part of a pattern that has been going on for millions of years * Climate change is just a natural fluctuation in Earth's temperatures * Even if we do experience some consequences from climate change, we will be able to cope with them * The effects of climate change are likely to be catastrophic * The evidence for climate change is unreliable * There are a lot of very different theories about climate change and little agreement about which is right * Scientists have in the past changed their results to make climate change appear worse than it is * Scientists have hidden research that shows climate change is not serious * Climate change is a scam * Social / behavioural scepticism measures * Climate change is so complicated, that there is very little politicians can do about it * There is no point in me doing anything about climate change because no - one else is * The actions of a single person doesn't make any difference in tackling climate change * People are too selfish to do anything about climate change * Not much will be done about climate change, because it is not in human nature to respond to problems that won't happen for many years * It is already too late to do anything about climate change * The media is often too alarmist about climate change * Environmentalists do their best to emphasise the worst possible effects of climate change * Climate change has now become a bit of an outdated issue * Whether it is important or not, on a day - to - day basis I am bored of hearing about climate change

Even global surface temperatures (which is how Spencer is likely measuring «global warming», although they only account for about 2 % of the Earth's warming), have warmed about 0.2 °C over the past 15 years, according to the best available measurements.

Even the most pronounced warming, evident from the cities of Hobart and Melbourne, is within what could be considered natural — though the trends shown here are likely to be artificially exaggerated by the method of measuring temperature since 1996 ** (electronic probes) and the urban heat island (UHI) effect.

Modern methods are far from being able to accurately measure the planet «s global temperature even today, so measurements made 50 or 100 years ago are even less reliable.

But I don't understand him as even being committed to the idea that dendros have the tools to measure temperature in the absence of climate change, simply because all kinds of things are going on with a tree as well as temperature.

You dismiss the natural variability because you argue it is too small to explain the 20th century temperature trends, even though you do not know how to measure it.

... Modern methods are far from being able to accurately measure the planet's overall temperature even today, so measurements made 50 or 100 years ago are even less reliable.»

As one measures temperature, up the gravity well, from sea level, the temperature drops even though solar flux is constant.

Even if punctiliously adhered to, it would reduce the calculated temperature rise by 0.05 degrees Celsius at most — an amount so insignificant it can hardly be measured.

Massaged isn't a word I would agree with, of course, but nevertheless the simple example I described showed how it was possible to measure temperature to a fraction of a degree even when the potential errors on the data points was as much as + / - 5 deg.

Perhaps some warming that is so modest that it is hard to even measure in the temperature data.

Even for the most recent century, the huge data sets of directly measured surface temperatures have their problems, and the stories that these data tell are revised in one way or another as new ideas about the correct method of analyzing the data appear on the scene.

These effects produced / induced in the Atmosphere can readily produce fluctuations in measure of «System Temperature» over a few Decades and even Centuries, whilst slower alterations to Turbulent Process in the liquid of the Ocean trend to produce fluctuation in measures of «System Temperature» over multiple Centuries.

Thus we are comparing — even though we are measuring the temperature here — apples and oranges.

That 150 C range of temperatures also covers a wide variety of terrains, and ground cover, even deep oceans, and the thermal energy flows in each of those different environments relate to the local temperature in totally different ways, so there is no relationship between the «average» global temperature (even if it was possible to measure such a number) and the energy balance of the planet.

The zeroth law of thermodynamics is precisely that statement; without it there is no such thing as thermometry and we can't even measure a temperature in the first place.

Even he and his supporters admit his original hockey stick was based entirely upon a small amount of tree ring data (which the NAS says should not be used to measure temperature).

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).