Sentences with phrase «other climate variables which»

In other words, there is noise due to measurement error, but then there is also noise due to other climate variables which obscure the underlying trend?

Not exact matches

When modelers want to predict the future movement of a particular species, they first establish a set of conditions — in terms of climate, soil quality and other variables — under which that species is likely to thrive.

But this phenomenon, called «upwelling» has a very variable intensity due to the variability of the currents in the Pacific Basin, to which other ocean and climate forcing mechanisms are added.

These and most other similar large - scale assessments are based primarily on species distribution (bioclimatic envelope) models, which use correlations between species» observed distributions and climate variables to predict their distributions and hence their extinction risk under future climate scenarios [9]--[11].

In No Small Change: Targeting Money Toward Student Performance, researchers analyze more than 100 variables before they grade states from A to F on four major categories: the rigor and clarity of the state's standards in core subjects; its efforts to improve teacher quality; its school climate as measured by absenteeism, school safety, parental involvement, character education, and other variables; and the extent to which it provides resources equitably.

(1) In this case even if they were correct and the models failed to predict or match reality (which, acc to this post has not been adequately established, bec we're still in overlapping data and model confidence intervals), it could just as well mean that AGW stands and the modelers have failed to include some less well understood or unquantifiable earth system variable into the models, or there are other unknowns within our weather / climate / earth systems, or some noise or choas or catastrophe (whose equation has not been found yet) thing.

Carbon dioxide may in fact have very little effect as a control variable in pushing climate to shift state — a small change lost amidst multiple other factors of which clouds, ice, UV and orbital irregularities are the obvious candidates.

In other words, the underlying climate models will have characteristics or variables which will set the overall size of the carbon budget.

The CERN Cloud study suggests cosmic radiation (variation of which, of course, would depend on other variables — I suppose there is no end to this question unless you believe in a supernatural being that controls it all, and even then you'd have to ask why that supernatural being would choose to make changes in cosmic radiation to determine the independent variable, and of course, then you'd have to ask why that supernatural being was created, etc.) but offers no solid evidence that correlates changes in cosmic radiation to measures of change in our climate.

I'm very convinced that the physical process of global warming is continuing, which appears as a statistically significant increase of the global surface and tropospheric temperature anomaly over a time scale of about 20 years and longer and also as trends in other climate variables (e.g., global ocean heat content increase, Arctic and Antarctic ice decrease, mountain glacier decrease on average and others), and I don't see any scientific evidence according to which this trend has been broken, recently.

The most likely candidate for that climatic variable force that comes to mind is solar variability (because I can think of no other force that can change or reverse in a different trend often enough, and quick enough to account for the historical climatic record) and the primary and secondary effects associated with this solar variability which I feel are a significant player in glacial / inter-glacial cycles, counter climatic trends when taken into consideration with these factors which are, land / ocean arrangements, mean land elevation, mean magnetic field strength of the earth (magnetic excursions), the mean state of the climate (average global temperature), the initial state of the earth's climate (how close to interglacial - glacial threshold condition it is) the state of random terrestrial (violent volcanic eruption, or a random atmospheric circulation / oceanic pattern that feeds upon itself possibly) / extra terrestrial events (super-nova in vicinity of earth or a random impact) along with Milankovitch Cycles.

The other important variable used in the model is the climate sensitivity, which varies between 2.0 and 4.5 °C for a doubling of atmospheric CO2, with a central value of 3.0 °C.

But the only difference between A, B, and C were not the model assumptions of climate sensitivity or any other variable — they only differed in the amount of Co2 growth and the number of volcano eruptions (which have a cooling effect via aerosols).

In addition to the data from the radiometers, the Berkeley Lab scientists will get supplemental data by taking advantage of a separate, in - depth DOE climate study at the same location, which is using additional instruments and a balloon - borne sounding system to get information on temperature, cloud cover, the density and types of aerosols or pollution particles, heat fluxes and other climate variables like precipitation.