Sentences with phrase «physical effect of warming»

Warming is linked to increases in precipitation extremes partly because of the physical effect of warming on atmospheric conditions.

Also the physical effects of warming up such as increasing your heart rate and blood flow to your muscles prepares you for maximum flexibility far quicker than not warming up, and lets not forget that warming up starts to prepare your mind for what is to come and never underestimate the influence the mind has over the body.

We are investigating our Berkeley Earth dataset for evidence of the physical effects of warming, the ability of Global Climate Models to replicate historical warming, and trends in global energy and emissions.

Not exact matches

That snug and warm feeling of close physical contact with you will make them less grumpy and have a soothing effect.

By showing that (a) there are no common physical laws between the warming phenomenon in glass houses and the fictitious atmospheric greenhouse effects, (b) there are no calculations to determine an average surface temperature of a planet, (c) the frequently mentioned difference of 33 C is a meaningless number calculated wrongly, (d) the formulas of cavity radiation are used inappropriately, (e) the assumption of a radiative balance is unphysical, (f) thermal conductivity and friction must not be set to zero, the atmospheric greenhouse conjecture is falsified

By showing that (a) there are no common physical laws between the warming phenomenon in glass houses and the fictitious atmospheric greenhouse effects, (b) there are no calculations to determine an average surface temperature of a planet, (c) the frequently mentioned difference of 33 C is a meaningless number calculated wrongly, (d) the formulas of cavity radiation are used inappropriately, (e) the assumption of a radiative balance is unphysical, (f) thermal conductivity and friction must not be set to zero, the atmospheric greenhouse conjecture is falsified

Based on physical modelling taking into account measured and astrophysically plausible variations in solar spectral luminosity, and on consistent physical models of the response of he climate system to solar forcing, you can't explain away the 20th / 21st net warming trend with solar effects.

What climate models assume is a wide - ranging compendium of physical processes that are either well known but too complicated to incorporate into the climate model (for example the direct radiational effect of Carbon Dioxide on greenhouse warming is considerably * simplified * compared to the most sophisticated «line - by - line» radiation models that are available, simply because there isn't enough computer power to make the line - by - line calculation at every location on Earth at every time step within in a GCM), or are not sufficiently well - known to treat them with complete certainty.

Hansen got the warming right in the 1980s, the hockey stick is validated by numerous oth alternative research methods and ocean heat content and arctic ice continue to rise and shrink as predicted from the understanding of the physical effect of CO2, as have air temperatures in the area.

A number of studies have used a variety of statistical and physical approaches to determine the contribution of greenhouse gases and other effects to the observed global warming, like Foster & Rahmstorf and Lean & Rind.

The economic costs of natural disasters related to global warming are adding up; some of the largest effects of these catastrophes can be felt in the United States, where politics and policies are not keeping pace with the physical realities of climate change.

The physical effects are seen in changes of rainfall, cloudiness, wind - strength and temperature, which are customarily lumped together in the misleading phrase «global warming».

Basic physical science considerations, exploratory climate modeling, and the impacts of volcanic aerosols on climate all suggest that SWCE could partially compensate for some effects — particularly net global warming — of increased atmospheric CO2.

While it is widely recognized that continued emission of greenhouse gases will cause further warming of the planet and this warming could lead to damaging economic and social consequences, the exact timing and severity of physical effects are difficult to estimate.

It asserts that manmade greenhouse gases do not play a «substantial role» in climate change and that previous reports about the effects of global warming overestimated the situation and «failed to incorporate chemical and biological processes, which are as important as the physical ones.»

The causal case is a cumulative case of: 1) correlation + 2) well - evidenced mechanism (i.e. plausibility) + 3) primacy, where the proposed cause occurs before the effect + 4) robustness of the correlation under multiple tests / conditions + 5) experimental evidence that adding the cause subsequently results in the effect + 6) exclusion of other likely causes (see point 7 as well) + 7) specificity, where the effect having hallmarks of the cause (ex: the observed tropospheric warming and stratopsheric cooling, is a hallmark of greenhouse - gas - induced warming, not warming from solar forcing) 8) a physical gradient (or a dose - response), where more of the cause produces a larger effect, or more of the cause is more likely to produce the effect +....

a) the troposphere has ten times as much mass as the stratosphere b) we live at the bottom of the troposphere c) the warming and cooling come via different physical effects of the increased CO2 and there is no reason for them to cancel, which they don't.

Using a simple physical model, O'Gorman suggests that this is due to the balance between two competing effects caused by the warming: increasing moisture available for humidity and the decreases in the fraction of precipitation that falls as snow.

BTW: There is no physical evidence that the assumption of a net positive feedback is correct, and much physical evidence to suggest that the real world feedbacks are net negative and will reduce the proposed direct warming effect of CO2 towards (closer too) 0.

We must protect our most vulnerable communities — and particularly communities of color — from the physical, economic, and public health effects of global warming, while providing pathways to prosperity.

By showing that (a) there are no c ommon physical laws between the warming phenomenon in glass houses and the fictitious atmospheric greenhouse effect b) there are no calculations to determine an average surface temperature of a planet, (c) the frequently mentioned difference of 33 C a meaningless number calculated wrongly, (d) the formulas of cavity radiation are used inappropriately, (e) the assumption of a radiative balance is unphysical, (f) thermal conductivity and friction must not be set to zero, the atmospheric greenhouse conjecture is falsified.

While most of us have yet to sense the extent of global warming's immediate and more long - term effects on the planet's physical geography, others - mostly in the northern regions of the world - have not been so fortunate.

Since oxygen and nitrogen expand quite magnificently when warmed and they represent 99 % of the Earths atmosphere, it is difficult to imagine that this PHYSICAL, Scientific effect is ignored and reference is made to just about every other bloody thing on the face of the Earth or Sun.

A number of studies have used a variety of statistical and physical approaches to determine the contribution of greenhouse gases and other effects to the observed global warming.

EPSRC (engineering and physical sciences research council) grants to study the effects of global warming: pounds sterling 63,245,372

In economic theory there are (were) plenty of models that seemed logical, coherent and broadly in line with both observations and established micro-results (this echoes the «but the effect is physical and the Earth is warming!»

«The implication of attributing 18C of warming to CO2 while saying -LSB-...] «About 98 % of the greenhouse effect in the atmosphere is due to water vapour» is to imply that in the absence of CO2 and H2O, the temperature would be 900C lower, i.e. well below the physical limit of absolute zero.»

The researchers found that the effects of one parent's harsh style on physical health were cushioned by the warm style of the other parent.