Sentences with phrase «showed a warming spike»

The temperature records showed a warming spike after the 1970s, and the ice records documented that river ice is breaking up about nine days earlier now than last century.

Yes you have posted that before, and the comment I made was the Aegean sea and Craig cave show warm spikes centered at 8.2 kyr BP, and more importantly, intensified trade winds, which is the wrong sign to associate with a cold period.

Not exact matches

Pair with: 3/4 oz rum (Mount Gay Black Barrel Rum), 3/4 oz Averna This delicious little spiked diddy tastes like getting a free car just for showing up, wrapped in a warm hug, nestled next to a healthy serving of inspiring quotes, and topped with a heaping mound of feminist empowerment.

A graph of the warming trend largely replicates the so - called «hockey stick,» a previous reconstruction that showed relatively stable temperatures suddenly spiking upward in recent history.

The isotopic analysis showed that seawater temperatures in the Antarctic in the Late Cretaceous averaged about 46 degrees Fahrenheit, punctuated by two abrupt warming spikes.

The research that shows that decade - long periods of static / declining temperatures are to be expected against the background of a warming trend (see the Spiked article above) makes no claims that such natural variation could account for the much longer post-war slump.

Using data gathered from tree rings, etc. her and other scientists in the 60's predicted that global warming would resume by 1980 for 2 decades (at the time there had been a cooling trend since a warming peak in the 1930's - and there was scientific consensus of that as all the charts as of the 1980's showed that) followed by 50 years of cooling AND they predicted a spike in cooling around 2020.

Indeed, the graph appears to show the opposite: the sharp spikes in temperature appear to indicate catastrophic warming to a brief peak, followed by return to an equilibrium temperature.

-LSB-...] blog by global warming advocate Michael Mann, creator of the now - discredited «hockey stick» graph that purported to show a sharp spike in global temperatures over the last few decades.

«Actually, with the exception of 1998 — a «blip» year when temperatures spiked because of a strong «El Nino» effect (the cyclical warming of the southern Pacific that affects weather around the world)-- the data on the Met Office's and CRU's own websites show that global temperatures have been flat, not for ten, but for the past 15 years.

Mann first rose to prominence in the late 1990s with publication of his «hockey stick» graph, which purported to show a spike in world temperatures due to anthropogenic global warming.

As for the «hockey stick» graph that my colleagues and I devised — showing a sharp spike in warming in recent decades — the physical sciences working group report has actually strengthened its conclusions regarding the exceptional nature of modern warmth.

Tony, You should also start tracking the USCRN data since 2005 which also shows no warming... and you will notice they know that USCRN data they can't mess with (yet) I think the CRN data spiked high in 2015 but should be coming down hard after this summer.

There are only a few points that show excursions from the trend now, warming spikes during WWII and a shift in cooling for a few years around 1910:

Large temperature spikes like the current global warming would have shown up in the proxy record as changes in the type of plants growing in the mid latitudes as is seen with the northward shift of the growing regions at present.

The suggestion that recent warming is anthropogenic due to divergence from a simple 60/20 year curve fit over a mere 100 years ignores prior divergence from both competing models of distantly past temperature, one being a hockey stick that shows a slow decline instead of incline prior 1850 and the other showing two similar «non-cyclical» spikes in the Roman and medieval periods.

The study showed that the current warming is unprecedented for 11500 years, but it really did not because of it's proxies» low resolution, but it did not have to because we know that the spikes did not exist (as there is no mechanism for that) in the past and the current warming, the spike, though a product of dubious procedures and «not robust» in the study (but this does not matter because we know from instrumental records that there's a spike), is unprecedented, because we know it is (and we know why and we already know that it's gonna continue)... So what exactly did this «excellent study» add to the knowledge when all that it was supposed to add, it did not but we already know all of this without the study.

For example Fig. 3 shows the dominance of El Niña warming events from 1978 to 1998 that could account for some of the temperature increase after 1978 as well as the 1998 spike.

They did, however, have a nice voiceover stating that temperatures haven't been this warm in 800,000 years while showing a graph, not of temperatures, but of spiking CO2 levels over the last 800,000 years.

«Actually, with the exception of 1998 — a «blip» year when temperatures spiked because of a strong El Niño effect (the cyclical warming of the southern Pacific that affects weather around the world)-- the data on the Met Office's and CRU's own websites show that global temperatures have been flat, not for 10, but for the past 15 years.»

This chart also shows that CO2 levels are not driving the considerable spikes of warming and cooling that take place - natural forces overwhelm any CO2 impact.

As in later eras, Cretaceous warmth led to ocean stratification and anoxia; evidence shows many warm «spikes» accompanied by such anoxic episodes.