Sentences with phrase «natural warming event»

The peak of the late century natural warming event was 1998 and the global climate shift was 1998/2001.

«Does the current global warming signal reflect a natural cycle»... We found 342 natural warming events (NWEs) corresponding to this definition, distributed over the past 250,000 years....

Does the climate hold onto natural warming events and dissipate it slowly?

Not exact matches

These «natural disasters» are the result of seasonal weather patterns and global warming, which has in the last decade produced a great number of weather events to move in a Northerly direction.

In the interest of our future world, scientists must seek to understand the complexities of linked natural events and field observations that are revealed in the geologic record of past warmer climates.

These other mechanisms include a net release of energy over regions that are cooler during a natural, unforced warming event.

«This emphasizes the importance of large - scale energy transport and atmospheric circulation changes in restoring Earth's global temperature equilibrium after a natural, unforced warming event,» Li said.

A detailed, long - term ocean temperature record derived from corals on Christmas Island in Kiribati and other islands in the tropical Pacific shows that the extreme warmth of recent El Niño events reflects not just the natural ocean - atmosphere cycle but a new factor: global warming caused by human activity.

As extreme weather events likely connected to the planet's warming climate become increasingly common, low - income communities are positioned to suffer the worst consequences during the aftermath of natural disasters, write the authors of a report from the Center for American Progress called «One Storm Shy of Despair.»

Fact # 1: Carbon Dioxide is a Heat - Trapping Gas Fact # 2: We Are Adding More Carbon Dioxide to the Atmosphere All the Time Fact # 3: Temperatures are Rising Fact # 4: Sea Level is Rising Fact # 5: Climate Change Can be Natural, but What's Happening Now Can't be Explained by Natural Forces Fact # 6: The Terms «Global Warming» and «Climate Change» Are Almost Interchangeable Fact # 7: We Can Already See The Effects of Climate Change Fact # 8: Large Regions of The World Are Seeing a Significant Increase In Extreme Weather Events, Including Torrential Rainstorms, Heat Waves And Droughts Fact # 9: Frost and Snowstorms Will Still Happen in a Warmer World Fact # 10: Global Warming is a Long - Term Trend; It Doesn't Mean Next Year Will Always Be Warmer Than This Year

But despite that steady climb, not every year is warmer than the one before it, thanks to the vagaries of weather, the influence of natural climate cycles, and the effects of events like volcanic eruptions.

However, Petrenko found that the gradual, natural global warming and rapid regional warming that characterized the deglaciation 12,000 years ago — events that were in some aspects comparable to the current human - driven global warming — did not trigger detectable releases of methane from these reservoirs.

Currently, instrumental temperature characteristics are consistent with natural climate variability of short - term events and steep warming trendlines.

However, global warming is caused by natural events and human that is believed to contribute to increases in average temperature.

In context of current increased forcing and in consideration of all relevant natural and forced events and time scale, it is valid to say that this is expected in a warming world.

Completely independently of this oceanographic data, a simple correlation analysis (Foster and Rahmstorf ERL 2011) showed that the flatter warming trend of the last 10 years was mostly a result of natural variability, namely the recently more frequent appearance of cold La Niña events in the tropical Pacific and a small contribution from decreasing solar activity.

I am not sure I understand Andy's question number (5), but «nature» involves many species: even if some parts of «nature» may survive global warming at the end (as parts of it have survived natural climate change events in the past), many parts of it are already going extinct and we are to blame this time around.

1) Previous «Natural Events» occurrd 2) Warming event is occurring now 3) therefore, todays trend is natual (even though we put in a new variable not seen in 4.6 billion years)

Whereas this phenomena has been principally related to a natural extreme event, its impacts may very well forebode the impact that a projected warming of surface temperatures could have by the end of the 21st Century due to greenhouse gas increases.

For skeptics like myself, most of the warming being observed is due to natural events, not CO2 forcing.

Due to this semi-random nature of weather, it is wrong to blame any one event such as Katrina specifically on global warming — and of course it is just as indefensible to blame Katrina on a long - term natural cycle in the climate.

Victor wrote @ 158: «For skeptics like myself, most of the warming being observed is due to natural events, not CO2 forcing.

So when you put cooling natural volcanic eruptions in 1982 and 1991 together with a warming natural strong El Nino in 1998 you get a slight upward tilt to the global temperature graph, but it's entirely due to the dominace of natural events.

Have to feel apprehensive about upcoming events, a combination of global warming enhanced phenomenon and extra natural enhanced events.

So: The study finds a fingerprint of anthropogenic influences on large scale increase in precipitation extremes, with remaining uncertainties — namely that there is still a possibility that the widespread increase in heavy precipitation could be due to an unusual event of natural variability.The intensification of extreme rainfall is expected with warming, and there is a clear physical mechanism for it, but it is never possible to completely separate a signal of external forcing from climate variability — the separation will always be statistical in nature.

... we strongly support Delworth and Knutson's (2000) contention that this high - latitude warming event represents primarily natural variability within the climate system, rather than being caused primarily by external forcings, whether solar forcing alone (Thejll and Lassen, 2000) or a combination of increasing solar irradiance, increasing anthropogenic trace gases, and decreasing volcanic aerosols.

Some scientists, though, say there is no long - term evidence yet for declaring Katrina to have been a storm intensified by global warming, rather than a natural, extremely violent event.

It is complicated, and the link between global warming and natural disasters often feels uncertain to people, since scientists can't say global warming caused this particular event (sigh...) A sense of issue fatigue can take hold, born of the difficulty of making rapid progress.

In the unlikely event that it is still large enough to have any effect at all it may well take millennia for any warming of the oceans to become apparent by which time it would be dwarfed by natural changes anyway.

Apparently you are having trouble understanding that this graph shows the monthly anomalies for a period that encompassed the 2015 - ’16 El Nino warming event and its denouement only, and it was used to demonstrate the speciousness of attributing cherry - picked warming anomalies to humans, and dismissing cherry - picked cooling anomalies as «natural variability.»

Previously Trenberth has argued that extreme events such as recent droughts and heat waves worsened due to CO2 warming and despite the fact that climate experts found those events to be within the bounds of natural variability (discussed here).

The human - induced changes are inherently multi-decadal and provide a warmer and moister environment for most weather events, even in the presence of large natural variability.

A more reasoned approach is to take the full weight of our understanding about the Earth and its systems and go beyond asking if any particular event is due to global warming or natural variability.

Even IPCC seems already to move in that direction as it has begun to emphasize adaptation to natural climate events, though there even still is an «institutional» belief in strengthening influences of potential anthropogenic warming.

One of the key effects of global warming and climate change is an increase in extreme weather events and natural disasters.

From the Vostok Ice Core, it is clear that the Earth is subjected to many levels of NATURAL «warmings»: JUST one «category «10» warming of 9 + with an ~ 12000y duration every 120,000 y; several category «6» warmings of 5 - 6C peaking ~ every 7500y after each category «10» event; many category «3» warmings of 2 - 3C peaking ~ every 5000y; and a multitude of category «2» warmings of 1 - 2C peaking on decade and century scales.

Over the past three decades, most natural disasters (90 %) have been caused by climate - related events, they say, and extreme climatic events are likely to become more frequent because of global warming.

While heat waves and extreme weather events are routinely pointed to as indicators of global warming trends, the coldest weather in over a century is simply brushed off as «natural variability.»

«The CCR - II report correctly explains that most of the reports on global warming and its impacts on sea - level rise, ice melts, glacial retreats, impact on crop production, extreme weather events, rainfall changes, etc. have not properly considered factors such as physical impacts of human activities, natural variability in climate, lopsided models used in the prediction of production estimates, etc..

The fact that there has on any basis been little further warming over the course of the last 10 to 15 years over and above that which had already occured by the mid / late 19902 suggests that recent extreme weather events are not the consequence of additional warming (there having been all but none these past 15 years) and therefore must be due to natural variability of weather events in an ever changing and chaotic world in which we live.

A substantial concern for me when preparing my initial Model description was that for the sequence of events to be true the cooling of the stratosphere during the late 20th century warming period had to be natural without needing to invoke human CO2 or CFCs.

Countless articles assured us that the seas were rising and would swamp major coastal cities, that all the polar bears were drowning, and that every natural climate event from hurricanes to tornadoes was caused by global warming.

Their «natural models» grossly underestimated the 40s peak warming by ~ 0.8 ° C (blue line) and when CO2 and sulfates were added the warming event was cooled further (red line).

But natural ocean oscillations have also raised temperatures, and regards to understanding both 20th century warming events in the Arctic, ocean oscillations offer the superior explanation.

Again their models failed to account for the heat during Arctic's earlier natural warming (black line), a warming climate scientists called «the most spectacular event of the century».

As hard as it might be to suss out the impact of extreme weather in 2017, yet harder is sussing out the impact of the changing climate, now and in the future — due to the difficulty of tying individual weather events to epochal changes like global warming, the inability of headline economic figures to capture the messy fullness of human life, and the inadequacy of the available data to measure changes in the natural and the economic world.

Jesus Christ, also, says that at the time of the end there will be natural disasters, and I think that that is obviously another reason why some want to blame poor weather events on the global warming theory instead of on their poor moral character and the judgements of God.

A physicist is no more likely than a sociologist to know what human emissions will be 50 years from now — if a slight warming would be beneficial or harmful to humans or the natural world; if forcings and feedbacks will partly or completely offset the theoretical warming; if natural variability will exceed any discernible human effect; if secondary effects on weather will lead to more extreme or more mild weather events; if efforts to reduce emissions will be successful; who should reduce emissions, by what amounts, or when; and whether the costs of attempting to reduce emissions will exceed the benefits by an amount so large as to render the effort counterproductive.

The framing of» the red team effort» may be needed to concern only adaptation to natural warming of climate and extreme weather events.

Show me the transcripts of the TV appearances where you and colleagues have appeared to reassure the public that the strange weather event du jour isn't directly caused by global warming, but is just part of natural variation.