Sentences with phrase «surface point measurements»

We argue that integrated column measurements of the urban dome of CO2 from the ground and / or space are less sensitive than surface point measurements to the redistribution of emitted CO2 by small - scale processes and thus may allow for more precise trend detection of emissions from urban regions.

Not exact matches

By measuring on many locations with micrometer spacing between the measurement points, we can construct a two - dimensional image of the surface's repellency, called a wetting map,» explains Professor Quan Zhou from Aalto University School of Electrical Engineering.

«These amazingly fine measurements make it possible to extract wavefront information right at the point where air, light, and surfaces interact.»

The measurements will be carried out in different modes: pointing through the atmosphere towards the Sun, at the horizon at sunlight scattered by the atmosphere, and looking downwards at sunlight reflected from the surface.

So, in your context of a sports hall, obviously shape is one that you have identified and used, but others that quickly come to mind would be dimension and measurement esp for different activities that can be played indoors - the dimensions of different playing surfaces / areas etc; construction design (more shape and space incl scale drawings), costs of construction (lots of maths including rates which could incorporate linear equations with fixed and variable costs); the rules and scoring of different indoor games played (basketball is a good example with different points for different shots); and probably more.

Although these criticisms are appealing on the surface, Messick (1994), a noted measurement researcher, pointed out that concerns about both authenticity and directness need to be supported empirically rather than simply claimed.

If the American Gem Society Laboratory were to measure the Brian Gavin Signature Cushion Cut Diamond from edge - to - edge, like a traditional square cut diamond with pointed corners, the outside diameter measurements would result in an inaccurate representation of the surface area of the diamond.

At face value, the satellite data is supported by weather balloon data, covers a much larger area of the globe than the surface - based data, and, as you pointed out, is free from the urban heat island effect and other potential flaws of surface measurements.

On Wednesday an interesting paper (Thompson et al) was published in Nature, pointing to a clear artifact in the sea surface temperatures in 1945 and associating it with the changing mix of fleets and measurement techniques at the end of World War II.

I have a basic (and what may seem like a trivial) question, but I am looking for a pointer to a place on the sebsite that tells about the conventions used to consolidate multiple observations / measurements at different points on the surface of the earth (e.g., different oceans) at different times (i.e., the seasons and such).

Given all the independent lines of evidence pointing to average surface warming over the last few decades (satellite measurements, ocean temperatures, sea - level rise, retreating glaciers, phenological changes, shifts in the ranges of temperature - sensitive species), it is highly implausible that it would lead to more than very minor refinements to the current overall picture.

The whole point is to have a system that uses every surface temperature measurement unchanged.

My point is, the Tierney 2010 report is a study of the change in Lake Tanganyika surface temperature over time, which contains no measurements of the change in LST over time, and which has exactly three actual surface temperature measurements, which are poorly cited, are from different parts of the lake, and are all from 2003...

«This is ongoing research and bears watching as other factors as still under investigation, such as changes in the time - of - day readings were taken, but at this point it helps explain why the surface measurements appear to be warming more than the deep atmosphere (where the greenhouse effect should appear.)»

I would point to TSI, OHC, sea level, humidity, temps, Sea Ice, nothing is good enough for either side except the highly adjusted surface temps from GISS and not even they fully support the models and appear to conflict with other measurements!!

«You are wrong because of the obvious point I made, that you can not attribute a measurement made at the surface»

As he pointed out, a dominant unforced contribution to surface warming relative to forced trends would be expected to be accompanied by a trend of declining OHC, which is inconsistent with the observed trends averaged over the past half century as evidenced by mixed layer temperature measurements and sea level rise.

The scientists use data from airborne Lidar, surface geophysical measurements, and point measurements to explore the complex relationships between different layers of permafrost soil.

Also interesting to me is that the equation they used to model cooling, slide 9, included nothing of the diffusion distance from the point of measurement to the surface or to the bucket walls.

The use of different data temperature sets, whether it is global surface temperatures or satellite measurements, is one of the major points of contention in the climate debate.

This point was also made by Schmidt et al. (2014), which additionally showed that incorporating the most recent estimates of aerosol, solar, and greenhouse gas forcings, as well as the El Niño Southern Oscillation (ENSO) and temperature measurement biases, the discrepancy between average GCM global surface warming projections and observations is significantly reduced.

The frequent refrain «no warming since 1998» relies on a double cherry - pick: First off, by choosing 1998, the hottest year ever in the satellite record, as a starting point and, secondly, by disregarding the more reliable measurements of the temperature at the Earth's surface where we actually live.

My point is that in the absence of such a fine grid, one should place the measurement locations according to the well studied rules of polling: Decide on the number of types of environment: urban, desert, mountain, iceberg, tropics, etc and weight the results according to the percentage each of these types have on the surface of the globe.

The general point is that satellites are themselves subject to large adjustments, and are not by definition a more robust and bias - free measurement of surface temperatures than thermometers.

The surface air temperature is just a single point of measurement in this energy flow.

As more and more people have pointed out the heat accumulation in the deep ocean, a common argument in the denialosphere has been that the measurements are wrong, because how could heat accumulate in the deep ocean without first passing through the top layer and being detected via ARGO floats and the like (apparently they're also saying this heat was never noticed near the surface).

Pilot balloon measurements during BoDEx point to a marked diurnal cycle in the wind speed such that the LLJ accelerates over a near frictionless inversion by night but is mixed down to the surface by extreme radiative heating through modification of eddy viscosity to produce a surface - wind - speed maximum by ≈ 1100 local time (32).