Sentences with phrase «significant difference in the temperature»

«This study has established that there are significant differences in temperature trends between weather stations sited at urban, agricultural, and low impact locations.

As stated well back on this thread, it appears to me that Parker establishes a straw man by somehow averring that lack of significant differences in temperatures between windy and calm summer nights in urban areas shows that UHI effects are minimal.

Not exact matches

Germination tests conducted under two different temperature regimes did not reveal any significant differences in percent germination, total seedling length, or seedling vigour index.

Rectal versus axillary temperatures: Is there a significant difference in infants less than 1 year of age?

The difference in the magnitude of the effect of fan use between warmer and cooler room temperatures was significant (P =.03 for the interaction term), whereas the differences in open window status, sleep position, bed sharing, and pacifier use did not reach significance (P =.13, P =.08, P =.59, and P =.16, respectively).

A new study suggests that it would take at least 25 years for a significant difference in the rise of average temperatures to be detected after pollution cuts were in place

«In months with a higher unemployment rate, the temperature difference between adjacent months had more of a significant association with suicide in Brisbane compared with months with a low unemployment rate.&raquIn months with a higher unemployment rate, the temperature difference between adjacent months had more of a significant association with suicide in Brisbane compared with months with a low unemployment rate.&raquin Brisbane compared with months with a low unemployment rate.»

However, no significant difference was observed in the feeling of comfort, length of sleep depth, skin temperature, rectal temperature or sense of warmth or coolness in each subject before sleeping.

Unexpectedly, they found a significant size difference between urban and rural trees, even after accounting for factors such as temperature and nutrient levels, they report in the 10 July issue of Nature.

There was no significant difference in the expression of ef - 1α between control and seizure - induced workers irrespective of experimental temperature (data not shown).

On the contrary, quantitative RT - PCR using the RNAs extracted from the MBs revealed that the difference in the Acks expression level in the MBs between the antennae - deprived and intact workers under high temperature was not statistically significant.

Examination at the time of diagnosis of Lyme disease revealed no significant differences by RFLP type in regard to size or duration of the primary erythema migrans lesion, oral temperature, or presence of lym phadenopathy (table 2).

The temperature difference between summer and winter plays a significant role in the egg clutch size of birds

All dogs had post-exercise elevations in rectal temperature, pulse rate, arterial blood pH, PaO2, and lactate, and decreased PaCO2 and bicarbonate, as expected with strenuous exercise, but there were no significant differences between BCC dogs and normal dogs.

It has been well established that there are significant physiological differences between very young pups and older dogs Differences such as immaturity in the regulation of body temperature, blood sugar and resistance to infection should be differences between very young pups and older dogs Differences such as immaturity in the regulation of body temperature, blood sugar and resistance to infection should be Differences such as immaturity in the regulation of body temperature, blood sugar and resistance to infection should be considered.

For instance, in your scenario of a 20 - yr temperature change of 0.3 ºC + / - 0.18 ºC, assuming a natural noise level (observed standard deviation of detrended annual global temperatures from 1977 - 2004) of 0.085 ºC, a statistically significant difference in the trend that leads to the lowest end of your range (a change of 0.12 ºC) and the trend that leads to the highest end of your range (0.48 ºC) doesn't begin to rise above the level of noise until around year 16 or 17.

The amount of energy difference is huge and I don't think that many people would argue that they don't have a significant impact on the global temperature in the short run.

The significant difference between the observed decrease of the CO2 sink estimated by the inversion (0.03 PgC / y per decade) and the expected increase due solely to rising atmospheric CO2 -LRB--0.05 PgC / y per decade) indicates that there has been a relative weakening of the Southern Ocean CO2 sink (0.08 PgC / y per decade) due to changes in other atmospheric forcing (winds, surface air temperature, and water fluxes).

This is mainly because of the time lag to the forcings — the differences between B and C temperature trends aren't yet significant (though they will be in a few years), and in 2010 do not reflect the difference in scenario.

Milk production due to climate change will vary across the U.S., since there are significant differences in humidity and how much the temperature swings between night and day across the country.

«The adjustments make no significant difference to the obvious upward trend in global average temperature over the last century,» he said.

But it could still create some pretty significant consequences, including rising seas along the U.S. East Coast and a difference in temperature in the North Atlantic and Europe.

Because of the «noise», relatively minor variations in temperatures between different data bases can lead to significant differences between linear fits for short time frames.

Pat, the lag to which you allude, in fact, makes a minor but significant difference to «the result» (meaning the correlation between CO2 and temperature in the record), but whether or not it does is really very much beside the point.

The Paris Agreement won't make a significant impact on the environment, even with full implementation, producing an estimated difference of «two - tenths of one degree» Celsius reduction in global temperatures by 2100, according to Trump.

There is no significant difference and the object was to show there has been no significant change in temperature since 1997.

As discussed in a comment last week, there is not necessarily any significant difference between what the surface temperature would be without all greenhouse gases and what it is today.

This effect could be significant, as the difference between a surface temperature of up to 22 degrees in summer and the permafrost (around 0 degrees) is quite large.

You shouldn't ignore this quote: «Over the interval 1979 to 2009, model - projected temperature trends are two to four times larger than observed trends in both the lower and mid-troposphere and the differences are statistically significant at the 99 % level.»

Is not it the case that had Parker seen an even small but significant difference in his windy versus calm trendlines, he would have had a calibration problem in relating the trend line differences to a degree temperature UHI effect?

Personally, I don't think the difference between turbulent and laminar flow is all that significant for this issue: In either case, you're going to be mixing air of one temperature («outside») with air of another («inside»).

Two sets of correlations are shown: one based only on the subfossil series and the other including the living tree material whose precise elevations are not known and have been set here to a constant elevation of 250 m. None of the correlations is significant indicating that there is little evidence for an elevation influence on ring density and hence little age - dependent bias in the temperature reconstruction arising out of the differences in sample heights shown in Figure 4.»

In my comment above I should have pointed to my surmise that the Marvel approach in looking for statistically significant differences in forcing efficacies is limited by the noise in the temperature series from the individual forcingIn my comment above I should have pointed to my surmise that the Marvel approach in looking for statistically significant differences in forcing efficacies is limited by the noise in the temperature series from the individual forcingin looking for statistically significant differences in forcing efficacies is limited by the noise in the temperature series from the individual forcingin forcing efficacies is limited by the noise in the temperature series from the individual forcingin the temperature series from the individual forcings.

I used the word «consistent» because observational data are not yet accurate enough to prove the existence of an imbalance (e.g. 0.9 W / m ^ 2) capable of significant temperature effect but too small to be precisely estimated as the exact difference between two large numbers in the range of 239 W / m ^ 2.

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.

Using permutation tests between temperature metrics at Butaritari versus Abaiang and North Tarawa, we found significant differences in the mean of the maximum annual DHW (mean 2.3 °C · week versus 3.9 °C · week, p < 0.01) and the scaled year - to - year temperature variability metrics (mean 1.3 °C · week versus 1.5 °C · week, p < 0.01).

The difference in trend between global SST and global land air temperature since 1976 does not appear to be significant, but the trend in NMAT (despite any residual data problems) does appear to be less than that in the land air temperature since 1976.

It comes down to the apparent judgment of almost all participants in this debate that an UHI effect exists and is probably quite significant, but the differences lay in the whether and how these UHI effects have influenced temperature measurements at the «official» measuring sites.

My point at that time was that the number of CRN 1 and CRN 2 stations was very small and that given the noisy data for temperature trends amongst even closer spaced stations meant that in order to see a statistically significant difference due to CRN rating would require a very large difference in trends or a larger number of stations in those classifications.

In fact, the lower - tropospheric temperatures warm at a slightly greater rate over North America (about 0.28 °C / decade using satellite data) than do the surface temperatures (0.27 °C / decade), although again the difference is not statistically significant.

«Everyone» may accept there are siting effects, well except for all those people presenting «mainstream climate science» papers and positions for years as evidence that Watts is full of it as siting has no discernible effects, people like Mosher etc have pointed to temperature record reconstructions done by individuals, often mentioned by Tami's Troupe over at Open Airy Mind and similar sites, that found siting made no significant difference in the trends, etc..

The Ljungqvist paper's abstract says «Our temperature reconstruction agrees well with the reconstructions by Moberg et al. (2005) and Mann et al. (2008) with regard to the amplitude of the variability as well as the timing of warm and cold periods, except for the period c. AD 300 — 800, despite significant differences in both data coverage and methodology.»

Scientists generally supporting the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) findings on climate change see this correction of the UAH temperature analyses as a significant vindication of their findings on this issue and, as such, as a major rebuttal to climate contrarians who long had pointed to the differences in surface and upper atmosphere warming trends as supporting their viewpoints.

Differences in air and ocean temperatures can play a significant role in the pace at which biological processes can begin to blunt the effects of oil.

Early comparisons of MMTS readings with temperature measurements from the traditional liquid - in - glass thermometers mounted in Cotton Region shelters showed small but significant differences.

Lansner and Pepke Pedersen (2018) point out that, due to the divergent rates of warming and cooling for land vs. ocean water, there is a significant difference in the range of temperature for the regions of the world influenced by their close proximity to oceans and coastal wind currents (ocean air affected, or OAA) and the inland regions of the world that are unaffected by ocean air effects and coastal wind because they are sheltered by hills and mountains or located in valleys (ocean air sheltered, or OAS).

I have used a hybrid version of the Cowtan Way global temperature data set and it definitely shows a significant difference in warming in the Arctic region over the past quarter century when compared to other data sets and most climate models.

Data received by the WMO show no statistically significant difference between global temperatures in 2010, 2005 and 1998.

The bulk of the differences between the two datasets, and associated uncertainties, relate to Australian national temperatures prior to 1950, when there is no significant trend in the data.

This is totally at odds with multiple robust, consistent, independently - derived empirical datasets, all showing no statistically significant positive (or negative) trend in temperature and thus, no difference in trend by altitude.