Sentences with phrase «satellite records»

I wonder what the satellite records show.

By analyzing satellite records of fire activity, he found that the 2016 fires were the most severe the region has seen since 2002 in regards to the number of fire hot spots satellites detected.

I would though suggest that the lag is more evident in the satellite records than it is in the surface records.

Where anywhere in the satellite records is there any evidence that clouds don't change?

An analysis of the available satellite records from UAH and RSS shows that within the only global warming within the last 31 years was a short spurt that started in 1998, in four years raised global temperature by a third of a degree, and then stopped.

Leif might well be right about the smallness of solar variation in terms of power output but his opinion that there is no other aspect of solar variation that might have a disproportionate effect on the rate of energy flow through the Earth system I find to be somewhat questionable given the variability we see in the satellite records of outward bound infra red.

But what he did in ERSST v3b was to throw out the satellite records followed up by throwing out the buoy trends in ERSST v4.

Only if you (a) homogenize the temperature record to cool the past and warm the present and (b) ignore both satellite records since 1979, and (c) ignore that the difference is not statistically significant, and has not been for 19 years in HadCrut4 per the recent McKittrick paper.

Eli, Eli is a small timer and has been spending his time wondering about the yuuuge difference between the surface records and the satellite records both in the 1997 - 98 and the 2015 - 16 el ninos.

Increased understanding of uncertainties in radiosonde and satellite records makes assessment of causes of observed trends in the upper troposphere less confident than an assessment of overall atmospheric temperature changes.

Now the U.S. National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC) has reported that Arctic sea ice was at its lowest extent ever recorded for January (since satellite records began).

The satellite records only began in October 1978, however.

So, it is quite likely that in the decades immediately before the satellite records began, average Arctic sea ice extent was actually increasing, but we just weren't monitoring it.

But instead they deny the importance of 28 million weather - balloons, call the missing heat a «travesty», they pretend that if you slap enough caveats on the 1990 report and ignore the actual direct quotes they made at the time, then possibly, just maybe, their models are doing OK, and through sheer bad luck 3000 ocean buoys, millions of weather balloons, and 30 years of satellite records are all biased in ways that hides the true genius of the climate models.

«The satellite records measure something different — not the surface, where we live but averages over a substantial vertical part of the atmosphere.

Note that the local differences between the satellite records and GISS are quite large, up to ± 0.4 °C / decade (4 ° / century).

People like Steve McIntyre [the climate blogger who first raised issues with how historical temperature records were created] were saying long before Climategate: you're not going to find a smoking gun in the temperature record, and you always had the satellite records which were telling pretty much the same story.

BTW, this is the difference between the warming trend of the surface and satellite records since 1979, so would IMO represent an «upper limit» to the UHI distortion on the global record.

The polar vortex that swirls around the South Pole is not just stronger than it was when satellite records began in the 1970s, it has more convergence, meaning it shoves the sea ice together to cause ridging.

While recent findings based on satellite records indicate a positive trend in vegetation greenness over global drylands, the reasons remain elusive.

She was also pushing the view that absence of satellite records may mean past events were missed without recognising that it actually weakens her arguments concerning the relative frequency of modern to historic extreme events.

We also know the two satellite records, RSS and UAH, both show it was not the warmest year.

Since the beginning of satellite records in 1979, the winter peak has declined by 3.2 percent per decade, while the summer minimum has declined by 13.7 percent per decade.

Add in the fact that the thickness of the ice, which is much harder to measure, is estimated to have fallen by half since 1979, when satellite records began, and there is probably less ice floating on the Arctic Ocean now than at any time since a particularly warm period 8,000 years ago, soon after the last ice age.

[Using the satellite records of the lower atmosphere].

According to NOAA's 2012 Arctic Report Card, the duration of melting at the surface of the ice sheet in summer 2012 was the longest since satellite observations began in 1979, and the total amount of summer melting was nearly double the previous record, set in 2010 (satellite records of melting go back to 1979.)

As is typically the case for satellite records, the data processed by NDISC comes from a number of different satellites as instruments and spacecraft fail.

According to satellite records, but for the ups and downs of the solar cycle, the solar output has been steady from about 1960 to slightly decreasing in the late 1990s.

Satellite observations indicate that the average Arctic sea ice extent has generally decreased since the start of the satellite records in October 1978.

The accuracy of the surface temperature record can be independently validated against satellite records.

December 2009 had the fourth - lowest average ice extent for the month since the beginning of satellite records, falling just above the extent for 2007.

This year, Remote Sensing Systems (RSS), one of the two main satellite records that estimate the temperature of the lower atmosphere, released a major update that was corrected due to decaying satellites orbits.

According to the University of Washington Polar Science Center, Arctic sea - ice levels have dropped to record lows in July 2011, with sea ice volume now 47 percent lower than it was in 1979, when satellite records began.

According to UAH, November was only the 8th warmest (global temperature LT) on satellite records.

It marks the end of a record breaking 7 month stretch where the lakes were covered in at least one ice cube, which is the longest period since satellite records began back in the 70's.

This makes the addition of Isostatic rebound to satellite records wrong.

-- * This makes the addition of Isostatic rebound to satellite records wrong.

For example, this year in March the Arctic sea ice reached its maximum extent, * but it was the lowest maximum extent ever seen since satellite records began in 1979.

is that the satellite thingie that doesn't agree with the other two satellite records, and that has refused and rejected all attempts to clarify the disagreements from outsiders?

Among all the main land based records (NOAA, GISSTEMP, HADCRUT4, C&W) and the two satellite records, over the duration of the pause, UAH shows the largest warming trend and RSS the lowest.

The land / ocean divergence appears in the surface record and not in the satellite records.

My understanding is that outside specific areas, like the US and UK monitoring stations and records are much more spotty and satellite records are so recent you can hardly claim to identify a climate trend from them.

This year's winter - time sea ice extent is the sixth lowest since the National Snow and Ice Data Center started keeping satellite records in 1979.

The study also removed El Nino and La Nina cycles, which are particularly pronounced in satellite records, but those cycles largely canceled each other out, the co-authors said.

It seems to me that our government agencies and mainstream scientists accept and use satellite records except the temperature measurements.

Sven, GISS and HadCRU are on different baselines than the satellite records.

Effects of this order are readily visible in gravimetric and altimetric satellite records.

We used new satellite records of fire incidence to create fire models which we then drove with a broad range of future climate model scenarios to get a sense of where the climate projections agreed on the sign of the change in fire frequency and where they did not.

Why don't you explain to us in your words with specific references, not «check the satellite records», what the global mean average temperature was in 1988, how it moved in the 20 years hence, and what it is today.

Flannery raises the issue of the at - one - time apparent contradiction between the satellite records (usually taken to be MSU 2LT from the UAH group) and the surface temperature records.