Sentences with phrase «much the forcing assumptions»

Not exact matches

As Provine summarized the matter, «The destructive implications of evolutionary biology extend far beyond the assumptions of organized religion to a much deeper and more pervasive belief, held by the vast majority of people, that non-mechanistic organizing designs or forces are somehow responsible for the visible order of the physical universe, biological organisms, and human moral order.»

As Peter Cookson and Kristina Berger observed in 2002, «Much of the charter movement is rooted in the same assumptions and philosophy that [voucher advocates John] Chubb and [Terry] Moe use to support their belief that the American public school system should be transformed into a market - based «economy» that forces autonomous, publicly funded schools to compete for students.»

Although nearly one hundred years have passed since the birth of Dada in Zurich and much has changed in terms of the initial purpose of the movement (which was founded to diminish social pretensions, ridicule the human situation, and force audience self - awareness by attacking their common assumptions about art), there are contemporary artists, like Boller, who employ similar forms, gestures and attitudes towards materials which like a steady heart seem to keep the beat of the movement alive.

I believe the way that they would have handled it (although I could very well be wrong) is the assumption that so much of the carbon which we emit expressed as a percent will be taken up by that sink — prior to any climate forcing / feedback analysis.

Before jumping to conclusions, there needs to be much better justification of the basic assumption that we just happen to be sitting at a time when GHG forcing is larger than all other potential long term (longer than the observational record) oceanic imbalances.

For regional climate projections it does not matter overly much what assumptions underlie that forcing as long as the magnitudes of increase in radiative forcing themselves are plausible.

Given this, it is likely that the 0.3 W / m ^ 2 figure quoted in the article is a mistake, but it is possible that expected increase in forcing is greater than 0.3 W / m ^ 2 per decade; and also that different assumptions were used in the calculation, resulting in a much higher relative increase in energy imbalance for a given increase in forcing.

The governing assumption in the vast majority of GCM / climate studies is that natural variability is a) small, b) integrates to zero over time and therefore its un interesting when it comes to answering the questions we care about: How much warming will human forcing cause.

In fact, depending on their mechanism of affecting climate, they could well reinforce one another, Given that any such mechanism remains speculative, and that there isn't much correlation between the cycle involved and actual glacial «cycles», there's no real justification for any assumption (s) regarding how important such «forcing» is.

since the uncertainties in radiative flux and forcing are proportionally much greater than those in temperature changes, their assumption that errors in these three variables are all D - distributed is approximately equivalent to assuming a uniform prior distribution in S..

Pekka, the approximately uniform prior in Y is, according to F&G, a consequence of a) the choice of an OLS regression type, b) the fact that the combined errors in the measurements of forcings and net radiative balance were very much greater than errors in measurements of the surface temperature, and c) the assumption of normal distributions in the errors of the three observables.

is that the hydrostatic assumption is only accurate when the vertical acceleration is much smaller than magnitudes of the buoyancy and the vertical pressure gradient force.

Their famous attribution graph depends on the assumption that their models accurately simulate natural variability with so much precision that they can draw tiny little blue uncertainty bands around the simulations that don't overlap with the GHG forcing simulations.

The remaining 9 W m − 2 forcing requires approximately 4.8 × CO2, corresponding to fossil fuel emissions as much as approximately 10,000 Gt C for a conservative assumption of a CO2 airborne fraction averaging one - third over the 1000 years following a peak emission [21,129].

In one sentence: there are uncertainties both in how much warming for a given forcing and how much damage that warming will do; people examining temperature uncertainty tend to make simplifying assumptions like +2 C is safe, +4 C is expensive, and +6 C is catastrophic, but it is also possible that +2 C will be expensive and +3 C will be catastrophic.