Sentences with phrase «observed period since»

First, it is generally accepted that global forcing from aerosols has changed little over the well - observed period since 1980.

Not exact matches

Since European women were staging their own demonstrations at different times throughout this same period, a consensus was reached in 1913 to observe IWD on March 8.

Butros was among more than 100 people who came to the church Thursday to mark 40 days since the attack - a mourning period commonly observed by some communities in the Middle East.

The First Lady who is also the President of the Organisation of African First Ladies Against HIV / AIDS (OAFLA) observed that since the inception of health mission as part of Lordina Foundation work, she and her team members have visited eight other Regions with Upper West being the ninth and that over 51 hospitals and canters have been supported during the period.

First, they compared simulated and observed temperature trends over all 15 - year periods since the start of the 20th century.

Both are slightly positive since 1850, and account for approximately 0.2 °C of the observed 0.8 °C surface warming over that period.

Peterson does observe that blacks and Hispanics increased their test scores substantially in reading in the 1970s and 1980s — but neglects to mention that this was precisely the period when our nation's schools were substantially more integrated than they were before then or since.

Given the extremely rich valuations we've observed since the late - 1990's, and the fact that the S&P 500 has achieved very little net return over this period, our approach has been generally defensive.

-- «Since we do not yet fully understand the natural geophysical processes that result in observed climate variations over geologic time periods, it is very difficult, if not impossible, for us to fully understand the contribution to global climate variation resulting from anthropogenic greenhouse gases.»

More than 95 % of the 5 yr running mean of the surface temperature change since 1850 can be replicated by an integration of the sunspot data (as a proxy for ocean heat content), departing from the average value over the period of the sunspot record (~ 40SSN), plus the superimposition of a ~ 60 yr sinusoid representing the observed oceanic oscillations.

This reduces the observed warming since 2011 (the start of their forecast period) to the end of the data curve from 0.34 to 0.22 °C.

Since 2007 it has shown a continued volume loss, over that period the trend in observed thickness, while patchy and sporadic, is rather equivocal.

John, You say that the BoM map of the trend in rainfall in southeastern Australia since 1970 «demonstrates how much drier the climate has become over the period in which warming has been observed.»

Here's the most relevant to consideration of the effects of global warming, the trend since 1970, which demonstrates how much drier the climate has become over the period in which warming has been observed.

The IPCC statement that most of the observed increase in global average temperature since the mid-20th century is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations» is very much dependent on what weighting was given to natural (mainly solar) forcing over this period.

2 / Models totally fail reproducing the [1880 — 1910] and [1940 — 1970/75] cooling periods, as well as they fail reproducing the pause observed since the late 90's.

Any warming observed prior to WWII is indicative of «global warming» (GW), but (since there were no significant human GHG emissions yet) is counterindicative of anthropogenic greenhouse warming (AGW), since something other than human GHGs caused it, raising the question: if non GH warming caused this warming, could it not also have caused the most recent extended warming period?

As such, the warming from 1910 — 1940, before Anthropogenic CO2 became potentially consequential, is «not statistically significantly different» from the warming during the period from 1975 — 1998 when the IPCC AR5 claims to be» extremely likely that human influence has been the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-20th century».

The intention is to deliver the message that the recent time period is different to what had been observed in the time before since 1980.

On a side note: The trends above for the period 1980 to 1995 also show that the recent assertions by David Rose in the Daily Mail and by Judith Curry, according to whom the recent time period was something different to what had been observed before in the temperature record since the 1970ies are false.

Thirdly, one can address sections of the period since 1970 to determine the confidence with which global warming can be observed.

IPCC has stated (AR4 WG1 Ch.9) that the «global mean warming observed since 1970 can only be reproduced when models are forced with combinations of external forcings that include anthropogenic forcings... Therefore modeling studies suggest that late 20th - century warming is much more likely to be anthropogenic than natural in origin...» whereas for the statistically indistinguishable early 20thC warming period «detection and attribution as well as modeling studies indicate more uncertainty regarding the causes of early 20th - century warming.»

The study found that it's likely that the weakening trend observed since the mid-1970s is unique in that entire period.

Observed changes at 23 BSRN sites since early 1990s: 23 longest BSRN records (totally 306 years) covering period 1993 - 2010 [18 years, page 47]: 20 stations with increase (11 significant) 3 stations with decrease (0 significant)

If you take into account the two major volcanic eruptions in the beginning of the observed period which had an approximately five year cooling effect each you will find that there has actually been almost no warming since 1980.

-- Warming trend of +0.16 °C / decade observed over [1910 — 1940] and [1970 — 2000] periods [c] A 60 years averaging also makes PDO variability disappear so that only background trend of +0.06 °C / decade, as observed since 1880, remains.

This page features the trends in mean annual and seasonal temperatures for Alaska's first - order observing stations since 1949, the time period for which the most reliable meteorological data are available.

Observed values have been outside the AR4 envelope for all but one year since publication of AR4... (Re Fig. 4) The figure shows that nearly every run of every model ran too hot over the 1979 - 2013 period, with many models running substantially too hot.

Since NO ONE claims to be able to predict the variations in climate over ANY period, absent any anthropogenic contribution, attributing ANY subset of the observed variations in the «Temperature of the Earth (never rigorously and consistently defined)» to anthropogenic influence amounts to nothing more than ex cathedra pronouncements by Climate Experts.

The chart below is from the Cryosphere Today and shows the sea ice anomaly for the short period of time (since 1979) we have been able to observe it by satellite.

Due to internal climate variability, in any given 15 - year period the observed GMST trend sometimes lies near one end of a model ensemble an effect that is pronounced in Box 9.2, Figure 1a, b since GMST was influenced by a very strong El Niño event in 1998

Firstly, that the statistical distribution of the observed 15 - year global temperature trends since 1880 isn't distinguishable from the distribution of 15 - year global temperature trends derived from an ensemble of model simulations, and, secondly, whether simulated global temperature trends over 15 years since 1950 lie in the same tail of the statistical distribution as the observed 15 - year temperature trends or whether the simulated and observed trends lie in opposite tails of the distribution largely depends on whether the simulated and observed ENSO variablity over the 15 - year periods are in phase or out of phase by chance.

Since the observed Schwabe cycle variations are small, eleven - year periods frequently found in climate data are often ascribed instead to hypothesized oscillations in the atmosphere or oceans, internal to the climate system.

If we apply the same implied sensitivity to the period since 1850, the 0.13 percent increase in solar radiation in the last 140 years should have produced a warming of 0.26 °C, or about half of that observed.

«The assessment is supported additionally by a complementary analysis in which the parameters of an Earth System Model of Intermediate Complexity (EMIC) were constrained using observations of near - surface temperature and ocean heat content, as well as prior information on the magnitudes of forcings, and which concluded that GHGs have caused 0.6 °C to 1.1 °C (5 to 95 % uncertainty) warming since the mid-20th century (Huber and Knutti, 2011); an analysis by Wigley and Santer (2013), who used an energy balance model and RF and climate sensitivity estimates from AR4, and they concluded that there was about a 93 % chance that GHGs caused a warming greater than observed over the 1950 — 2005 period; and earlier detection and attribution studies assessed in the AR4 (Hegerl et al., 2007b).»

California's average daily gasoline sales for the first four months of 2009 were 2.1 percent lower than the same period in 2008, continuing a reduction in demand observed since 2004.

Then we are told that natural factors have masked AGW over a recent short time period during which there was no observed warming yet close to one - third of all human CO2 emissions since industrialization have occurred.

● That climate natural variability is powerful enough to fully compensate manmade global warming (if any) and long term pause (as observed since 1997) or even slight cooling periods as observed from 1880 to 1910 or from 1940 to 1970.

Indeed, this dynamics suggests a major multiple harmonic influence component on the climate with a likely astronomical origin (sun + moon + planets) although not yet fully understood in its physical mechanisms, that, as shown in the above figures, can apparently explain also the post 2000 climate quite satisfactorily (even by using my model calibrated from 1850 to 1950, that is more than 50 years before the observed temperature hiatus period since 2000!).

But that does not change the observed fact that the fraction remaining in the atmosphere has decreased (by around 1 % - point per decade since Mauna Loa measurements started — from around 55 % to around 50 % (even though the ocean temperature increased marginally over this period).

Superimposed on the secular trend is a natural multidecadal oscillation of an average period of 70 y with significant amplitude of 0.3 — 0.4 °C peak to peak, which can explain many historical episodes of warming and cooling and accounts for 40 % of the observed warming since the mid-20th century and for 50 % of the previously attributed anthropogenic warming trend (55).

The models heavily relied upon by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) had not projected this multidecadal stasis in «global warming»; nor (until trained ex post facto) the fall in TS from 1940 - 1975; nor 50 years» cooling in Antarctica (Doran et al., 2002) and the Arctic (Soon, 2005); nor the absence of ocean warming since 2003 (Lyman et al., 2006; Gouretski & Koltermann, 2007); nor the onset, duration, or intensity of the Madden - Julian intraseasonal oscillation, the Quasi-Biennial Oscillation in the tropical stratosphere, El Nino / La Nina oscillations, the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation, or the Pacific Decadal Oscillation that has recently transited from its warming to its cooling phase (oceanic oscillations which, on their own, may account for all of the observed warmings and coolings over the past half - century: Tsoniset al., 2007); nor the magnitude nor duration of multi-century events such as the Mediaeval Warm Period or the Little Ice Age; nor the cessation since 2000 of the previously - observed growth in atmospheric methane concentration (IPCC, 2007); nor the active 2004 hurricane season; nor the inactive subsequent seasons; nor the UK flooding of 2007 (the Met Office had forecast a summer of prolonged droughts only six weeks previously); nor the solar Grand Maximum of the past 70 years, during which the Sun was more active, for longer, than at almost any similar period in the past 11,400 years (Hathaway, 2004; Solankiet al., 2005); nor the consequent surface «global warming» on Mars, Jupiter, Neptune's largest moon, and even distant Pluto; nor the eerily - continuing 2006 solar minimum; nor the consequent, precipitate decline of ~ 0.8 °C in TS from January 2007 to May 2008 that has canceled out almost all of the observed warming of the 20th cePeriod or the Little Ice Age; nor the cessation since 2000 of the previously - observed growth in atmospheric methane concentration (IPCC, 2007); nor the active 2004 hurricane season; nor the inactive subsequent seasons; nor the UK flooding of 2007 (the Met Office had forecast a summer of prolonged droughts only six weeks previously); nor the solar Grand Maximum of the past 70 years, during which the Sun was more active, for longer, than at almost any similar period in the past 11,400 years (Hathaway, 2004; Solankiet al., 2005); nor the consequent surface «global warming» on Mars, Jupiter, Neptune's largest moon, and even distant Pluto; nor the eerily - continuing 2006 solar minimum; nor the consequent, precipitate decline of ~ 0.8 °C in TS from January 2007 to May 2008 that has canceled out almost all of the observed warming of the 20th ceperiod in the past 11,400 years (Hathaway, 2004; Solankiet al., 2005); nor the consequent surface «global warming» on Mars, Jupiter, Neptune's largest moon, and even distant Pluto; nor the eerily - continuing 2006 solar minimum; nor the consequent, precipitate decline of ~ 0.8 °C in TS from January 2007 to May 2008 that has canceled out almost all of the observed warming of the 20th century.

«The 0.2 degrees Celsius per decade figure relates to an observed warming over the period 1990 - 2005 which clearly can not be compared with the period since 1951».

Both are slightly positive since 1850, and account for approximately 0.2 °C of the observed 0.8 °C surface warming over that period.

Louise Spitz of Manches, a London law firm, has observed an «exceptional» period since September.

Note: If you incur several traffic citations within a certain time period, you may also observe an increase of your vehicle insurance policy rates, since insurance providers reassess your safe driving practices on a regular basis.

The three - week high observed is the highest figure since 16th March, when bitcoin hit a high of $ 1,260 amid a period of heavy volatility.