Sentences with phrase «recent small warming»

One passage written by Heartland reads, «Scientists who study the issue say it is impossible to tell if the recent small warming trend is natural, a continuation of the planet's recovery from the more recent «Little Ice Age,» or unnatural, the result of human greenhouse gas emissions.»

Not exact matches

In a recent study on how weather affects mood in Emotion, a small percentage of Dutch participants were labeled Summer Haters (their mood worsened with warmer and sunnier weather).

However, the recent period of cooling does suggest that either manmade global warming may be smaller or that the impact of other factors may be greater than climate models have so far assumed.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)'s recent report said the rate of warming over the past 15 years has been 0.05 degrees Celsius per decade — quite a bit smaller than the 0.12 degrees per decade calculated since 1951.

Those studies find a relatively small solar contribution to global warming, particularly in recent decades (Figure 8).

The steady uptick in warming, even with a relative slowdown in recent decades, means that the likelihood of seeing a record cold year in the future is, according to a quick calculation by Mann, «astronomically small.»

On such a wintery day, I can't help but daydream about my recent whirlwind trip to Ambergris Caye, a small island off the northeastern coast of Belize — a place so consistently warm that residents easily (and even somewhat wistfully) recall in detail the one day of the year they wore a sweater.

He says the most recent warming period is the last 1.5 million years, but data indicates that we went form a more stable warmer state with smaller oscillations into deeper oscillations into colder states.

Scientists (like Richard Lindzen) have a duty NOT to imply to the pubic that: 1) there is no support for the human human population being responsible for most or all of the warming in recent decades, and 2) NOT to imply that there is only a small amount of warming recently.

When they did this, they discovered some potential instrument bias problems with the recent dataset, which seem to have resulted from the recent transition of the in - situ ocean sounding instruments from the old Expendable Bathythermographs (XBT) system, which has a small warm temperature bias, to the new Argo system, which has a small cold temperature bias in a subset of the instruments.

In particular, the authors find fault with IPCC's conclusions relating to human activities being the primary cause of recent global warming, claiming, contrary to significant evidence that they tend to ignore, that the comparatively small influences of natural changes in solar radiation are dominating the influences of the much larger effects of changes in the atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations on the global energy balance.

However, taking account of sampling uncertainty (as most more recent detection and attribution studies do, including those shown in Figure 9.9) makes relatively little difference to estimates of attributable warming rates, particularly those due to greenhouse gases; the largest differences occur in estimates of upper bounds for small signals, such as the response to solar forcing (Allen and Stott, 2003; Stott et al., 2003a).

The authors conclude that the there is a higher retreat - rate for marine terminating glaciers in the recent warm period; in the 1930s when there is a natural mode of variability active that caused regional temperatures around Greenland to be anomalously warm, there was a higher retreat rate for land - terminating glaciers (the lower retreat rate today is in part because they are currently smaller).

The best information we have now from our most recent research is that the chances of getting a fingerprint match between that human fingerprint pattern of warming low down and cooling up high and purely natural causes is infinitesimally small.

there is indeed limited argument regarding recent warming as long as the discussion is based on «official» global data bases; as soon as you consider a) all «comments» on data quality and significance, temperature data as included in GHCN, Crutem, Giss are heavily contested by experts from more than 15 countries, including «smaller» countries like he US, Canada, the entire Northern Europe, Russia....

Even assuming lolwot is right, the recent spike is still a lot smaller than several ones earlier in the Holocene, even though just greater than the Mideval Warm Period, by a whisker, thus justifying «The Mann's» Nobel Peace Prize.

Abdussamatov was also featured in a February 28, 2007 article in National Geographic titled «Mars Melt Hints at Solar, Not Human, Cause for Warming, Scientist Says,» where he reiterated his scientific findings that «man - made greenhouse warming has made a small contribution to the warming seen on Earth in recent years, but it can not compete with the increase in solar irradiance.Warming, Scientist Says,» where he reiterated his scientific findings that «man - made greenhouse warming has made a small contribution to the warming seen on Earth in recent years, but it can not compete with the increase in solar irradiance.warming has made a small contribution to the warming seen on Earth in recent years, but it can not compete with the increase in solar irradiance.warming seen on Earth in recent years, but it can not compete with the increase in solar irradiance.»

Global warming is evaluated on the basis of the land - ocean temperature record; the impact of adjustments on recent warming is minimal, and on the whole record it is small compared to the total amount of warming.

For more information on this topic a good link is: http://www.climateaudit.org/ As these records may not be as reliable as we would want them to be in consideration of the small degree of warming we are trying to measure, it is perhaps better to rely on other measures, which are more accurate, and do show a recent warming trend.

There are, however, caveats: (1) multidecadal fluctuations in Arctic — subarctic climate and sea ice appear most pronounced in the Atlantic sector, such that the pan-Arctic signal may be substantially smaller [e.g., Polyakov et al., 2003; Mahajan et al., 2011]; (2) the sea - ice records synthesized here represent primarily the cold season (winter — spring), whereas the satellite record clearly shows losses primarily in summer, suggesting that other processes and feedback are important; (3) observations show that while recent sea - ice losses in winter are most pronounced in the Greenland and Barents Seas, the largest reductions in summer are remote from the Atlantic, e.g., Beaufort, Chukchi, and Siberian seas (National Snow and Ice Data Center, 2012, http://nsidc.org/Arcticseaicenews/); and (4) the recent reductions in sea ice should not be considered merely the latest in a sequence of AMOrelated multidecadal fluctuations but rather the first one to be superposed upon an anthropogenic GHG warming background signal that is emerging strongly in the Arctic [Kaufmann et al., 2009; Serreze et al., 2009].

Unlike the continental U.S., with its abundance of micro and regional climates, the small island area of Great Britain affords less climate variety yet produces similar warming / cooling trends over the recent past.

On the basis of this evidence, how could anyone still believe that the recent relatively small increase in CO2 levels would be the major cause of the past century's modest warming?»

Like the earlier warming event and migrations, the most recent northward advance of small fish such as sardines, anchovies and herring correlate very well with the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation and the current distribution of fish from southerly waters is «almost identical to that described by Aurich for 1951.»

I say «almost» because it gets the first decade after 1850 a bit too cool which might suggest recent warming is slightly more than is typical, but to amount to such a small error over 100 years shows it to be minuscule.

«Note that for shorter recent periods, the slope is smaller, indicating decelerated warming.»

The AGW platform has been built on the premise that manmade CO2 emissions (a very small % of what is released into the atmosphere) has caused / exacerbated the recent global warming (which stopped 8 - 10 years ago).

«Continued global warming is likely to favor smaller individuals, and we predict that organism size will continue to decrease over the century,» Jennifer Sheridan and David Bickford of the National University of Singapore wrote in a recent article in the journal Nature Climate Change.

The most recent trough in solar activity likely plays a role in depressing short - term trends, and the overall decline in total solar irradiance (TSI) in recent years relative to past solar cycles may be a small contributing factor in the current slow - down in the rate of warming.

The most recent survey of the literature (Foukal et al., Nature, 2006 — / / www.ucar.edu/news/releases/2006/brightness.shtml) concludes that solar variations are far too small to explain the observed warming trends.

Sadly enough, recent allegations that the IPCC, the lead scientific body responsible for providing information regarding global warming science and policy, has misrepresented its findings in order to support the feelings of a small majority has served to intensify the debate, compromising the panel's integrity in the process.

An example of an explicit endorsement without quantification would be «while anthropogenic forcings continue to rise, combined natural forcings are negative over recent times, and internal variability is small» from which it is readilly deduced that anthropogenic factors are the primary cause of recent warming, without being able to quantify whether they contribute 55 % or 110 %, or something in between.

There has not been shown to be a density variation of significance that correlates with average temperature variation (e.g, the recent high average temperature came from a small very hot area over the ocean and a small northern area, and more normal to even colder temperatures everywhere else, not global temperatures being warmer), and Solar activity has been shown to correlate very well with much of the long term (thousands of years time scale) global temperature trend.

But figure 2 shows the 1920 - 1939 anomoly as localized in the arctic, as if the energy was transferred there from further south, while in recent decades it is only a small part of a global warming pattern.

The solar contribution to recent temperature change is probably minimal and / or negative (i.e., the sun has probably caused cooling, but human increases in greenhouse gasses have overwhelmed that small cooling to cause a net warming).

There is some recent evidence from modeling experiments that indicate a small global martian warming due to its observed decreasing albedo.

We all know warmer temperatures have led to shrinking glaciers, and now two more of Glacier National Park's ice fields are too small to be classified as glaciers, according to a recent article on msnbc.com.

None of these could have been caused by an increase in atmospheric CO2, Model projections of warming during recent decades have greatly exceeded what has been observed, The modelling community has openly acknowledged that the ability of existing models to simulate past climates is due to numerous arbitrary tuning adjustments, Observations show no statistically valid trends in flooding or drought, and no meaningful acceleration whatsoever of pre-existing long term sea level rise (about 6 inches per century) worldwide, Current carbon dioxide levels, around 400 parts per million are still very small compared to the averages over geological history, when thousands of parts per million prevailed, and when life flourished on land and in the oceans.

Ultimately, however, one must recognize how small the difference is between the estimation that the anthropogenic contribution to recent surface warming is on the order of 1/3, and the iconic claim that it is likely that the human contribution is more that [sic] 1/2.

In any case, it is simply an effort to reconcile the rapid rates of warming in the Arctic with the output of the most recent group of global climate models — everyone agrees that global warming is real, except for a very large number of editors and reporters with the U.S. press, who continue to advocate for the positions held by a small number of fossil fuel funded contrarians and insist on giving them «equal time» — a luxury denied to renewable energy experts.

Both Lean and Rind and Foster and Rahmstorf found that solar activity has played a very small role in the recent observed global warming.

Alternatively, only a small fraction reject that anthropogenic forcings are the dominant driver of the recent warming.

Both cases I suggest fly in the face of your recent statements along these lines «all energy flows from lower warmer to higher colder areas, layer by layer and you can make those layers as small as you want.

The small size, and its negative sign, supports the key conclusion of prior groups that urban warming does not unduly bias estimates of recent global temperature change...

Since the theoretical physics behind GH warming only predict a very small effect of doubling CO2, all sorts of «positive feedbacks» are contrived to make this GH warming appear less insignificant (our recent exchange).

The most recent (1980 to present) warming of much of the Arctic is strongest (about 1 °C / decade) in winter and spring, and smallest in autumn; it is strongest over the interior portions of northern Asia and north - western North America (McBean et al., 2005).