Sentences with phrase «several periods of warming»

The Earth has experienced several periods of warming in the past 200 years.

This temperature reconstruction identifies several periods of warming and cooling relative to its long - term mean (1897 - 2012).

Not exact matches

For example, the ice ages during the last several million years — and the warmer periods in between — appear to have been triggered by no more than a different seasonal and latitudinal distribution of the solar energy absorbed by the Earth, not by a change in output from the sun.

Much of this change has occurred over the last several decades indicating that the warming trend accelerated over the 1925 — 2016 period.

Over what time period might this savannization process release carbon «equivalent to several years of worldwide carbon emissions», and how does that affect the assessment offered by Gore, Hansen and others that we have perhaps ten years in which to substantially reduce CO2 emissions to avoid irreversible catastrophic warming?

The whole of the last several million years has been a classic two state climate, oscillating between ice ages and warm periods, with sudden changes between the two.

In geological time, the balance of the system has changed several times, and just like any system can have a resonance at certain points, the climate can reach a resonant point where it is teetering between two states (our current 100,000 year ice age warm period cycle).

Ocean temperatures experience interannual variability and over the past 3 decades of global warming have had several short periods of cooling.

If these scenarios are correct, then the settlement pattern in the Monte Verde area during this period was probably just one of several with small groups of people seasonally adapted to cold parkland and boreal environments, most likely during the warmer months.

Tumeric!I never out of it, I once had a painful feet, that once made me cried, after a visit to my doctor, I was given some pain killer, which work for a period, I was advised to use tumeric with some warm milk before bedtime, about three nights, after that period the pain was gone.on my date to see to doctor, After a few Questions and checks, I was told it was a kidney problem I had, after several visits I was discharged, and now free from pains.

Further, since you agree with us that the warming rate during the next several decades will be below 0.325 ºC / decade, then, as I have pointed out, due to the level of natural variability, a 20 - yr time period is too short to really differentiate between your beliefs and ours (if there exist any).

It is possible that we are on the brink of a several - decades - long period of rapid warming.

The Hockeystick theory & indeed part 4 of your defined consensus, that things are so bad that serious action is required, requires that there was not a period (the medieval warming) when average temperatures were several degrees warmer than now.

In the posts, Stephen McIntyre questions sets of tree - ring data used in, or excluded from, prominent studies concluding that recent warming is unusual even when compared with past warm periods in the last several millenniums (including the recent Kaufman et al. paper discussed here).

Burning all fossil fuels, if the CO2 is released into the air, would destroy creation, the planet with its animal and plant life as it has existed for the past several thousand years, the time of civilization, the Holocene, the period of relative climate stability, warm enough to keep ice sheets off North America and Eurasia, but cool enough to maintain Antarctic and Greenland ice, and thus a stable sea level.

In geological time, the balance of the system has changed several times, and just like any system can have a resonance at certain points, the climate can reach a resonant point where it is teetering between two states (our current 100,000 year ice age warm period cycle).

The whole of the last several million years has been a classic two state climate, oscillating between ice ages and warm periods, with sudden changes between the two.

And, as the satellite observations of Spencer and Braswell showed, as the planet warms over a period of several months, clouds act as a net negative feedback (the reflecting low - altitude clouds increase more than the absorbing high - altitude clouds with warming).

Now to the second point: Satellite observations by Spencer and Braswell showed that, as the planet over the tropics warmed over a period of several months, the net feedback from clouds was strongly negative.

As has been noted in several articles in The New American in recent years, not only has the threat of global warming been exaggerated, the Earth may actually be facing a period of global cooling.

The MWP was so far as is known a period of several hundred years during which different places on the earth were warmer than average for a while.

It is the last of several multi-century warming periods that have happened during the Neoglacial cooling of the past 3000 years.

So if the second half of the 20th century had the highest average absolute levels of solar activity for «several thousand years» (Solanki) and at least 350 + years (Lean), then this could well have been a significant cause of late 20th century warming (building in all the «time lags» one might envision), despite the fact that the absolute level of solar activity was declining over this period.

My opinion expressed elsewhere is that almost all the temperature changes we observe over periods of less than a century are caused by cyclical changes in the rate of energy emission from the oceans with the solar effect only providing a slow background trend of warming or cooling for several centuries at a time.

If we assume that the LIA was caused mostly by naturally forced variability, then we have several periods in the 20th century of cooling and warming associated with modest unforced variability: The AMO's effect on GMST (0.25 degC peak to trough) isn't big enough to invalidate the IPCC's attribution statement.

If we have real - world evidence that temperatures were warmer than today during most of the past 10,000 years (and also during several interglacial warm periods during the past few million years), and if we also have real - world evidence that human civilization thrived during these warmer temperatures and the warmer temperatures did not trigger so - called «tipping points» sending the planet into a climate catastrophe, then we have very little reason to believe that our presently and moderately warming temperatures are now poised to send the planet into a climate catastrophe.

In the begin period of RC, there were several interesting discussions, where warmers and sceptics both could have their view.

It is also worth noting that the use of both modes of Geo - E in a Troika strategy can not entirely guarantee a benign outcome, however long the R&D period, since we have no firm information on how large the response the Methane Hydrates Melt feedback will be to the sum of ocean warming that is already penetrating the seabed plus that from the several decades of further warming as the natural sea temperatures are slowly restored.

The 800 year lag is not that fixed, the lag is 800 years at the end of a cold period, but several thousands of years at the end of a warm interglacial.

Internal variability can only account for ~ 0.3 °C change in average global surface air temperature at most over periods of several decades, and scientific studies have consistently shown that it can not account for more than a small fraction of the global warming over the past century.

Ferdinand Engelbeen said: The 800 year lag is not that fixed, the lag is 800 years at the end of a cold period, but several thousands of years at the end of a warm interglacial.

By process of elimination, there is net flow of CO2 into vegetation / land (with emissions from them being overall negative aside from fuel combustion), which is unsurprising in contexts ranging from a multitude of studies on co2science.org to how satellite - measured global net terrestrial primary production increased by several percent per decade during the period of global warming (Nemani et al. 2003, for instance).

We have a solid 10,000 years of recent climate change to consider, and it shows several periods of greater warming than present, none explained by increased atmospheric CO2, or more obviously, by human activity.

Furthermore, by the mid-1900s we were, to the best of our knowledge, passing the warmest temperatures of the Medieval Warm Period that preceded the Little Ice Age by several centuries.

And, this addresses the issue of the synchronicity of the warm events in different locations during the broadly - defined several hundred year period called the Medieval Warm Period how exacwarm events in different locations during the broadly - defined several hundred year period called the Medieval Warm Period how experiod called the Medieval Warm Period how exacWarm Period how exPeriod how exactly?

By that standard, last week in Rochester we should have stopped preparing for winter given that we had several days of warm temperatures that surely made the temperature trends over some reasonable time period of a week or more positive rather than negative, as would be expected if this seasonal cycle theory was real.

We found that the world naturally switches between periods of global warming and periods of global cooling, with each period lasting several decades.

If polar bears have been around for, say, half a million years this means that they've survived several ice ages, including all the sudden warming periods at the beginning of each interglacial, many of which will have been warmer than now.

Did the CO2 contribute to the several thousand years of subsequent warming, making the warming period longer and / or making the total temperature increase higher?

In other words, global temperatures seem to alternate between periods of global warming and periods of global cooling, lasting several decades.

Global mean temperature during the Eemian interglacial period (120,000 years ago) is constrained to be 2 °C warmer than our pre-industrial (1880 — 1920) level based on several studies of Eemian climate [52].

We consider several important climate impacts and use evidence from current observations to assess the effect of 0.8 °C warming and paleoclimate data for the effect of larger warming, especially the Eemian period, which had global mean temperature about +2 °C relative to pre-industrial time.

In addition and to visualize the impacts of climate warming on species diversity, we documented the mean location of February (the coldest month of the year in the Mediterranean) sea surface isotherms (°C) for the period 1985 to 2006, integrating several data sources.

Just that plus 0.8 C over that period - with several clearly distinct ups and down in the graph - including crucially the ongoing 16 year flat lining is not a reason to jump out the window screaming nor change the socio economic make up of the world to stop «catastrophic man - made global warming».

We had the warm ENSO period of the 1980s / 1990s (which led to the all - time record warm year 1998), an observed decrease in late 20th C cloud cover (and albedo), the highest solar activity for several thousand years, etc..

The third is less widely known but should be front - and - center: It is well - known among people who study such things that, human civilization has seen several warm periods and several cold periods all within the span of recorded history and the archeological record timeframe, so we have a pretty good understanding of what each kind of climate change bodes for mankind.

Most of the evidence is that species thrive in warmer weather, and polar bears have survived several inter-glaciation periods where the north pole melted entirely in the summer.

That assumption conflicts with studies finding that the Northern Hemisphere was warmer than present for several decades during the Medieval Warm Period and Roman Warm Period and for thousands of years during Holocene Optimum.

My arithmetic for a 2x C02 would be: Present Warming: 0.75 deg C Current warming Rate 0.15 deg C per decade Time to 2x C02 (BAU scenario) approx 100 years So 0.15 x 10 +0.75 = 2.25 deg C Further warming due to time lag at end of 100 year period ~ 0.75 deg, probably over several dWarming: 0.75 deg C Current warming Rate 0.15 deg C per decade Time to 2x C02 (BAU scenario) approx 100 years So 0.15 x 10 +0.75 = 2.25 deg C Further warming due to time lag at end of 100 year period ~ 0.75 deg, probably over several dwarming Rate 0.15 deg C per decade Time to 2x C02 (BAU scenario) approx 100 years So 0.15 x 10 +0.75 = 2.25 deg C Further warming due to time lag at end of 100 year period ~ 0.75 deg, probably over several dwarming due to time lag at end of 100 year period ~ 0.75 deg, probably over several decades.

As it turns out, there were several warming periods BEFORE the MWP, all of the warmer than the MWP, and each warmer than the later ones.