Sentences with phrase «natural fluctuations due»

This is powerful evidence that the recent slowdown in global temperature increase is not a slowdown of «global warming,» i.e. man - made climate change, it's simply partial cancellation of global warming by the natural fluctuations due to ENSO.

Aside from the long - term upward trend, the analysis captures the decadal natural fluctuations due to the PDO.

The most statistics can tell us at present is that there does appear to be a genuine warming trend in figure A. Whether this trend is the effect of greenhouse gas emissions or of a natural fluctuation due to some as - yet - undiscovered mechanism can not be determined from an analysis of the global mean temperature alone.

Not exact matches

Such risks, uncertainties and other factors include, without limitation: (1) the effect of economic conditions in the industries and markets in which United Technologies and Rockwell Collins operate in the U.S. and globally and any changes therein, including financial market conditions, fluctuations in commodity prices, interest rates and foreign currency exchange rates, levels of end market demand in construction and in both the commercial and defense segments of the aerospace industry, levels of air travel, financial condition of commercial airlines, the impact of weather conditions and natural disasters and the financial condition of our customers and suppliers; (2) challenges in the development, production, delivery, support, performance and realization of the anticipated benefits of advanced technologies and new products and services; (3) the scope, nature, impact or timing of acquisition and divestiture or restructuring activity, including the pending acquisition of Rockwell Collins, including among other things integration of acquired businesses into United Technologies» existing businesses and realization of synergies and opportunities for growth and innovation; (4) future timing and levels of indebtedness, including indebtedness expected to be incurred by United Technologies in connection with the pending Rockwell Collins acquisition, and capital spending and research and development spending, including in connection with the pending Rockwell Collins acquisition; (5) future availability of credit and factors that may affect such availability, including credit market conditions and our capital structure; (6) the timing and scope of future repurchases of United Technologies» common stock, which may be suspended at any time due to various factors, including market conditions and the level of other investing activities and uses of cash, including in connection with the proposed acquisition of Rockwell; (7) delays and disruption in delivery of materials and services from suppliers; (8) company and customer - directed cost reduction efforts and restructuring costs and savings and other consequences thereof; (9) new business and investment opportunities; (10) our ability to realize the intended benefits of organizational changes; (11) the anticipated benefits of diversification and balance of operations across product lines, regions and industries; (12) the outcome of legal proceedings, investigations and other contingencies; (13) pension plan assumptions and future contributions; (14) the impact of the negotiation of collective bargaining agreements and labor disputes; (15) the effect of changes in political conditions in the U.S. and other countries in which United Technologies and Rockwell Collins operate, including the effect of changes in U.S. trade policies or the U.K.'s pending withdrawal from the EU, on general market conditions, global trade policies and currency exchange rates in the near term and beyond; (16) the effect of changes in tax (including U.S. tax reform enacted on December 22, 2017, which is commonly referred to as the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017), environmental, regulatory (including among other things import / export) and other laws and regulations in the U.S. and other countries in which United Technologies and Rockwell Collins operate; (17) the ability of United Technologies and Rockwell Collins to receive the required regulatory approvals (and the risk that such approvals may result in the imposition of conditions that could adversely affect the combined company or the expected benefits of the merger) and to satisfy the other conditions to the closing of the pending acquisition on a timely basis or at all; (18) the occurrence of events that may give rise to a right of one or both of United Technologies or Rockwell Collins to terminate the merger agreement, including in circumstances that might require Rockwell Collins to pay a termination fee of $ 695 million to United Technologies or $ 50 million of expense reimbursement; (19) negative effects of the announcement or the completion of the merger on the market price of United Technologies» and / or Rockwell Collins» common stock and / or on their respective financial performance; (20) risks related to Rockwell Collins and United Technologies being restricted in their operation of their businesses while the merger agreement is in effect; (21) risks relating to the value of the United Technologies» shares to be issued in connection with the pending Rockwell acquisition, significant merger costs and / or unknown liabilities; (22) risks associated with third party contracts containing consent and / or other provisions that may be triggered by the Rockwell merger agreement; (23) risks associated with merger - related litigation or appraisal proceedings; and (24) the ability of United Technologies and Rockwell Collins, or the combined company, to retain and hire key personnel.

Among the factors that could cause actual results to differ materially are the following: (1) worldwide economic, political, and capital markets conditions and other factors beyond the Company's control, including natural and other disasters or climate change affecting the operations of the Company or its customers and suppliers; (2) the Company's credit ratings and its cost of capital; (3) competitive conditions and customer preferences; (4) foreign currency exchange rates and fluctuations in those rates; (5) the timing and market acceptance of new product offerings; (6) the availability and cost of purchased components, compounds, raw materials and energy (including oil and natural gas and their derivatives) due to shortages, increased demand or supply interruptions (including those caused by natural and other disasters and other events); (7) the impact of acquisitions, strategic alliances, divestitures, and other unusual events resulting from portfolio management actions and other evolving business strategies, and possible organizational restructuring; (8) generating fewer productivity improvements than estimated; (9) unanticipated problems or delays with the phased implementation of a global enterprise resource planning (ERP) system, or security breaches and other disruptions to the Company's information technology infrastructure; (10) financial market risks that may affect the Company's funding obligations under defined benefit pension and postretirement plans; and (11) legal proceedings, including significant developments that could occur in the legal and regulatory proceedings described in the Company's Annual Report on Form 10 - K for the year ended Dec. 31, 2017, and any subsequent quarterly reports on Form 10 - Q (the «Reports»).

Professor Aneta Stefanovska from Lancaster University, who has been studying the physics of biological oscillations for over 20 years, said: «Combining the technique to noninvasively record the fluctuation corresponding to cerebrospinal fluid and our sophisticated methods to analyse oscillations which are not clock - like but rather vary in time around their natural values, we have come to an interesting and non-invasive method that can be used to study aging and changes due to various neurodegenerative brain aging may begin earlier than expected.»

«The recent earthquake rate changes (in Oklahoma) are not due to typical, random fluctuations in natural seismicity rates,» they said.

During the past decade, the global temperature may have «paused,» most likely due to natural climate fluctuations, the panel finds.

The uniquely large ensemble of simulations that is achievable with climateprediction.net allows us to deduce the changes in the climate due to this regionally - banded SRM geoengineering from the considerable inherent natural fluctuations that occur in local climates.

Although many different phylogenetic subclusters were present before and after vaccine introduction, some unique clusters were only identified after vaccine introduction, which could be due to natural fluctuation or the first signs of vaccine - driven evolution.

Climate variations are made up of both long - term trends, such as in response to greenhouse gases and aerosols, and shorter term fluctuations due to natural variability, such as the El Nino Southern Oscillation.

The picture from the acne underground is equally clouded: some report improvements, a tiny minority get worse, probably due to natural fluctuation, while many experience nothing.

Estimates using the longer dataset are further into the future, due to the removal of natural fluctuations.

The reason why CO2 trumps natural variability IN THE LONG RUN is not becuase it is, at present, much larger than energy fluctuations due to natural variability, but because it's sign is consistent.

«Climate forcing results in an imbalance in the TOA radiation budget that has direct implications for global climate, but the large natural variability in the Earth's radiation budget due to fluctuations in atmospheric and ocean dynamics complicates this picture.»

As the Earth's surface warms — due to either manmade greenhouse gases or natural fluctuations in the climate system — more water evaporates from the surface.

Is the rather definitive statement that «The increased activity since 1995 is due to natural fluctuations (and) cycles of hurricane activity driven by the Atlantic Ocean itself along with the atmosphere above it and not enhanced substantially by global warming» at all supportable?

The problem is really that SW assume that all climatic fluctuations in the 17th to the 19th centuries to solar activity, and hence neglect factors (natural forcings) such as landscape changes (that the North America and Europe underwent large - scale de-forestation), volcanism (see IPCC TAR Fig 6 - 8), and internal variations due to chaotic dynamics.

This provides good results and shows a notable slowdown — but only since 2004, and probably the change over such a short period of time is mainly due to natural fluctuations and in itself hardly reveals anything about the possible effects of climate change.

Indeed, the record - breaking losses in the past couple of years could easily be due to natural fluctuations in the weather, with summer sea ice increasing again over the next few years.

It is currently on average around 0.2 C / decade [Note the IPCC claimed 0.34 C], actually smaller than the annual noise from natural annual variation of the temperature due to ocean currents and volcanoes and in the range of solar activity fluctuations.»

Some of these fluctuations may be due to natural climate oscillations and may therefore be fairly predictable.

The point however is that natural temperature fluctuations due to other causes, particularly the ocean oscillations, will dwarf those attributable to CO2 fluctuations, which is what AGW accounts for.

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..

The natural variations consist mainly of short term fluctuations (less than a decade) due to ENSO and other chaotic elements, plus longer term climate «oscillations» — mainly the AMO and PDO, with total «cycle» lengths in the neighborhood of about 60 years.

The near - linear rate of anthropogenic warming (predominantly from anthropogenic greenhouse gases) is shown in sources such as: «Deducing Multidecadal Anthropogenic Global Warming Trends Using Multiple Regression Analysis» «The global warming hiatus — a natural product of interactions of a secular warming trend and a multi-decadal oscillation» «The Origin and Limits of the Near Proportionality between Climate Warming and Cumulative CO2 Emissions» «Sensitivity of climate to cumulative carbon emissions due to compensation of ocean heat and carbon uptake» «Return periods of global climate fluctuations and the pause» «Using data to attribute episodes of warming and cooling in instrumental records» «The proportionality of global warming to cumulative carbon emissions» «The sensitivity of the proportionality between temperature change and cumulative CO2 emissions to ocean mixing»

These year - to - year fluctuations in temperature are due to natural processes, such as the effects of El Niños, La Niñas, and volcanic eruptions.

Therefore, any increase in losses could, more likely than not, be partly related to anthropogenic climate change... we advance the premise that if losses are affected by natural climate fluctuations, they are also likely to be affected by additional global warming due to anthropogenic climate change.

My own reading of the evidence is that much of the fluctuation during that interval was due to natural unforced variability from internal climate dynamics, with aerosols perhaps adding some cooling after 1950 but not necessarily a major player before 1950 nor necessarily an exclusive player from 1950 to the mid 1950s.

But we advance the premise that if losses are affected by natural climate fluctuations, they are also likely to be affected by additional global warming due to anthropogenic climate change.

This «hiatus» is probably due to the cooling influences from natural radiative forcings (more volcanic eruptions and reducing output from the sun as part of the natural 11 - year solar cycle) and internal variability (fluctuations within the oceans unrelated to forcings).

While climate scientists don't expect every year to be record warm (due to these natural fluctuations), there is already evidence to suggest this time next year we'll be writing about 2016 being the new hottest year on record.

Most importantly, the 2008 minimum reinforces the long - term declining trend that is not due to natural climate fluctuations.

The climate has changed many times in the geologic past due to natural causes — including volcanic activity, changes in the sun's intensity, fluctuations in Earth's orbit, and other factors — but none of these can account for the current rise in global temperatures.

There is a solid body of research now showing that any apparent slow - down of warming during the past decade was likely due to natural short - term factors (like small changes in solar output and volcanic activity) and internal fluctuations related to e.g. the El Niño phenomenon.

El Niño's center of action appears to be shifting from the eastern to the central Pacific, which in turn is affecting the distribution and frequency of weather events.7 However, due to the wide natural fluctuations within circulation patterns, it is difficult to attribute recent changes solely to human activity.

«The increased activity since 1995 is due to natural fluctuations (and) cycles of hurricane activity driven by the Atlantic Ocean itself along with the atmosphere above it and not enhanced substantially by global warming,» he testified.

Since annual global temperature data is moderately noisy due to natural fluctuations, trend significance can only be detected with high confidence after considering the physical basis.

Max Mayfield, director of the National Hurricane Center in Miami: «The increased activity since 1995 is due to natural fluctuations (and) cycles of hurricane activity driven by the Atlantic Ocean itself along with the atmosphere above it and not enhanced substantially by global warming,» he testified.

This is where the claim that global warming is due to an alignment of all these «natural» ocean basin and atmospheric fluctuations originates — but it doesn't work.

I suspect that under a pink assumption one might find it difficult to show that it is «very likely» that less than half the warming since 1970 is not due to random fluctuations on the assumption that all we have is linear trend plus noise, without having to bother with other natural cyclic trends.

In his presentation at the 7th International Conference for Climate and Energy in Germany (the original presentation is in German), Lunning claims that warming is due to natural fluctuations in solar activity: [11]