Sentences with phrase «periods of warming prior»

However, other periods of warming prior to that peiod suggests that co2 is a pretty minor driver and the variation we can see is basically natural tonyb

Not exact matches

An unsportsmanlike conduct penalty will be assessed to the head coach if the team is not back on the field prior to the start of the warm - up period.

A confounding factor in discussions of this period is the unfortunate tendency of some authors to label any warm peak prior to the 15th Century as the «Medieval Warm Period» in their rperiod is the unfortunate tendency of some authors to label any warm peak prior to the 15th Century as the «Medieval Warm Period» in their recwarm peak prior to the 15th Century as the «Medieval Warm Period» in their recWarm Period» in their rPeriod» in their record.

This is a vision more befitting our time, one that does not look back to a heavy industry, carbon polluting economy, now infeasible as it imperils a warming planet and can not be remade in a globally competitive market unlike the period prior to global trade liberalization of the early 1970s.

Prevention of these injuries involves maintaining your dog's physical conditioning through adequate exercise, warm - up periods prior to performance events such as agility and common sense (think about what you would do for yourself).

Higher levels of CO2 prior to 1940 had some role in warming at that period, because of the greenhouse effect, but are insufficient when calculated to explain all the warming.

-- The same goes for the earlier multi-decadal period of slight cooling (~ 1940 - 1970) and especially for the early 20thC period of rapid warming (1910 - 1940), which occurred prior to significant human GHG emissions.

I have been arguing that the IPCC's attribution arguments are unconvincing unless they can also explain the early 20th century warming, and the longer period of overall warming prior to the 20th century.

[Recall that the warm period in the first half of the century would have been prior to the time when man - made greenhouse gas emissions are supposed to have warmed up the climate.]

The party line is only warming since 1980 is anthropogenic therefore warming periods prior to then are evidence of non-anthropogenic warming.

If part of the 1910 - 40 warming was, say, the atmosphere being warmed by the ocean (because, say, the ocean had not yet cooled down since the warmer period prior to 1900) then one wouldn't expect to see a lag.

Any warming observed prior to WWII is indicative of «global warming» (GW), but (since there were no significant human GHG emissions yet) is counterindicative of anthropogenic greenhouse warming (AGW), since something other than human GHGs caused it, raising the question: if non GH warming caused this warming, could it not also have caused the most recent extended warming period?

«Surface temperature reconstructions for periods prior to the industrial era are only one of multiple lines of evidence supporting the conclusion that climatic warming is occurring in response to human activities, and they are not the primary evidence.»

Our interpretations of the δ18O and MS records suggest a warming event ~ 400 k.y. prior to the Cretaceous - Paleogene (K - Pg) boundary, and a period of climatic and environmental instability in the earliest Danian.

Warming over the Arctic proper during such periods would also be common with a wind reversal from the common winter westerlies to the vortex disrupted easterlies, but of course historical documentation of this is virtually non-existent prior to the modern period.

In order to produce a visual apple - to - apple comparison of the amount of warming for the two periods, the prior period's 5 - year averages were offset to start at the exactly same point as the modern warming period («offsetting» the datapoints does not affect the slope of the earlier period's warming trend, nor the amount of warming).

Indeed, a portion of that small linear trend difference might be due to human CO2 emissions; or, then again, it might be due to the vast urbanization effect over the last 60 + years; or due to the large deforestation that's taken place; or, maybe it's entirely due to the serial fabrication of global warming by the world's climate agencies; or it's even possible that the post-1950 warming was entirely a natural phenomenon - the same as the prior 64 - year period experience.

Our devotee will also pass by the curious additional facts that a period of similar warming occurred between 1918 and 1940, well prior to the greatest phase of world industrialisation, and that cooling occurred between 1940 and 1965, at precisely the time that human emissions were increasing at their greatest rate.

Lacking CO2 data going back as far as 1850 what is your theory for the other plateaus / cooling periods in between the warming, and indeed the warming itself prior to our tracking of that CO2?

Note that today's temperature, and perhaps its duration if it ends soon, matches 3 of the 4 prior brief warm periods (temp and duration) in this 100,000 year cycle.

If this exercise is well publicized, millions in America will be saying to themselves, «WTF, you mean climate scientists have been discussing aspects of prior warm periods?

«Surface temperature reconstructions for periods prior to the industrial era are only one of multiple lines of evidence supporting the conclusion that climatic warming is occurring in response to human activities, and they are not the primary evidence,» the report said.

ust sticking a trend line through a recent period (eg 1998 - present) and declare it has no warming with no comparison to a prior period (or at least no mention of the confidence ranges).

The suggestion that recent warming is anthropogenic due to divergence from a simple 60/20 year curve fit over a mere 100 years ignores prior divergence from both competing models of distantly past temperature, one being a hockey stick that shows a slow decline instead of incline prior 1850 and the other showing two similar «non-cyclical» spikes in the Roman and medieval periods.

As this adjacent chart reveals, modern warming increases over the last 60 years don't even match the warming increases of the prior 60 - year period, when earlier human emissions were just a fraction of contemporary amounts.

However, that was a period of warming just prior to the industrial surge of atmospheric sulfates, so if the ice did diminish at that time, it would likely be attributed to human caused global warming.

By this same token, Marcott et al could have also «confirmed» Loehle et al and whatever other reconstructions that exist during that same period that show general warming prior to the top of the WMP and then a cooling afterward to the LIA (but only differed in their amplitudes and peak maxes).

These claims of statistical «skill» were not an idle puff by MBH, but were relevant to the widespread view that MBH methods represented a new level of sophistication, separating their work from Lamb's prior work purporting to show a Medieval Warm Period.

«The assessment is supported additionally by a complementary analysis in which the parameters of an Earth System Model of Intermediate Complexity (EMIC) were constrained using observations of near - surface temperature and ocean heat content, as well as prior information on the magnitudes of forcings, and which concluded that GHGs have caused 0.6 °C to 1.1 °C (5 to 95 % uncertainty) warming since the mid-20th century (Huber and Knutti, 2011); an analysis by Wigley and Santer (2013), who used an energy balance model and RF and climate sensitivity estimates from AR4, and they concluded that there was about a 93 % chance that GHGs caused a warming greater than observed over the 1950 — 2005 period; and earlier detection and attribution studies assessed in the AR4 (Hegerl et al., 2007b).»

The best of the ice core records from Greenland (see www.WilliamCalvin.com/climate) show a sharp cooling at about 117,000 years ago, effectively ending the prior warm period, but it took a long time for the ice sheets to return.

That conclusion is based not on climate models or recent trends in forest fires, but rather on records of forest fires that occurred more than a millennium ago, during the Medieval Climate Anomaly, a period when global temperatures were comparable to what they are today, and about half a degree warmer (on the Celsius scale) than they had been for several centuries prior.

In the abstract he elaborates it further: ``... There is evidence of ice melt, sea level rise to +5 — 9 m, and extreme storms in the prior interglacial period that was less than 1 °C warmer than today....»

There is evidence of ice melt, sea level rise to +5 — 9 m, and extreme storms in the prior interglacial period that was less than 1 C warmer than today.

For instance, if ocean flows do represent some of the heat during the modern warming then it implies some of the cooling in the period prior was related to this and then some of the warming prior to that is because of this effect.

The warming for the 20 years prior to 2005 appears to be at a greater rate of warming for a 20 year period than for the latter years of all RCP scenarios and even RCP 8.5.

In addition to Adrian Burd's recommendation, Al should read the comprehensive review by Wild: «Global dimming and brightening: A review» http://www.leif.org/EOS/2008JD011470.pdf «Recent brightening can not supersede the greenhouse effect as the main cause of global warming, since land surface temperatures overall increased by 0.8 °C from 1960 to 2000, even though solar brightening did not fully outweigh prior dimming within this period...» The story is nowhere near as simplistic as Al would have it.