Sentences with phrase «stations in warmer areas»

The «corrected» CET now used by CRU / HADCRUT includes stations in warmer areas and shows slightly different temperatures but with a mean average from 1971 to 2010 of 9.9 degrees C.

BillD: No, I was referring to the discontinuation of the use of data from some surface stations, many of which were in areas which were cooler, thus leading to a suspected bias towards stations in warmer areas.

Not exact matches

The restaurants are painted in warm, inviting colors with light that emphasizes the different stations like the central hearth where the bakers work their magic and the «bakers» area where square bagels called «Squagels» await the morning crowds for breakfast.

The locations of weather stations, changes in instruments, the siting of weather stations in warmer urban areas, changes in land cover and other issues have all been cited as issues affecting the temperature trends often used to show that our planet is in fact warming.

Elegant simplicity blended with an attentive, warm welcome: among the hotels in Naples, Hotel Ideal, located in the historic area of the city and just a stroll from the railway station, knows how to treat its guests to a pleasant stay in calm and friendly surroundings.

Cabanes et al. (16) have demonstrated that the historical estimates of ζ̇ (here taken at 18 cm / cy) are severely biased by a concentration of tide stations in areas of recent warming, and that global estimates have to be radically revised downward.

Quite near by we have German stations Garmisch Parten Kirchen and Mittenwalde (OAS area Blue 15 in shelter from Western winds) and these stations has much less warm trend.

The meteorological station Ostrov Dikson, located in this area of warming climate, has reported temperatures since 1917.

So, you are saying that that stations with poor microsite (Class 3, 4, 5) DO NOT have significantly higher warming trends than well sited stations (Class 1, 2), or that this is NOT true in all nine geographical areas of all five data samples or that the odds of this result having occurred randomly are NOT vanishingly minuscule or is it your belief that none of these things has been inescapably demonstrated?

In the current environment warmer temperatures in Arctic stations are being extended over a wide area to imply a higher global meaIn the current environment warmer temperatures in Arctic stations are being extended over a wide area to imply a higher global meain Arctic stations are being extended over a wide area to imply a higher global mean.

Although urban areas occupy less than 1 % of China's land mass, the majority of China's observing stations are situated in proximity to urban areas, and thus some of the recorded warming is undoubtedly the consequence of rapid urban development, particularly since the late 1970s.

The idea is that 1 % of the Earth has warmed 5C and the rest hasn't warmed at all, but because 20 % of stations are in the areas that have warmed by 5C, the actual increase of 0.05 C is overstated by a factor 20 (numbers plugged out of thin air, merely for illustration).

Anomalies for stations in areas of high latitudes and high elevations are typically some of the largest anomalies in the world because temperatures are warming at the greatest rates in those areas.

Imagine a well sited long period station near Las Vegas out in a rural area that has its missing data infilled using Las Vegas data, you know it will be warmer when that happens.

So the suggestion that the absence of station data in these areas creates an artificial warm bias is completely false.»

Note that I am not saying that warming has not taken place just that it is not global — BEST admits that 30 % of the stations have cooled and that is true of severla of therse long term stations — but that we should concentrate on finding a useful set of temperature trends in regional and zonal areas that reflect the impacts of climate change, as for example the Sahel, and understand the true reasons without assuming carbon dioxide to be the culprit.

The proposed site of the first new nuclear station was on the coast of Port Elizabeth, where warm water discharged by the nuclear station's cooling system would have raised the temperature of the ocean, harming marine life and jeopardizing the livelihoods of small - scale fishermen in the area.

Temperature records from around the world — from weather stations in both urban and rural areas, and from weather balloons and satellites — tell us the world is warming.

With how many people have complained about the effects of UHI, why would anyone think it means anything that a single, urban station shows a warming trend not present in the trend of its area?

Combining the OAS temperatures and OAA temperatures and using the century - scale trends for each identified in the paper -LRB--0.03 K / century and +0.78 K / century, respectively), it may be concluded that instrumental temperature stations located in non-urban areas and not subjected to artificial urban heating bias produce an overall warming trend of just 0.375 K / century (0.038 K / decade) during 1900 - 2010.

You are also ignoring that rural stations show the same trend as urban — and that the greatest warming is observed in the far north — where there are no major urban areas.

If global warming does not fit the observable temperature measurements, then a new «reality» must be invented to fit the ideology: actual temperature records must be altered or dismissed — hundreds of temperature - reporting stations in colder areas worldwide were eliminated from the global network so the average temperature is higher than when those stations were included link.

Therefore, all temperature stations in or around these urban areas does not just have a warm urban temperature, no theyve gotten a lot warmer during 1900 - 2010.