Sentences with phrase «predicted results of global warming»

Floods, famine, drought, pestilence, disease — they are all commonly predicted results of global warming.

Not exact matches

An increase in snowfall has long been predicted as a result of global warming.

«The result is not a surprise, but if you look at the global climate models that have been used to analyze what the planet looked like 20,000 years ago — the same models used to predict global warming in the future — they are doing, on average, a very good job reproducing how cold it was in Antarctica,» said first author Kurt Cuffey, a glaciologist at the University of California, Berkeley, and professor of geography and of earth and planetary sciences.

These models currently predict that as a result of today's global climate change, Antarctica will warm twice as much as the rest of the planet, though it won't reach its peak for a couple of hundred years.

Although global warming is likely to change the distribution of species, deforestation will result in the loss of more dry forests than predicted by climate change damage.

One possible source is a 1938 study by pioneering climate scientist Guy Callendar in which he predicted that doubling the global concentration of carbon dioxide from pre-industrial levels would result in around 2 °C of warming.

«The results thus predict an interesting two-fold negative impact on the potential world - wide distribution of the miconia plant resulting from global warming since a decrease in potentially affected areas in overrun territories would be minimum,» says González - Muñoz.

He and his colleagues hope to find correlations between those circumstances and diversity, which might enable them to predict the impact of global warming and the resulting ocean acidification on marine ecosystems.

«This species has the smallest, most restricted habitat of any Amazonian primate, and it has been predicted that the habitat may be drastically altered due to changes in weather patterns as a result of global warming.»

The resulting computer simulation is the basis for predicting the catastrophic effects of increasing AGHG on global warming.

The basic fact that rising concentrations of greenhouse gases result in global warming has been understood since it was predicted from physical laws over a century ago; specification of the magnitude and geographical distribution of the warming are elucidated by the twentieth century observations and calculations.

Anyway it is a false comparison to compare old temperatures with new temperatures when asking «wht should we do» you need to compare «our solution» with «their solution» If you are advocating a political strategy you need to accept current proposed strategies will probably still result in the majority of the global warming predicted in the ordinary scenario (if not all of it — a point which I can argue if you like).

This intensification has resulted in significantly greater global summer monsoon rainfall in the Northern Hemisphere than predicted from greenhouse - gas - induced warming alone: namely a 9.5 % increase, compared to the anthropogenic predicted contribution of 2.6 % per degree of global warming.

Christy, a noted skeptic of catastrophic man - made global warming, said his results reinforce his claim that climate models predict too much warming in the troposphere, the lowest five miles of the atmosphere.

Kevin Hamilton, who co-authored the report, warns: «If our model results prove to be representative of the real global climate, then climate is actually more sensitive to perturbations by greenhouse gases than current global models predict, and even the highest warming predictions would underestimate the real change we could see.»

This is opposite to the prediction and since this was the only actual problem predicted to result directly from the predicted global warming; global warming should be of no concern.

1847 «George Perkins Marsh (1801 - 1882) author of the 1847 lecture that predicted — «human - induced climate change» — from multiple historical records Scientists WERE ALREADY LECTURING ABOUT GLOBAL WARMING and the resulting Climate Changes, in 1847!

Here's the problem with the Bayesian approach as we see it being used here: prior information is being used to incorporate results from previous studies for the purpose of demonstrating that later data — despite being a reduced sample size — effectively predicts global warming.

Researchers said that a doubling of carbon dioxide in the Earth's atmosphere compared with pre-industrial times could result in a global temperature increase of up to 5.3 C — far warmer than the 4.6 C older models predict.

Dismissing natural variability even though it is well demonstrated by now that the consensus view on so - called «global warming» has failed seems to invert the scientific process of (in rough form): Observe > hypothesis > test / predict > measure result > Compare to observation > reconcile to reality.

The same «experts» who predicted that hurricanes would become stronger and more frequent as a result of the global warming - which also did not happen.

The UN's IPCC and associated climate alarmist scientists predicted that severe weather would increase globally as a result of human - caused global warming.

Over this period the mean CR intensity appears to have fallen by less than 0.6 % using the data of Bazilevskaya et al. (2008)... the increase in temperature predicted [as a result] is 0.002 C, a value that is quite negligible to the Global Warming in this period...

Hansen long ago had predicted that if human CO2 emissions continued in a manner of «business - as - usual» there would result exceptional, accelerating global warming.

Velasco dismissed computer models that are used to predict global warming as a result of man - made carbon dioxide emissions, noting that «today we are experiencing a scientific revolution in which on one side there are are supercomputers and on the other, human intelligence.

The resulting computer simulation is the basis for predicting the catastrophic effects of increasing AGHG on global warming.

The basic fact that rising concentrations of greenhouse gases result in global warming has been understood since it was predicted from physical laws over a century ago; specification of the magnitude and geographical distribution of the warming are elucidated by the twentieth century observations and calculations.

And while the study published in the journal Nature last week did not dispute manmade global warming, it did predict a cooling from recent average temperatures through 2015, as a result of a natural and temporary shift in ocean currents.

Even if global warming wasn't a hoax a rise of sea levels still is impossible to predict — e.g., some scientists believe that with global warming there would be increased precipitation and it could fall as snow on a frozen Antarctica and stay there resulting in falling sea levels.

The principal glacier of the world's biggest tropical ice - cap could disappear within five years as a result of global warming, one of the world's leading glaciologists predicted yesterday.

A new study, due to be presented in July to the International Commission on Snow and Ice (ICSI), predicts that most of the glaciers in the region will vanish within 40 years as a result of global warming.