Sentences with phrase «significant climate driver»

For the GCM's, the only significant climate driver is CO2.

What's all this about «For the GCM's, the only significant climate driver is CO2.»?

Not exact matches

Growing coffee is both a point of pride and a significant economic driver for Colombia but a changing climate is now threatening the harvest.

Calling today's coalition «a significant announcement,» Podesta said «there's a considerable win - win» in addressing short - term climate drivers.

The models show that climate change is a less influential driver of global food security than income, population and productivity — but it could still pose a significant risk to the nutrition levels of people living in the world's poorest regions, Baldos said.

The study incorporates multiple environmental drivers — notably climate and fire — at large spatial scales for a significant number of species and populations.

Consider the ice ages, the alleged cause in this case is changes in the earths orbit BUT the ice ages are characterized by significant changes in CO2 levels that would appear to be the direct driver (i.e.» forcing») of the consequent climate change.

Thus the propagation of the Hansen / Gore / Mann / Briffa ad nauseum «CO2 is the only significant driver of climate» mantra.

Carbon dioxide can cause temperatures to rise without being the primary driver, or even a significant driver, of climate change.

This is the dire forecast of Professor Valentina Zharkova, a solar physicist at Northumbria University, who has based her prediction on sun spot activity — known to be a significant driver of global climate — which is currently very low and likely to get even lower during the next three solar cycles.

«It is unlikely that the man - made changes are drivers of significant climate variation,» he wrote in 2007.

Unfortunately the study needs to be taken with a hefty pinch of salt because it's based on «complex climate models» and emanates from Germany's fanatically warmist Potsdam Institute, which is ideologically committed to «proving» that CO2 is a significant driver of «climate change» even when most real - world evidence suggests it's not.

A theory of abrupt climate change means you discard all linearized models or admit that [CO2] is not a factor in any significant linear term involving an abrupt driver.

Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from human activity and livestock are a significant driver of climate change, trapping heat in the earth's atmosphere and triggering global warming.

The clearing of rainforests and carbon - rich peatlands for new plantations is releasing globally significant carbon pollution, making Conflict Palm Oil a major driver of human induced climate change.

The latter is a politico -(pseudo) scientific construct, developed since the late - 1980s, in which the human emission of «greenhouse gases», such as carbon dioxide and methane, is unquestioningly taken as the prime - driver of a new and dramatic type of climate change that will inexorably result in a significant warming during the next 100 years and which will inevitably lead to catastrophe for both humanity and the Earth.

There can not simultaneously be both «significant uncertainty» about primary climate drivers and 95 % certainty that anthropogenic GHGs are causing any observed warming, yet EPA concludes there is.

Yet we do not know the underlying driver for all of this, the climate sensitivity, to even one significant figure.

An additional smack - down to the CO2 haters is that not only is CO2 very dubious as a significant driver of climate (as opposed to the sun, water vapor, clouds, and oceans), but man - made CO2 comprises only a tiny fraction — about three percent — of the Earth's total atmospheric CO2.

Unlike you, I do not have a «Magic 8 Ball», but I see that a considerable amount of money is being spent to do a large - scale test at CERN of the GCR cloud nucleation hypothesis suggested by Henrik Svensmark (and others) to have been a significant driver of our climate, which Svensmark et al. tested in at a small scale in the laboratory.

Any anthropogenic CO2 influence would only have been significant, if at all, since about 1945 because before that date the human contribution to total atmospheric CO2 was relatively minor and, in my opinion, probably insignificant as a climate driver.

Here's what still needs to be done before it could be validated as a significant driver of climate 1.

«Accompanied by significant peaks at 60.2 and 73 years, the continuously periodicities around 49 — 114 years in our regional temperature reconstruction might tentatively be related to PDO, Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation... as well as solar activity... The AMO was an important driver of multidecadal variations in summer climate not only in North America and western Europebut also in the East Asia... The 60.2 - year peak associated with AMO demonstrated that multidecadal variations in late summer temperature in the NWSP NWSP [northwestern Sichuan Plateau, China] might be controlled by AMO.»

This can be seen in the Pacific Ocean — a very significant driver of interannual to decadal hydrologic and climate variability — in changes in hydrology and ocean states around 1910, the mid 1940's, the late 1970's and after 1998.