Sentences with phrase «on planetary temperatures»

That CO2 has little effect on planetary temperatures, and there is no climate crisis.

Understanding the carbon - cycle was key to explaining this: the realisation was that throughout geological time the levels of carbon dioxide and other non-condensing greenhouse - gases had exterted major controls on the planetary temperature.

As Coronal holes can persist for months and years and as the solar wind burst affect lasts for roughly week, a coronal hole has a significant effect on planetary temperature) which reflects all solar activity, and it is highly correlated to global temperature variations in the whole period for which we have data.

And do we have any evidence that ANY or ALL of the proposed «climate policies» would have any measurable effect on the planetary temperature, which is the purpose for which they are ostensibly being imposed?

Understanding the carbon - cycle was key to explaining this: the realisation was that throughout geological time the levels of carbon dioxide and other non-condensing greenhouse - gases had exterted major controls on the planetary temperature.

Not exact matches

Far more suggestive and convincing than this «flat «vision of the biological world is the three - dimensional concept of a heavenly body on which, through the effect of planetary compression, the state of complexity (or, which amounts to the same thing, the «psychic» temperature of the biosphere) is continually rising.

«There's a perception that Venus is a very difficult place to have a mission,» says planetary scientist Darby Dyar of Mount Holyoke College in South Hadley, Mass. «Everybody knows about the high pressures and temperatures on Venus, so people think we don't have technology to survive that.

«What has always been intriguing about the moon is that we expect to find ice wherever the temperatures are cold enough for ice, but that's not quite what we see,» said Matt Siegler, a researcher with the Planetary Science Institute in Dallas, Texas, and a co-author on the study.

The team assessed the role that rock temperature, sub-surface pressure and general Martian make - up, have on the planetary surfaces.

Although both worlds are similar in size and density, our planetary neighbor has temperatures so high they can melt lead, winds that whip around it some 60 times faster than the planet itself rotates and an atmosphere that slams down with more than 90 times the pressure found on Earth's atmosphere.

«We can see now at true planetary scale that increasing water temperature will have a huge impact on microbial life in the ocean,» said Shinici Sunagawa, an EMBL staff scientist and a senior author on a second Tara paper.

With Earth's temperature climbing in concert with rising emissions of carbon dioxide (and eight of the hottest years on record occurring in the last decade), we appear to have begun a vast, unplanned experiment with our planetary home.

Or would it have an effect mainly restricted to the Arctic Ocean and adjacent areas, and have little effect on overall planetary temperatures?

Since a planet's radius and equilibrium temperature depends on the parameters of its host star, our study provides more precise planetary parameters for planets and candidates orbiting late - type stars observed with K2.

She is a planetary scientist at Mount Holyoke College in South Hadley, Mass. «Everybody knows about the high pressures and temperatures on Venus, so people think we don't have technology to survive that.

Slow feedbacks have little effect on the immediate planetary energy balance, instead coming into play in response to temperature change.

Our evaluation of a fossil fuel emissions limit is not based on climate models but rather on observational evidence of global climate change as a function of global temperature and on the fact that climate stabilization requires long - term planetary energy balance.

The surface changes on Pluto are due to extreme temperature variations between seasons, said Mike Brown, professor of planetary astronomy at Caltech.

Very recent, wide ranging review of temperature measurements in the oceans with a detailed discussion of the accuracy of the data, planetary energy balance and the effect of the warming on sea levels.

If anyone is interested, I've revised my planetary temperatures page and the javascript calculator based on it.

This summary, based on real - world data for temperature, planetary energy balance, and GHG changes, differs from a common optimistic perception of progress toward stabilizing climate.

I have an article running in The Times on recent vagaries in planetary temperature, which almost all scientific experts on global warming describe as a brief and normal hiatus from the long - term warming driven by greenhouse gases.

The general argument however is being discussed by rasmus in the context of planetary energy balance: the impact of additional CO2 is to reduce the outgoing longwave radiation term and force the system to accumulate excess energy; the imbalance is currently on the order of 1.45 * (10 ^ 22) Joules / year over the globe, and the temperature must rise allowing the outgoing radiation term to increase until it once again matches the absorbed incoming stellar flux.

You typed: «Planets with a thin atmosphere and insignificant greenhouse effect, on the other hand, have a surface temperature that is close the the estimates from the planetary energy balance model (Figure 3).»

Planets with a thin atmosphere and insignificant greenhouse effect, on the other hand, have a surface temperature that is close the the estimates from the planetary energy balance model (Figure 3).»

Or would it have an effect mainly restricted to the Arctic Ocean and adjacent areas, and have little effect on overall planetary temperatures?

The fact is that unless one can properly appreciate the nature and scale of the effect that an atmosphere has on planetary surface temperature then the significance of my article and indeed the entire underlying debate is impossible to assess meaningfully.

The fact that eadler2 didn't make this point right away is proof that she is little more than a Skeptical Science parrot and not a very good one considering she didn't point to this canonical restraint on planetary surface temperatures.

Unless one can properly appreciate the nature and scale of the effect that an atmosphere has on planetary surface temperature the entire underlying debate is impossible to assess meaningfully.

It remains that there are no evidence lines on a global scale that indicate the planetary temperature is either stable or cooling, or that it is natural cycle.

«Further recognizing the fact that «[h] uman activity has and will continue to alter the atmosphere of the planet» and that «[s] uch activity may lead to demonstrable changes in climate, including a warming of the planetary mean temperature,» ALEC developed the Interstate Research Commission on Climactic Change Act in the mid-1990s.

Reading more about planetary temperatures, I find the Universe Today has a page quoting «The average temperature on Earth is 7.2 °C.».

So, on those grounds, more GHGs could not affect equilibrium temperature because they provoke an equal and opposite system response to any effect they might have on the transfer of energy through the planetary system.

Since there is no appreciable long - term trend in planetary temperature, it may be concluded that this budget is essentially zero on a global long - term average.

We have now passed over 30 consecutive years of above normal temperatures on planet Earth, and even now, individuals from the climate science / meteorological communities are actively propagating the blatant lie that climate engineering / solar radiation management will save us from planetary incineration (which geoengineering is making far worse, not better).

But no... let's ignore planetary geologic changes, claim that there could be any other cause for the temperature increase, and blame temperature on a trace gas concentration that is temperature dependent.

The «unnatural» warming so far seen is however trended strongly to the alterations to the planetary surface by Humanity over the past 400 years and the rebalance towards greater kinetic induction (in its cumulative effect) is now producing observable alterations not only to the Land Surface median Temperature, but to the Ocean (vie conduction / convection) and a still unconfirmed claim of a small overall rise in Median Atmospheric Temperature, which if «true» would place the Planetary Biosphere on the «Human Population Plot» with regard to «warminplanetary surface by Humanity over the past 400 years and the rebalance towards greater kinetic induction (in its cumulative effect) is now producing observable alterations not only to the Land Surface median Temperature, but to the Ocean (vie conduction / convection) and a still unconfirmed claim of a small overall rise in Median Atmospheric Temperature, which if «true» would place the Planetary Biosphere on the «Human Population Plot» with regard to «warminPlanetary Biosphere on the «Human Population Plot» with regard to «warming».

And on planetary scale, earth has large variation in equator and polar temperature.

All this is in my paper on Planetary Surface Temperatures on the Principia Scientific International website.

Temperature has nothing to do with energy balances on the surface of a planetary body.

Nikolov N, Zeller K (2017) New Insights on the Physical Nature of the Atmospheric Greenhouse Effect Deduced from an Empirical Planetary Temperature Model.

Slow feedbacks have little effect on the immediate planetary energy balance, instead coming into play in response to temperature change.

But some stays in the atmosphere to raise planetary temperatures to increasingly alarming levels − with carbon dioxide ratios having tipped 400 parts per million, and global average temperatures on average having already risen by 1 °C.

This week on their Web site, CO2Science.Org, the Idsos review a study, published in Earth and Planetary Science Letters, that attempts to reconstruct the temperature history of the Antarctic Peninsula from ikaite crystals (an icy version of limestone) in marine sediments.

Planets with atmospheres stabilise their surface temperatures at a level dependent upon the density of the atmosphere leaving the main variation in planetary temperature dependent on variations in the energy coming in from the local star.

On the timescale of decades, every planetary object has a mean temperature mainly given by the power of its star according to Stefan - Boltzmann's law combined with the greenhouse effect.

4 Volokin et al have shown that planetary surface temperatures are a function of solar insolation and surface pressure only, not GHG concentrations, on all 8 planets for which we have adequate data, including Earth & Venus.

Lolwot If you're well versed in atmospheric physics why not «have a go at» my latest paper Planetary Surface Temperatures A Discussion of Alternative Mechanisms which is still on the PROM (Peer Review in Open Media) system.

None of this has any bearing whatsoever on mean planetary surface temperatures which are supported by the autonomous gravitationally induced temperature gradient which results from the process described in statements of the Second Law of Thermodynamics in which thermodynamic equilibrium evolves spontaneously.

I also deny that the efficacy of the amelioration policies that are being demanded (and implemented by decree) on the «Temperature of the Earth», the «Planetary Climate», or «Climate Weirding» will be measurable.