Sentences with phrase «more warm current»

Not exact matches

Although its current license plate features a minimalistic rendering of the state capitol building, Nebraska's plates were more colorful until 2016, when they were enlivened by the warm tones of the state bird and flower (the western meadowlark and goldenrod, respectively).

It does indeed cause some warming of our planet, and we should thank Providence for that, because without the greenhouse warming of CO2 and its more potent partners, water vapor and clouds, the earth would be too cold to sustain its current abundance of life.

Sentiments apart, some players currently warming Chelsea bench are sure starters should they get to our team: Petr Cech, Felipe Luiz, Willian, Ramirez, even the poor Mikel can play a holding midfielders more any of our current players cited there!

The Government has put in place legislation which requires any future Government to reach this first goal however this analysis and subsequent figures from Policy Exchange's report: Warmer Homes — Improving fuel poverty and energy efficiency policy in the UK highlights current resources are less than half of what is required to meet this target, let alone a more ambitious timeframe.

A recent study (pdf) estimated that at the current rate of global warming, Manhattan will face a sea level rise of 2 feet or more by 2080.

Ocean currents bringing unusually warm water, for instance, could shift away more from Greenland, or move in closer, he said.

If climate change gets catastrophic — and the world sees more than 6 degrees Celsius warming of average temperatures — the planet will have left the current geologic period, known as the Quaternary and a distant successor to the Ordovician, and have returned to temperatures last seen in the Paleogene period more than 30 million years ago.

Some glaciers on the perimeter of West Antarctica are receiving increased heat from deep, warm ocean currents, which melt ice from the grounding line, releasing the brake and causing the glaciers to flow and shed icebergs into the ocean more quickly.

If global emissions continue at the current trajectory, Australia is expected to warm more than 9 F by 2090.

Velicogna and her colleagues also measured a dramatic loss of Greenland ice, as much as 38 cubic miles per year between 2002 and 2005 — even more troubling, given that an influx of fresh melt water into the salty North Atlantic could in theory shut off the system of ocean currents that keep Europe relatively warm.

But current methods to desalinate water come at a very high cost in terms of energy, which means more greenhouse gases and more global warming.

Extreme weather does not prove the existence of global warming, but climate change is likely to exaggerate it — by messing with ocean currents, providing extra heat to forming tornadoes, bolstering heat waves, lengthening droughts and causing more precipitation and flooding.

Unexpectedly, this more detailed approach suggests changes in Antarctic coastal winds due to climate change and their impact on coastal currents could be even more important on melting of the ice shelves than the broader warming of the ocean.

«Even in this current warming climate, some mountains are so high that the temperatures are still below freezing, and the warming ocean may provide more precipitation to drive some of the glaciers to advance,» Batbaatar said.

Even with more beetles munching on them, an increase of 2 °C — the current target cap for global warming — bumps the average mosquito's probability of survival into adulthood by 53 %.

If the new results are correct, that means warming will come on faster, and be more intense, than many current predictions.

She also emphasises the importance of the study to current debates about a human role in climate warming: «Cumulative archaeological data clearly demonstrates that humans are more than capable of reshaping and dramatically transforming ecosystems.

This would not give us a more informative an answer about what the relative attribution of the 20th century warming is, but would perhaps give us a range on what it could be, given our current lack of knowledge and understanding.

It seems far more likely that volcanic activity and the natural ice age cycles are causing the current, temporary warming trend.

Natural changes in winds, air pressures and ocean currents were found to be responsible for more than 80 percent of the observed warming during the 112 years studied.

Current data are not accurate enough to identify whether warming started earlier in the Southern Hemisphere (SH) or Northern Hemisphere (NH), but a major deglacial feature is the difference between North and South in terms of the magnitude and timing of strong reversals in the warming trend, which are not in phase between the hemispheres and are more pronounced in the NH (Blunier and Brook, 2001).

Assuming the current anthropogenic CO2 forcing is larger than orbital forcings, shouldn't we expect more than 5C warming as an ultimate result?

He attributes the current temperature increase to Earth recovering from the Little Ice Age and, in the same article, states that «no consensus exists that man - made emissions are the primary driver of global warming or, more importantly, that global warming is accelerating and dangerous.»

For example, I am patiently waiting for someone at the Guardian to address the serious misrepresentations of Oxburgh and Muir Russell made by Steve McIntyre at last week's panel discussions in the U.K. (Not to mention McIntyre's characterization of paleoclimatology as little more than «phrenology» or his inability to answer a simple question about attribution of current warming — and don't get me started on Fred Pearce).

It's proving to be the mvp of my current wardrobe that's transitioning into warm weather pieces, but still needs something more than a light layer over the top.

Warm Me Up is the perfect natural colored lipstick for all skin tones that can create a more current look with

Manta Point and Crystal Bay can be more challenging due to the currents and cold water, and Nusa Lembongan is the relaxing, warmer, shallower dive usually done after a long lunch break and surface interval.

; — increasingly warm waters running into the area from Siberian rivers; — Atlantic currents becoming increasingly warm and making their way further into the Arctic (more an issue in the Svarlbard area than ESAS?)

Seems this might hold for larger scale events, such as the arctic ice melting (i.e., there would be more warming in the arctic ocean in our current times, except some of the «warming» energy is going into the melting process rather than warming).

Other factors would include: — albedo shifts (both from ice > water, and from increased biological activity, and from edge melt revealing more land, and from more old dust coming to the surface...); — direct effect of CO2 on ice (the former weakens the latter); — increasing, and increasingly warm, rain fall on ice; — «stuck» weather systems bringing more and more warm tropical air ever further toward the poles; — melting of sea ice shelf increasing mobility of glaciers; — sea water getting under parts of the ice sheets where the base is below sea level; — melt water lubricating the ice sheet base; — changes in ocean currents -LRB-?)

«A new study, prepared at the request of the Russian security agencies, concludes that global warming is likely to make it impossible for Moscow to continue to export oil and gas at current rates and thus over the next decade or more will undermine the foundations of Russia's economic recovery and international standing...

So, to be «CLEAR»,... Climate «Change» (current or more «recent» euphemism for Global «Warming») is NOT synonymous with, oh... let me see... «WEATHER»... the «SEASONS» («Duh?!?»)... or, the «NATUR» (AL) operation of the Earth (our World).

The current rate (over the last 2 years) is about 1 m per century and we still have a lot more warming to cause in a BAU scenario.

Thus doubling the solar wind velocity [which is what happens during these solar wind peaks of 500 - 1000 km / s and more increases the dynamic pressure pulse four fold, increases the electrical field - aligned currents, which then increases ionospheric Joule heating which contribute to global warming.

To make things even more difficult, the current rate of warming is not comparable with previous periods, where greenhouse gas increases were much slower.

While it has gotten about one degree warmer since 1900, there is no clear evidence that current climate is anywhere outside of natural variability, and mankind is, at this time, successfully living in climate extremes ranging from the far North to the Equator where climate differences are much more than 3C.

Link iv.1: therefore current warmth is not unprecedented Link iv.2: therefore something other than man - made forcing can be responsible for this level of warming Link iv.3: therefore today's warming is more likely caused by something natural than by man - made forcing.

Since it is well encased in Ice, I do not think that currents of warm water coing from the Atlantic could be to blame, but perhaps the Volcanism under the North Pole is more active than usual.

This suggests to me that he was getting the basics more or less right, which in turn emphasises the point that the best models and theory we have all predict and have consistently predicted the same thing: warming, and quite a bit of it by the end of this century if we keep dumping CO2 in the atmosphere at our current rates.

It's too soon to say whether the current «pause» in warming is anything more than statistics being clouded by one unusual El Nino event, but we should be thinking now about possible explanations just in case something more interesting is going on.

The second aerosol indirect effect is more likely to cause cooling than warming because, to the best current knowledge, high clouds are more likely to warm climate, whereas low clouds are more likely to cool.

However, it is important to keep in mind that we might easily more than double it if we really don't make much effort to cut back (I think the current estimated reserves of fossil fuels would increase CO2 by a factor of like 5 or 10, which would mean a warming of roughly 2 - 3 times the climate sensitivity for doubling CO2 [because of the logarithmic dependence of the resulting warming to CO2 levels]-RRB-... and CO2 levels may be able to fall short of doubling if we really make a very strong effort to reduce emissions.

Second, «always» is forever, but ice isn't, especially since on our current greenhouse gas emissions path, we may see more than 5 °C global warming this century.

In fact, if humanity takes no action and this century will bring a temperature rise of 2 ºC, 3 ºC or even more, the current discussions over whether the 14th Century was a few tenths of a degree warmer or the 17th a few tenths cooler than previously thought will look rather academic.

That, and the destabilized structures in the arctic from the melting permafrost demonstrate that the «cost» side of the current warming trend is already occurring and making people's lives more difficult, especially those who are losing their homes.

If there was more natural variation in the past millenia, specifically due to solar changes, then that goes at the cost of the GHG / aerosol combination, as both are near impossible to distinguish from each other in the warming of the last halve century... Solar activity has never been as high, and for an as long period, as current in the past millenium (and even the past 8,000 years).

Apparently the current belief (discussed starting on page 18, and like most such statements accompanied by a caveat that much more research is needed) is that the PDO itself is closely linked to global warming, which is to say we can expect it to spend a lot more time in the positive phase as global warming progresses.

Given all the independent lines of evidence pointing to average surface warming over the last few decades (satellite measurements, ocean temperatures, sea - level rise, retreating glaciers, phenological changes, shifts in the ranges of temperature - sensitive species), it is highly implausible that it would lead to more than very minor refinements to the current overall picture.

Even if there is equal warming in the tropics, but the heat is not dissipated to the poles fast enough by the ocean currents, the area of high SSTs will increase and more heat will dissipated by other means like TC's.

A more reasonable natural variability / forcing argument might go something like this: 1) There is natural variability of climate due to solar activity 2) Climate is changing now 3) Forcing can result in climate change, but the response of the C cycle to forcing is poorly understood 4) Forcing is happening now 5) Forcing and / or solar activity could be to blame for current warming trends Is this unreasonable?