Not exact matches
The graph showed a fairly
stable trend until 1900, when
temperatures spiked sharply upward.
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.
Other, more
stable data sets, such as satellite, radiosonde and ocean
temperatures yield smaller warming
trends.
Developer (s) IAC: Initial release: September 12, 2012; 5 years ago (2012-09-12)
Stable release (s) Corrigendum to «Tree - ring derived Little Ice Age
temperature trends from the central British Columbia Coast Mountains, Canada» [Quat.
I just meant that a thousand year period of
stable temperature which happens to have a rapid warming
trend at the end of the series is absolutely nothing out of the ordinary with regards to «other» thousand years periods in the Holocene.
Because the long - term warming
trends are highly significant relative to our estimates of the magnitude of natural variability, the current decadal period of
stable global mean
temperature does nothing to alter a fundamental conclusion from the AR4: warming has unequivocally been observed and documented.
It shouldn't be surprising that the UHI effect is not a big source of error in the
temperature trend, because a
stable temperature bias because of bad siting will not affect the
trend.
Other, more
stable data sets, such as satellite, radiosonde and ocean
temperatures yield smaller warming
trends.
Global average surface
temperatures rose rapidly from the 1970s but have been relatively
stable since the late 1990s, in a
trend that has been seized upon by climate sceptics who question the science of man - made warming.
To point out just a couple of things: — oceans warming slower (or cooling slower) than lands on long - time
trends is absolutely normal, because water is more difficult both to warm or to cool (I mean, we require both a bigger heat flow and more time); at the contrary, I see as a non-sense theory (made by some serrist, but don't know who) that oceans are storing up heat, and that suddenly they will release such heat as a positive feedback: or the water warms than no heat can be considered ad «stored» (we have no phase change inside oceans, so no latent heat) or oceans begin to release heat but in the same time they have to cool (because they are losing heat); so, I don't feel strange that in last years land
temperatures for some series (NCDC and GISS) can be heating up while oceans are slightly cooling, but I feel strange that they are heating up so much to reverse global
trend from slightly negative /
stable to slightly positive; but, in the end, all this is not an evidence that lands» warming is led by UHI (but, this effect, I would not exclude it from having a small part in
temperature trends for some regional area, but just small); both because, as writtend, it is normal to have waters warming slower than lands, and because lands»
temperatures are often measured in a not so precise way (despite they continue to give us a global uncertainity in TT values which is barely the instrumental's one)-- but, to point out, HadCRU and MSU of last years (I mean always 2002 - 2006) follow much better waters»
temperatures trend; — metropolis and larger cities
temperature trends actually show an increase in UHI effect, but I think the sites are few, and the covered area is very small worldwide, so the global effect is very poor (but it still can be sensible for regional effects); but I would not run out a small warming
trend for airport measurements due mainly to three things: increasing jet planes traffic, enlarging airports (then more buildings and more asphalt — if you follow motor sports, or simply live in a town / city, you will know how easy they get very warmer than air during day, and how much it can slow night - time cooling) and overall having airports nearer to cities (if not becoming an area inside the city after some decade of hurban growth, e.g. Milan - Linate); — I found no point about UHI in towns and villages; you will tell me they are not large cities; but, in comparison with 20-40-60 years ago when they were «countryside», many small towns and villages have become part of larger hurban areas (at least in Europe and Asia) so examining just larger cities would not be enough in my opinion to get a full view of UHI effect (still remembering that it has a small global effect: we can say many matters are due to UHI instead of GW, maybe even that a small part of measured GW is due to UHI, and that GW measurements are not so precise to make us able to make good analisyses and predictions, but not that GW is due to UHI).
He shows that the Earth's
temperature trend in this 800 year period never moves more than a few tenths of a degree C. Even during the Maunder minimum, where we know the sun was unusually quiet, global
temperatures were dead
stable.
«
Temperature trends in SW US have been relatively
stable over last 5 centuries.»
The chart
trend shows the Global Mean
Temperature as decreasing, not
stable and only increasing during the industrial age.
In other words, implying a
stable, peaceful, comfortable, adaptable range gently bumping up and down throughout 11,000 years... then bottoming out at the Little Ice Age, only to rapidly reverse upward to cover roughly the same
temperature span, but in 1 / 100th the time — implying a volatile, un-natural, «alarming», and «un-adaptable»
trend.
With all respect to Mears and his colleagues, the continuously shifting nature of the baseline corrections still doesn't suggest that the microwave - derived atmospheric
temperature measurements (or calculations) constitute a
stable enough data set to reliably or accurately interpret long - term
trends on the magnitude of ~ 0.1 K / decade.
The average
temperature may change in an «orderly» or «
stable» or «predictable» ocean along a
trend, but the variance stays the same.
His new reconstruction shows a remarkably
stable, slightly downward
trending temperature record that leaps upward in 1900.