Sentences with phrase «of the paleoclimate evidence»

For example, Jessica tell Mike how she and her colleagues pulled together a sweeping collection of paleoclimate evidence to reveal how the jet stream contracted and twisted in glacial boundary conditions, rather than moving monolithically south.

Not exact matches

The findings, published in the journal Nature Communications, show that integrating evidence from historical writings with paleoclimate data can advance both our understanding of how the climate system functions, and how climatic changes impacted past human societies.

Evidence of these changes is found in many parts of the Southern Hemisphere and in different paleoclimate archives, but what prompted these changes has remained largely unexplained.

«Our study has found evidence to the contrary, suggesting that in fact, the future long - term trend based on paleoclimate reconstructions is likely towards diminishing precipitation, with no relief in the form of increased Mediterranean storms, the primary source of annual precipitation to the region, in the foreseeable future.»

However, studies evaluating model performance on key observed processes and paleoclimate evidence suggest that the higher end of sensitivity is more likely, partially conflicting with the studies based on the recent transient observed warming.

Paleoclimate derived from stacked benthic foraminifera δ18O or aeolian dust records has been unable explain the occurrence of discrete evolutionary phases in the hominin fossil record [2]--[3], [15], the incorporation of the Rift lakes as both a climate indicator and landscape feature provides this missing environmental evidence.

It's based upon multiple lines of evidence including (in no particular order) the paleoclimate record, experimental evidence, well - established physical theory, and observational evidence.

But to them, we offer the reminder that paleoclimate evidence comprises only one of many independent lines of evidence indicating a primary role of human activity in modern climate change.

He attacks Hansen without evidence and utilizes proxy data after he criticizes middle and upper lay troposphere and his analysis of proxy data for paleoclimate.

On July 23, I wrote about the rocky rollout, prior to peer review, of «Ice Melt, Sea Level Rise and Superstorms: Evidence from Paleoclimate Data, Climate Modeling, and Modern Observations that 2 °C Global Warming is Highly Dangerous.»

Natural (non-human-induced) variability is still likely the dominant cause of today's droughts, and clearly was for megadroughts evidenced in the paleoclimate record.

I suspect that this obvious test of the validity of GCMs is not emphasized in public discussions because of the considerable influence of people who have an unshakable belief that the earth is 5000 or so years old, such that paleoclimate evidence is unconvincing to them.

The paleoclimate evidence from this new study supports the attribution of the tropical temperature trend to the ever - increasing greenhouse gas burden in the atmosphere.

In terms of the comments about the Holocene record, etc, and Gavin's saying that there is «no evidence» of such methane burps then: first, let us all also acknowledge that some of the world's major paleoclimate and methane experts HAVE seen evidence of exactly that [i.e., Nisbet, Have sudden large releases of methane from geological reservoirs occurred since the Last Glacial Maximum, and could such releases occur again?

Paleoclimate evidence and ongoing global changes imply that today's CO2, about 385 ppm, is already too high to maintain the climate to which humanity, wildlife, and the rest of the biosphere are adapted.

What is true is that there is very very strong evidence from paleoclimate data (deep sea sediment cores) for changes in the distribution of chemical tracers that must reflect changes in the deep circulation in the Atlantic.

That it is possible to construct a metric that doesn't show regional warming in a certain roughly specified region on a certain unspecified time scale with a certain unspecified statistical technique in no way contradicts the assertion that the balance of observational evidence shows unusual recent global warming, in first order agreement with theoretical, computational, and paleoclimate evidence.

I also agree with you that paleoclimate has been the strongest evidence that the humans are doing something unprecedented with the Earth - that the current changes exceed those that appear on the timescales of millenia.

On the first sentence stating that the WGI report considers evidence of past and future climate change based on many independent scientific analyses from observations of the climate system, paleoclimate archives, theoretical studies of climate processes, and simulations using climate models, Saudi Arabia proposed clarifying that evidence of future climate change is based on models and simulations only.

The initial title of «Ice melt, sea level rise and superstorms: evidence from paleoclimate data, climate modeling, and modern observations that 2 °C global warming is highly dangerous» had the final phrase changed to «could be dangerous.»

«Researchers first became intrigued by abrupt climate change when they discovered striking evidence of large, abrupt, and widespread changes preserved in paleoclimatic archives... Modern climate records include abrupt changes that are smaller and briefer than in paleoclimate records but show that abrupt climate change is not restricted to the distant past.»

The ONLY compelling convergent evidence we see is in the field of climatology the picture of collusion and corruption in the field of paleoclimate.

BBD writes - «Finite fossil hydrocarbon reserves (note I do not limit this definition to «fuel») plus robust physics of radiative transfer, plus paleoclimate evidence plus uncertainty are, together, more than sufficient grounds to justify the rapid reduction in fossil HC use.»

Finite fossil hydrocarbon reserves (note I do not limit this definition to «fuel») plus robust physics of radiative transfer, plus paleoclimate evidence plus uncertainty are, together, more than sufficient grounds to justify the rapid reduction in fossil HC use.

while there is undoubtedly scope for statisticians to play a larger role in paleoclimate research, the large investment of time needed to become familiar with the scientific background is likely to deter most statisticians from entering this field... In the end, it's important not to lose sight of the forest for the trees, where the «forest» refers to the totality of scientific evidence for global warming.

He thinks that we can look to paleoclimate as evidence for abrupt climate change — and indeed we can — but the examples he has to use are those of abrupt change during deglaciation (YD) or during glacial climate (D - O; Heinrich; Bond).

We consider several important climate impacts and use evidence from current observations to assess the effect of 0.8 °C warming and paleoclimate data for the effect of larger warming, especially the Eemian period, which had global mean temperature about +2 °C relative to pre-industrial time.

In the case of the earth, there is also an immense amount of evidence (from theory, from paleoclimate, even from observations of other planets) to bring to bear.

«By flipping the data opposite to the interpretation of Tiljander et al, Mann shows the Little Ice Age in Finland as being warmer than the MWP, 100 % opposite to the interpretation of the authors and the paleoclimate evidence.

As where Marcott et al went wrong as climate scientists, when they used paleoclimate data of long millenia time scales in natural variability, with the short decadal time scale (weather) in natural variability and claim to predict the future of where the pendulum of climatology will be in the future, when actually showing that they are confused, what they are representing as evidence of the future climate is in fact their total misunderstanding of climatology and the complex chaotic circumstances that influence the real world.

In summary, paleoclimate studies provide one line of evidence that supports an equilibrium climate sensitivity between about 2 and 4.5 °C, and the GWPF justification for dismissing these estimates is weak.

Starting in 2005, building on a sequence of events seeking to obtain raw data, leading ultimately to the FOIA events central to the CRU controversy, McIntyre builds an iconoclastic website which at least implicitly supports the false propositions that climate change concerns rest primarily on paleoclimate evidence and that paleoclimate evidence is systematically skewed.

This is supported by multiple lines of evidence, including GCMs, paleoclimate evidence (including climate response to forcing during glacial periods as well as millennial proxies), the instrumental record, and the climate response to volcanic forcings among others.

Accomplishing this will require synthesizing multiple lines of scientific evidence, including simple and complex models, physical arguments, and paleoclimate data, as well as new modeling experiments to better explore the possibility of extreme scenarios.

But great advances in paleoclimate, analysis of in - situ and satellite observations, my own acquisition of some basic understanding of climate physics and, yes, climate models have all added up to very compelling evidence that we are changing climate and engendering serious risks in doing so.

Even issues which are typically taken to be the sign of a more legitimate skepticism (like arguing for a low sensitivity), are now constrained by data and paleoclimate evidence, and mechanisms that could cause such model errors or misinterpretation of the paleo - record need to be shown by those who argue so confidently against it.

The primary objective here is to try to quantify the character of natural variability though the instrumental record of climate, through paleoclimate evidence (e.g. ice cores), and in computer models that run for long periods of time without any change in climate forcing (i.e. constant sunlight and greenhouse gases).

Composed of 450 instrumental records from temperature stations sheltered from ocean - air / urbanization / adjustment biases throughout the world, a new 20th / 21st century global temperature record introduced previously here very closely aligns with paleoclimate evidence from tree rings, ice cores, fossil pollen and other temperature proxies.

Jim Hansen, who I seem to recall is some sort of modeler, noted recently that the evidence that we have a problem is based on paleoclimate, observations and models, in that order.

Arctic temperatures at the beginning of the first millennium were between 2 ° and 6 °C warmer than they are now, as paleoclimate evidence suggests summer Arctic sea surface temperatures ranged between 3 °C and 7.5 °C about 2,000 years ago, whereas they average about 1.1 °C today.

Rial et al. (2004) have discussed the evidence for nonlinear behavior in the paleoclimate proxies for temperature and in the powerful ocean - atmosphere interactions of the North Atlantic Oscillation, the Pacific Decadal Oscillation and the El Niño Southern Oscillation in Fig. 3.

Eli, and the bunnies, have been following the on line review of Ice melt, sea level rise and superstorms: evidence from paleoclimate data, climate modeling, and modern observations that 2 °C global warming is highly dangerous by J. Hansen, M. Sato, P. Hearty, R. Ruedy, M. Kelley, V. Masson - Delmotte, G. Russell, G. Tselioudis, J. Cao, E. Rignot, I. Velicogna, E. Kandiano, K. von Schuckmann, P. Kharecha, A. N. Legrande, M. Bauer, and K. - W.

Loehle 2008 is one of several independent studies from all over the world using different paleoclimate methodologies as well as actual physical evidence, which have also shown that there was a MWP, that it was global and that it was slightly warmer than today.

For Hansen, an independent line of evidence is paleoclimate, especially the Eocene, that shows the long - term effects of high CO2 levels on things like glaciers, sea - level, mammal evolution, etc..

Jim D: For Hansen, an independent line of evidence is paleoclimate, especially the Eocene, that shows the long - term effects of high CO2 levels on things like glaciers, sea - level, mammal evolution, etc..

Pekka, paleoclimate being independent of models is valuable as another line of evidence, and in recent years the last 60 million years has become better constrained in temperature and CO2 to allow for sensitivity ranges to be independently estimated from it, as Hansen has done.

Paleoclimate evidence is simply one in a number of independent lines of evidence indicating the strong likelihood that human influences on climate play a dominant role in the observed 20th century warming of the earth's surface.

That might have changed this week with the coverage of announcement of «Ice Melt, Sea Level Rise and Superstorms: Evidence from Paleoclimate Data, Climate Modeling, and Modern Observations that 2 °C Global Warming is Highly Dangerous» by James Hansen and 16 other eminent scientists.

Kilbourne K. H., T. M. Quinn, R. S. Webb, et al. (September 2008): Paleoclimate proxy perspective on Caribbean climate since the year 1751: Evidence of cooler temperatures and multidecadal variability.

Using this ancient evidence, scientists have built a record of Earth's past climates, or «paleoclimates.»