Sentences with phrase «natural cooling effects»

Global surface temperatures have continued to rise steadily beneath short - term natural cooling effects, and the rise in global heat content has not slowed at all.

Could you please define «short term», so we would know when the anthropogenic greenhouse forcing is expected to trump the recent natural cooling effects, whatever they may be.

Global surface temperatures have continued to rise steadily beneath short - term natural cooling effects, and the rise in global heat content has not slowed at all.

Grooming offers a natural cooling effect that can help your feline feel more comfortable when the temperature soars.

Seafloor sediments show that during past ice ages, more iron - rich dust blew from chilly, barren landmasses into the oceans, apparently producing more algae in these areas and, presumably, a natural cooling effect.

1998 was a strong El Nino year, when temperatures are forced higher, whereas 2008 was a strong La Nina, when there is a natural cooling effect.

Well - known for its breathability and natural cooling effect, linen is a popular year - round fabric choice for warmer climates and warm sleepers.

Not exact matches

Because the Earth's climate has a certain amount of natural variability, and those natural cycles can have warming and cooling effects that last for a couple of decades or even longer, Tebaldi said, it takes time to detect a change.

Scientists can measure how much energy greenhouse gases now add (roughly three watts per square meter), but what eludes precise definition is how much other factors — the response of clouds to warming, the cooling role of aerosols, the heat and gas absorbed by oceans, human transformation of the landscape, even the natural variability of solar strength — diminish or strengthen that effect.

Of course, the fact that dust has played a natural cooling role in the past does not mean that the deliberate application of iron filings to the ocean surface would have a similar cooling effect today.

In a paper published this month in Geophysical Research Letters, Lovejoy concludes that a natural cooling fluctuation during this period largely masked the warming effects of a continued increase in human - made emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases.

Because the AP1000 design uses a chimney effect to draw air outside of the containment vessel upward (a design Westinghouse envisioned for cooling the containment and preventing rust using natural circulation), if radioactive air were to seep from the steel vessel, it would be ushered up into the outside air through the hole in the shield building roof.

One just included the effective influence on temperatures from manmade forces (including greenhouse gases and aerosols, which tend to have a cooling effect), while the second included both manmade and natural ones (including volcanic activity and solar radiation).

Over the last 30 years of direct satellite observation of the Earth's climate, many natural influences including orbital variations, solar and volcanic activity, and oceanic conditions like El Nino (ENSO) and the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) have either had no effect or promoted cooling conditions.

Each en - suite bathroom is fitted with creamy natural colored stone That matches the floors throughout the villa for a cooling effect.

That is an argument for a bit of cooling due to natural cycles overcoming most of the warming effects of rapidly rising CO2.

SCIENTIFIC UNDERSTANDING of these OTHER FACTORS â MOST NOTABLY NATURAL climatic variations, changes in the sun's energy, and the cooling effects of pollutant aerosols â REMAINS INCOMPLETE.»

This is an issue because we know there is a substantial long - term natural cooling trend for high - latitude summers because of Earth orbital effects, but the trend is nearly zero in the global annual average.

It would provide a partial explanation for not only the «pause» but 1910 - 1940 warming (mostly natural), the 1940 - 1980 (cooling / static period offset by increasing (but lower) CO2 effects), and the 1980 - 1998 warm period (natural and ever increasing anthropogenic effects).

Multi-signal detection and attribution analyses, which quantify the contributions of different natural and anthropogenic forcings to observed changes, show that greenhouse gas forcing alone during the past half century would likely have resulted in greater than the observed warming if there had not been an offsetting cooling effect from aerosol and other forcings.

Has anyone been able to separate the effects of the natural warming - cooling cycles, of which the earth has had numerous for aeons, from the effects of the recent rise in CO2?

Most scientists attribute this «pause» in warming to natural climate cycles that have a cooling effect on the planet, especially ocean oscillation cycles.

For instance, the warming that began in the early 20th century (1925 - 1944) is consistent with natural variability of the climate system (including a generalized lack of significant volcanic activity, which has a cooling effect), solar forcing, and initial forcing from greenhouse gases.

The leveling off between the 1940s and 1970s may be explained by natural variability and possibly by cooling effects of aerosols generated by the rapid economic growth after World War II.

Volcanic eruptions represent one kind of natural event whose lofting of sulfur dioxide high into the stratosphere can create tiny particles that can have a temporary cooling effect.

They looked at anthropogenic cooling effects and the potential for natural causes.

Akasofu's prediction is the least wrong of the contrarian predictions examined here, but with a 0.02 °C per decade cooling prediction between 2000 and 2012, has not matched the 0.06 °C per decade warming trend, despite the fact that according to Foster and Rahmstorf, natural climate influences have had an approximately 0.1 °C cooling effect since 2000.

And thirty years later, there is vigorous debate over the magnitude of both natural and anthropogenic factors, and how opposite effects of the latter (SO2 cooling versus CO2 warming) net out.

It could be a relatively cheap, effective and quick way to cool the planet by mimicking the natural effects on climate of large volcanic eruptions, but scientists concede there could be dramatic and dangerous side effects that they don't know about.

When you write - «The effect of AGW has grown while the rate of cooling due to the natural variability may be close to its maximum.»

The effect of AGW has grown while the rate of cooling due to the natural variability may be close to its maximum.

In effect, these particles — whether aerosols or kitchen table salt — could act like natural aerosols that cool the planet after a volcanic eruption.

This would be some combination of warmings and coolings due to natural and / or human influences such as aerosols, instabilities in ocean currents, Length - Of - Day (LOD) fluctuations, the stadium wave (Wyatt and Curry), the 3M effect (me, December 17, Global Environmental Change section, this AGU Fall Meeting), etc. etc..

A NATURAL cooling process which reverses the effects of global warming could be nearly TWICE as powerful as scientists previously believed.

The last decade hasn't been cooling btw, though a slower upward trend or even standstill in the trend (of one would deem it meaningful over such a short timeframe) is of course helped by the dampening effect of natural factors having a cooling effect, offsetting some of the warming effect of GHG.

But the utter incoherence of views presented by deniers gives the game away even so (it's cooling, it's warming but the sun is responsible, it's warming but some unknown natural cycle is responsible, the «greenhouse» effect violates the laws of thermodynamics, but somehow the energy radiated back to the surface by the atmosphere simply vanishes, there is a greenhouse effect but negative feed - backs make it negligible, & c ad nauseam).

I would probably generally state it as «human CO2 activity has a measurable warming impact on global average temperature that can be readily discerned from the background of natural climate change and other human effects that may cause cooling, and this warming impact will be, in general, neutral in impact for humanity and the biosphere».

Favourite plays include hyper - focus on one, extremely speculative study (T&S 09); misrepresenting the potential for abrupt cooling in the C21st, dismissing the dominance of the centennial forced trend, misrepresenting deglacial abrupt climate change; grossly over-stating the accuracy and utility of pre-CERES TOA reconstructions (especially the synthetic, non-observational ISCCP - FD reconstruction); hyper - focus on interannual OHC variability; confusion of cause and effect with long - term trends in OHC (CO2 forcing denial) and general inability to see that natural variability from now on will be riding up a forced trend which will increasingly dominate climate behaviour.

Whatever the average regional temperature, it's hotter in the cities, because concentrations of traffic, business, heating, cooking, lighting and air conditioning generate what has become known as the urban heat island effect: what makes this worse is that the asphalt, tarmacadam, stone, brick, glass and tile of which cities are made absorb radiation but prevent ground evaporation as a natural cooling device.

The conclusion that Tamino draws, that natural variability has a uniformly cooling effect, and JNG's analysis that it has no effect (or maybe up to 30 % with the uncertainty analysis in his second post) are not convincing, particularly in context of their allowing for the PDO to be the pause cause since 2002.

I guess you're saying there shouldn't be??? Anyway, according to the version of the greenhouse effect theory used by the climate models, the greenhouse gases should be altering this natural temperature profile by changing the rates of «infrared cooling» from different altitudes.

The second issue raised in our Science paper (now available free, see bottom of this post) is that perhaps there shouldn't yet have been substantial long - term trends in hurricane intensity — whether we would be able detect them above the natural variability or not — because until the last couple of decades, aerosol cooling effects on hurricanes have been counteracting the effects of greenhouse gas warming.

I suspect CO2 has some warming effect, but I'm quite sure natural processes can cool to catastrophe.

In recent years, he has claimed that the Earth has been cooling since 1998 (in 2006), that the Earth is warming, but it is natural and unstoppable (in 2007), and that the warming is artificial and due to the urban heat island effect (in 2009).

If natural variability is a sort of sine wave effect, and just moves the energy around, why did La Nina have a greater cooling effect in the recent period after 1990 than El Nino had a warming effect previous to that?

The natural temperature control reduces the heat by up to seven degrees in the summer (relative to outside temperatures), due to cooling effects of evaporation, resulting in more stress - free chickens!

Natural temperature influences have had a very slight cooling effect, and natural internal variability appears to have had a fairly significant cooling effect over the past decade, but little temperature influence over longer timeNatural temperature influences have had a very slight cooling effect, and natural internal variability appears to have had a fairly significant cooling effect over the past decade, but little temperature influence over longer timenatural internal variability appears to have had a fairly significant cooling effect over the past decade, but little temperature influence over longer timeframes.

To stop catastrophic natural global cooling (CNGC) we need to pump out all the CO2 we can as a «precaution» to mitigate some of the effects of cold — which are much worse than the effects of warm.

Additionally a serious cooling period from natural causes is likely to increase oceanic CO2 absorption and so dampen down any CO2 effect in the subsequent natural upturn although the length of lag is uncertain and may be as long as 800 years.

If you know what the forcings are and their magnitude, you can predict whether the climate will warm or cool in the future and by how much, excepting the effect of natural variability (ie the internal variability of the climate system).