Finally, pull out an instant
read thermometer since you will need it later.
Not exact matches
And
since this isn't a recipe that you can use an objective measure to determine readiness (like a candy
thermometer that
reads 240 °F, for example), it was hard to guarantee success.
Whether the cause is human activity or natural variability — and the preponderance of evidence says it's humans —
thermometer readings all around the world have risen steadily
since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution.
Well
since Temperature measurements are good out to 1200 km away from the
thermometer; you don't really need any more than one
thermometer for Nepal; and
since you only need one; it follows by logical deduction, that it doesn't matter a hoot where you put the
thermometer; well there are some places in Kathmandu where you could insert a
thermometer and get anomalous
readings; which aren't quite the same as anomalies which are supposed to be anomalous.
Whether the cause is human activity or natural variability,
thermometer readings all around the world have risen steadily
since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution.
Measurement sites form the core input of the data set for calculating this «global mean temperature» (whatever that actually means), but the measurements from these sites is accurate at best to the nearest 1 degree, in actual practice around the nearest 5 degrees
since many are
reading off mercury
thermometers — and this condition increases in frequency the further back in time you go.
Since NOAA is supplying temperature data valid to two decimal places, going from the times of glass
thermometers where maybe you could guess a half - degree, their analysis would be interesting
reading.
Some have dismissed the idea that the world would continue to burn fossil fuels despite obvious global warming, but emissions are still increasing despite a 1C rise in average
thermometer readings since the 1880s.