Sentences with phrase «seen global average temperatures»

The fact is that if we can't greatly reduce fossil fuel use by the 2030 - 2040 range, by 2075 be will see a global average temperature rise of 3.5 to 4.0 degrees Celsius, which is also just about the time frame for world phosphate supplies to enter critical shortages that will eventually cut crop yields in half and require twice as much land and water to grow the same yield as previously.

That is to say, let's say there is no super volcano, or no massive aerosol outburst, and we don't see global average temperatures rise (they've stalled for quite a while now already).

More and more scientists warn that the world could see global average temperatures rise 6 °C by 2100.

Not exact matches

The global temperature average has increased by 1.4 degrees F, which may not seem like a lot, but the effects of the increase are being seen and felt globally.

One of the planet's hotspots has been the outsized warming in the Arctic, which is seeing a temperature rise double that of the global average.

In contrast, the consensus view among paleoclimatologists is that the Medieval Warming Period was a regional phenomenon, that the worldwide nature of the Little Ice Age is open to question and that the late 20th century saw the most extreme global average temperatures.

While 2014 temperatures continue the planet's long - term warming trend, scientists still expect to see year - to - year fluctuations in average global temperature caused by phenomena such as El Niño or La Niña.

This is probably why we've seen a leveling - off [of global average temperatures] in the past five or so years.

So the report notes that the current «pause» in new global average temperature records since 1998 — a year that saw the second strongest El Nino on record and shattered warming records — does not reflect the long - term trend and may be explained by the oceans absorbing the majority of the extra heat trapped by greenhouse gases as well as the cooling contributions of volcanic eruptions.

By the end of this century, according to the new research, some «megapolitan» regions of the U.S. could see local average temperatures rise by as much as 3 degrees Celsius, in addition to whatever global warming may do.

Expressed as a global average, surface temperatures have increased by about 0.74 °C over the past hundred years (between 1906 and 2005; see Figure 1).

The planet experienced a positive IPO, or El Tio, in the periods 1925 - 1946 and 1977 - 1998, both of which were periods that saw «rapid» increases in global average temperatures, according to the study.

However, at the increased levels seen since the Industrial Revolution (roughly 275 ppm then, 400 ppm now; Figure 2 - 1), greenhouse gases are contributing to the rapid rise of our global average temperatures by trapping more heat, often referred to as human - caused climate change.

The past century has seen a 0.8 °C increase in average global temperature, and according to the IPCC, the overwhelming source of this increase has been emissions of greenhouse gases and other pollutants from human activities.

It's easy to see that there was a sharp increase in global average surface temperatures from the 1970s through the end of the 1990s.

Even though these are the same areas that tend to have above average temperatures during El Niño winters, this pattern is also consistent with the long - term trend we are seeing with global warming.

These shifts taken individually and together account for the year - to - year variability seen in the global average temperatures.

Those extremes will come about more slowly than the rise of mean temperature, but I have seen zero models that suggests a continued rise of global average with no rise of global high.

This was one of the motivations for our study out this week in Nature Climate Change (England et al., 2014) With the global - average surface air temperature (SAT) more - or-less steady since 2001, scientists have been seeking to explain the climate mechanics of the slowdown in warming seen in the observations during 2001 - 2013.

Now I've seen mentions that (strong) El Nino years will make the global annual average higher — e.g. 1998 was so warm partly because of El Nino, and that this is due to the fact that sub-surface warmer water is brought up and allowed to affect the air temperature.

I regularly speak to public audiences about climate change (see http://www.andrewgunther.com/climate-change/#talks for details), and use the NASA / GISS dataset to discuss global average temperature of the atmosphere.

When it does end, they expect to see some rapid changes, including a sudden acceleration of global average surface temperatures.

Secondly, unlike the global average surface temperature trend, which has a lag with respect to radiative forcing, there is no such lag when heat content is measured in Joules (see http://blue.atmos.colostate.edu/publications/pdf/R-247.pdf).

For most recent sampling see: New Peer - Reviewed Study finds «Solar changes significantly alter climate» (11-3-07)(LINK) & «New Peer - Reviewed Study Halves the Global Average Surface Temperature Trend 1980 — 2002» (LINK) & New Study finds Medieval Warm Period «0.3 C Warmer than 20th Century» (LINK) For a more comprehensive sampling of peer - reviewed studies earlier in 2007 see «New Peer - Reviewed Scientific Studies Chill Global Warming Fears» LINK]

In the entirely subjective opinion of a particular group of IPCC authors, it's «extremely likely» (95 % certain) that «more than half of the observed increase in global average surface temperature from 1951 to 2010» was caused by human - generated greenhouse gas emissions (see the bottom of p. 13 here).

As noted above, 1997 - 98 saw an exceptionally strong El Nino, producing a consequent temperature high that has only in recent years been equalled - hence it being a popular start - point for the «global average temperature has now been flat for the past 15 years» talking - point.

You've likely seen the graph of the Earth's average global temperature over the past 2000 years... it's mostly a straight line until you get to the industrial revolution and then it shoots up.

All this Global Warming if you plot it on a graph with the vertical y - axis incremented in whole degrees you could free hand a straight line starting from the end of the Little Ice Age all the way to the current day and see there has been no dramatic global average temperature change since the turn of the 19th ceGlobal Warming if you plot it on a graph with the vertical y - axis incremented in whole degrees you could free hand a straight line starting from the end of the Little Ice Age all the way to the current day and see there has been no dramatic global average temperature change since the turn of the 19th ceglobal average temperature change since the turn of the 19th century.

Also in my opinion, averaged global temperature has very little meaning, but such as it is, I would like to see the same methodology applied to all prominent variables and not start comparing temperatures globally with CO2 locally, as is happening now.

According to NASA GISS, September of 2014 saw global surface temperatures that were 0.77 C hotter than the 20th Century average.

It is still the case that observations are more - or-less in the middle of the model simulations, but it can now be seen that the range of simulated values for absolute global average temperature is pretty large (~ 2.5 C).

If you read it closely, you will see that there is nothing in the NASA link you cited that refutes the observed fact that global average surface temperature has stopped warming since 2001 or 1998.

The seasonal variation in the earth's global average sea surface temperature is only about 0.5 degrees Kelvin, being hotter in April and colder in October (see e.g. http://discover.itsc.uah.edu/amsutemps/execute.csh?amsutemps).

Hi Dave, «I have seen no mitigation plan that stands a snowball's chance in hell of actually lowering global average temperature enough to mitigate the problem so the best course of action is to keep your powder dry until you have something specific to aim at that you know you can kill i.e. adapt to higher temperature instead of trying to reduce it.»

The economic constraint on environmental action can easily be seen by looking at what is widely regarded as the most far - reaching establishment attempt to date to deal with The Economics of Climate Change in the form of a massive study issued in 2007 under that title, commissioned by the UK Treasury Office.7 Subtitled the Stern Review after the report's principal author Nicholas Stern, a former chief economist of the World Bank, it is widely viewed as the most important, and most progressive mainstream treatment of the economics of global warming.8 The Stern Review focuses on the target level of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) concentration in the atmosphere necessary to stabilize global average temperature at no more than 3 °C (5.4 °F) over pre-industrial levels.

The solar cycle can not be detected at point sites, which are too noisy to see a signal of one to two tenths of a degree, but is easily seen in the global average surface temperature.

It shows up well in their Figure 1a about which they state ``... you can see how well the POGA H global average surface temperature matches the observations...» It matches well the phony eighties and nineties and would be off the mark if the real temperatures were substituted.

To mathematicians and physicists like Tomas and me, irregular wobbles in the climate of different regions and the global average temperature are exactly what we would expect to see.

Similarly, see Roger Pielke Sr. posts on «Global Average Surface Temperature» Especially: Climate Science Myths And Misconceptions — Post # 1 On The Global Annual Average Surface Temperature Trend

If you simply plot the average global temperatures, 1975 - present, you will see a continuing upward trend that slowed down around 1995 (due to Eastern SO2 Emissions offsetting Western SO2 reductions), but it has never been flat.

Judith, you write «I predict we will see continuation of the «standstill» in global average temperature for the next decade, with solar playing a role in this as well.».

There are plenty, but for a conservative example see IPCC Synthesis Report 2007 Table 5.1 which says to stay within 2 - 2.4 degrees global average temperature increase above pre-industrial (Copenhagen upper «low risk» target) and 425 - 490ppm CO2 - equivalent concentration at stabilisation, the required change in global CO2 emissions in 2050 (percent of 2000 emissions) is decline between 85 to 50 percent.

It concluded that the global average temperatures seen in recent years would be highly unlikely in a world without human influence on the climate.

As was widely covered in the media, 2014 saw the highest annual average global surface temperature since records began, the report says:

It is for these reasons that the concept of an «average global temperature» can be seen to have no more than a political meaning.

Based on the Cohen et al paper it's likely that leaving out the most volatile data series would in the present case result in a time series where warming continues with less plateauing than we see in the existing data on global average surface temperature.

Besides I strongly oppose (like R.Pielke and many others) the idea that the «global time average of the surface temperature» has any physical meaning or is a valid metrics to measure the «climate» and I can't see the beginning of a valid reason why it should correlate to any relevant dynamical parameter.

See a list of global average annual temperatures here.

As tamino has pointed out, calculating an area - weighted average global temperature can hardly be considered a «prediction» and as he and Greg Laden both pointed out, BEST has provided the uncertainty range for their data, and it is quite small (see it graphically here and here).

Or maybe, «As shown in Figures 1.4 and 1.5, since the end of the 1992 Pinatubo volcano, models have predicted a steady upward trend in global average temperatures, but the observed series have been comparatively trendless, and thus the range of model warming predictions since the early 1990s can be seen to have been biased towards more warming than was subsequently observed.»