Sentences with phrase «only delay the warming»

Do you except that by the end of the century it would only delay warming (if AGW is correct) by a few years.

Not exact matches

From it, I'll only address the SkS «thermal inertia» quote, which Victor took to imply a lag in response: the proposed 21 - year delay between atmospheric warming and oceanic warming.

Which is not surprising, given that the ice core data suggest that this feedback only sets in with a delay of hundreds of years after the warming starts.

Mark Bowen, the author of «Censoring Science: Inside the Political Attack on Dr. James Hansen and the Truth About Global Warming» (Fresh Air interview) said he was initially skeptical about the investigation, but was pleasantly surprised that it captured not only the basic violations of the public trust, but also dealt with «the subtler aspects of censorship — the delaying of information, the sorts of intimidation that cause self censorship.»

But more warming is already «in - the - pipeline,» delayed only by the great inertia of the world ocean.

Some climate scientists have looked at the potential impact of such an event and concluded that it likely would delay additional global warming — but only until the sun returned to more - normal swings in sun - spot activity.

The ocean heat uptake comes into play only when one is trying to explain why the structure of the warming in models changes in time — that is, why the high latitude warming is delayed.

Part of problem is that even with current levels of emissions, the inertia of the climate system means that not all of the warming those emissions will cause has happened yet — a certain amount is «in the pipeline» and will only rear its head in the future, because the ocean absorbs some of the heat, delaying the inherent atmospheric warming for decades to centuries.

«These results warn against drawing over-optimistic conclusions from the relatively modest loss of mountain plant populations likely to be observed during the coming decades», says Stefan Dullinger from the University of Vienna, «because the final consequences of climate warming on plant distribution in the Alps will only become realized with a delay of decades or even centuries.»

What you see in this, is that nightly cooling matching warming, no delay, only slight changes between warming and cooling.

In fact, even a 3 % chance of a warming this great is enough to render useless all traditional cost - benefit analyses that argue for delay or only modest action, as Harvard economist Martin Weitzman has shown.

Personally I think he landed on the ocean heat argument as being the only reasonable way to measure global warming because he thinks he can make a stronger measurement uncertainty - based action - delaying argument on this tack... Who, me?

-- In which case there are (66 — 40) = 22 W / m ² of energy left to bounce back and forth between surface and GHGs creating a «delay» before those 22 W / m ² also left for space, then yes I too may have accepted a bit of warming down here in the Troposphere, but only as a result of the delay in the 22 W / m ² leaving the system.

If possible at all, delaying the rise by storing water on Antarctica would only show significant effects in a scenario of ambitious climate policy, strictly limiting global warming.

All that having been said, let's take another look at the Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) argument, first noting the following: The proponents of AGW argue that, right from the beginning of the Industrial Revolution when there were no automobiles, very few steam engines, and only 1.2 billion people (versus today's 7 billion), the introduction of initially tiny quantities of a weak greenhouse gas produced, without time - delay, an in - phase and measurable rise in global temperatures that continues to this day.