Sentences with phrase «of changes in solar activity»

There have been several studies by solar scientists on temperature impact of changes in solar activity, going back to pre-industrial periods of very low solar activity and colder than normal temperatures (Dalton and Maunder minima).

It was possible, according to the I.P.C.C. consensus statement, that the warming before 1956 could be because of changes in solar activity, and that even a substantial part of the more recent warming could be natural.

Not exact matches

Peaks in solar activity cause the city to flood more often, apparently by changing the paths of storms over Europe.

A change in solar activity may also, for example, have contributed to the post Little Ice Age rise in global temperatures in the first half of the 20th Century.

Now Muller says Berkeley Earth's new results «are stronger than those of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change,» because they found solar activity had a «negligible» role in warming observed since the 1750s.

Changes in the number of cosmic rays hitting the atmosphere due to changes in solar activity can not explain global warming, as average cosmic ray intensities have been increasing since 1985 even as the world has warmed — the opposite of what should happen if cosmic rays produce climate - cooling Changes in the number of cosmic rays hitting the atmosphere due to changes in solar activity can not explain global warming, as average cosmic ray intensities have been increasing since 1985 even as the world has warmed — the opposite of what should happen if cosmic rays produce climate - cooling changes in solar activity can not explain global warming, as average cosmic ray intensities have been increasing since 1985 even as the world has warmed — the opposite of what should happen if cosmic rays produce climate - cooling clouds.

So when the number of particles coming from the sun changes — usually as a result of its 11 - year activity cycle — it takes years before that's reflected in the amount of neutral atoms shooting back into the solar system.

Their findings indicated that, overall, the contribution of changing solar activity, either directly or through cosmic rays, was even less and can not have contributed more than 10 percent to global warming in the 20th century.

«We conclude that the level of contribution of changing solar activity is less than 10 percent of the measured global warming observed in the 20th century.

«It is true that there are other factors (such as volcanism, the changes in the orbit and the axis of the Earth, the solar cycle), but numerous scientific studies indicate that most of the global warming in recent decades is due to the large concentration of greenhouse gases (carbon dioxide, methane, nitrogen oxide and others) mainly emitted due to human activity.»

«The task,» Millikan wrote, «of learning to substitute stored solar energy for muscular energy — the great underlying cause of most of the changes in man's activities and living conditions — has been learned within the past eighty years and will never need to be learned over again.»

This conclusion is, in retrospect, not too surprising; we've learned from satellite measurements that solar activity changes the brightness of the sun very little.

After all, the implied changes in GCR flux are huge compared to what is expected from the gentle modulation of the Earth's magnetic field arising from recent solar activity changes (not that there's any trend in those that would explain recent warming).

The main factors include solar variability, volcanic activity, atmospheric composition, the amount of sunlight reflected back into space, ocean currents and changes in the Earth's orbit.

Investigating the cause of 20th Century warming is properly done in detection and attribution studies, which analyze the various forcings (e.g., solar variations, greenhouse gases or volcanic activity) and the observed time and space patterns of climate change in detail.

New data have more accurately quantifi ed changes in solar spectral fl uxes over a broad range of wavelengths in association with changing solar activity.

Periods of volcanism can cool the climate (as with the 1991 Pinatubo eruption), methane emissions from increased biological activity can warm the climate, and slight changes in solar output and orbital variations can all have climate effects which are much shorter in duration than the ice age cycles, ranging from less than a decade to a thousand years in duration (the Younger Dryas).

And Perdue's not the only leading recipient of Southern's political support to help spread the questionable scientific talking points the utility has paid for: Rep. Gary Palmer, an Alabama Republican who received $ 18,000 from the company's PAC and employees in the 2014 cycle, last year told WATE that science «says global climate change is more a function of nature and solar activity than it is anything man does.»

The first collection of papers establishes that (a) decadal and multi-decadal ocean circulation patterns (AMO, PDO, NAO, ENSO) have significantly modulated precipitation and temperature changes in recent decades, and the second collection of papers confirm that (b) natural ocean oscillations are, in turn, modulated by solar activity.

Scientists have modelled the expected temperature drop over the 21st century due to waning solar activity — and they found that the change is likely to be dwarfed by the much bigger warming effect of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.

Changes in the density of the upper atmosphere caused by dust storms and solar activity make each TGO close approach unpredictable.

Solar cycle length is a useful indicator of long term changes in solar actiSolar cycle length is a useful indicator of long term changes in solar actisolar activity.

«If we figure out how much atmosphere is removed by changes in solar activity, we can extrapolate back to estimate what the isotope ratios should have been billions of years ago.

The number of sunspots varies as solar magnetic activity does — the change in this number, from a minimum of none to a maximum of roughly 250 sunspots or clusters of sunspots and then back to a minimum, is known as the solar cycle, and averages about 11 years long.

Investigating the cause of 20th Century warming is properly done in detection and attribution studies, which analyze the various forcings (e.g., solar variations, greenhouse gases or volcanic activity) and the observed time and space patterns of climate change in detail.

If I'm correct in saying that the bulk of that increase was up to the late 90s, and * should * have been by the mid-90s or even earlier, then this leaves a tiny bit more room for changes in solar forcing — since it's only after the solar max of the early 90s that the trend in solar activity from 1940 took a dive http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Temp-sunspot-co2.svg#file.

There are a large number of recent peer - reviewed scientific publications demonstrating how solar activity can affect our climate (Benestad, 2002), such as how changes in the UV radiation following the solar activity affect the stratospheric ozone concentrations (1999) and how earth's temperatures respond to changes in the total solar irradiance (Meehl, 2003).

Dr. Sami Solanki — director and scientific member at the Max Planck Institute for Solar System Research in Germany, who argues that changes in the Sun's state, not human activity, may be the principal cause of global warming: «The sun has been at its strongest over the past 60 years and may now be affecting global temperatures.»

Thanks for publishing this, there are folks who denigrated the work of scientists that claimed a solar - climate (temperature) link because the variability in solar energy output just wasn't enough to explain the temperature swings, and perhaps they now realize that there could be another mechanism - similar to a transistor where small changes in gate voltage can affect large changes in power transmission - whereby solar activity can create significant effects on temperature.

Thus it appears that, provided further satellite cloud data confirms the cosmic ray flux low cloud seeding hypothesis, and no other factors were involved over the past 150 years (e.g., variability of other cloud layers) then there is a potential for solar activity induced changes in cloudiness and irradiance to account for a significant part of the global warming experienced during the 20th century, with the possible exception of the last two decades.

I particularly enjoyed the slides that, when combined (1) provided an overview of hotter and cooler CO2 molecules as it relates to how they are seen from outer space and from profile — because this will make it easier for me to explain this process to others; (2) walked through the volcanic and solar activity vs assigning importance to CO2 changes — because this another way to help make it clearer, too, but in another way; (3) discussed CO2 induced warming and ocean rise vs different choices we might make — because this helps point out why every day's delay matters; and (4) showed Figure 1 from William Nordhaus» «Strategies for Control of Carbon Dioxide» and then super-imposed upon that the global mean temperature in colors showing pre-paper and post-paper periods — because this helps to show just how far back it was possible to make reasoned projections without the aid of a more nuanced and modern understanding.

The paper he wrote together with Friis - Christensen in which he found a correlation between solar activity and clouds had a «slight» flaw: it ignored that the period of the study coincided with a big El Nino, and that large scale changes in ocean surface temperature are going to have an effect on cloud formation.

Investigating the cause of 20th Century warming is done in so - called detection and attribution studies, which analyze the various forcings (e.g., solar variations, greenhouse gases or volcanic activity) and the observed time and space patterns of climate change in detail.

One key metric in this debate is the spatial pattern of cooling which may provide a «fingerprint» of the underlying climate change, whether that was externally forced (from solar or volcanic activity) or was part of an intrinsic mode of variability.

If there was more natural variation in the past millenia, specifically due to solar changes, then that goes at the cost of the GHG / aerosol combination, as both are near impossible to distinguish from each other in the warming of the last halve century... Solar activity has never been as high, and for an as long period, as current in the past millenium (and even the past 8,000 yesolar changes, then that goes at the cost of the GHG / aerosol combination, as both are near impossible to distinguish from each other in the warming of the last halve century... Solar activity has never been as high, and for an as long period, as current in the past millenium (and even the past 8,000 yeSolar activity has never been as high, and for an as long period, as current in the past millenium (and even the past 8,000 years).

If that holds (directly or indirectly) for longer term changes (in this case continuous higher levels) of solar activity remains to be proven.

This problem is illustrated by two alternative reconstructions of past changes in solar activity based on ice core 10Be records.

New data have more accurately quantifi ed changes in solar spectral fl uxes over a broad range of wavelengths in association with changing solar activity.

A more reasonable natural variability / forcing argument might go something like this: 1) There is natural variability of climate due to solar activity 2) Climate is changing now 3) Forcing can result in climate change, but the response of the C cycle to forcing is poorly understood 4) Forcing is happening now 5) Forcing and / or solar activity could be to blame for current warming trends Is this unreasonable?

Veizer's alternative hypothesis for 20th century global warming does appear to be: the warming was caused by a «celestial driver» (i.e., a change in solar activity — despite the lack of observed trend), and it is this warming which has increased the CO2 concentration, not the other way round.

Though it still considered very controversial, evidence is emerging that regime changes in the Pacific ocean (the last of which was in 1977) may be caused by small variations in the rotation rate of the Earth that are forced by changes in the level of solar activity.

a) atmospheric CO2 from human activity is a major bause of observed warming in the 1980's and 1990's, c) that warming is overstated due to a number of factors including solar effects and measurement skew d) the data going back 150 years is of little reliability because it is clustered so heavily in northeast america and western europe rather than being global e) the global climate has been significantly shifting over the last thousand years, over the last ten thousand years, and over the last hundred thousand years; atmospheric CO2 levels did not drive those changes, and some of them were rapid.

It is true that there are other factors (such as volcanism, the changes in the orbit and the axis of the Earth, the solar cycle), but numerous scientific studies indicate that most of the global warming in recent decades it is due to the large concentration of greenhouse gases (carbon dioxide, methane, nitrogen oxide and others) mainly emitted due to human activity.

Scientists quoted in a past DailyTech article link the cooling to reduced solar activity which they claim is a much larger driver of climate change than man - made greenhouse gases.

(3) Subordinate to solar activity alone, atmospheric water vapor / cloud formation and movement is the largest known variable that influences temperature changes in the atmosphere of the earth, and the earth's oceans.

In particular, the authors find fault with IPCC's conclusions relating to human activities being the primary cause of recent global warming, claiming, contrary to significant evidence that they tend to ignore, that the comparatively small influences of natural changes in solar radiation are dominating the influences of the much larger effects of changes in the atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations on the global energy balancIn particular, the authors find fault with IPCC's conclusions relating to human activities being the primary cause of recent global warming, claiming, contrary to significant evidence that they tend to ignore, that the comparatively small influences of natural changes in solar radiation are dominating the influences of the much larger effects of changes in the atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations on the global energy balancin solar radiation are dominating the influences of the much larger effects of changes in the atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations on the global energy balancin the atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations on the global energy balance.

All evidence suggests that significant climate changes like the LIA, and the Medieval Warm Period that preceded it, are the result of significant changes in solar activity.

When we do, no matter how good the climate model is it will not be able to overcome deficiencies in our ability to predict the things that affect climate — solar activity, ocean cycles, etc — and it will not be able to overcome deficiencies in our understanding of how things that affect climate actually work — solar activity, Earth orbital changes, etc..

The red line incorporates natural influences like changes in solar output and volcanic activity but virtually all of the long - term warming is attributable to human - caused increases in greenhouse gasses.

Another major climate oscillation around 7500 — 7000 cal BP may have resulted from combined effects of a strong rate of change in insolation and of variations in solar activity.»