Sentences with phrase «temp increase since»

Not exact matches

«Small» needs some elaboration, since the hypothesized temp effect to a doubling of CO2 concentration is less than a 1 % increase in mean absolute temp.

His position: • No evidence of increasing lake clarity as a result of secchi measurements since 1946 • The interplay of stratification and plankton productivity are not «straightforward» • Challenges O'Reilly's assumption on the correlation of wind and productivity - the highest production is on the end of the lake with the lowest winds • A strong caution using diatoms as the productivity proxy (it is one of two different lake modes) • No ability to link climate change to productivity changes • More productivity from river than allowed for in Nature Geopscience article • Externally derived nutrients control productivity for a quarter of the year • Strong indications of overfishing • No evidence of a climate and fishery production link • The current productivity of the lake is within the expected range • Doesn't challenge recent temp increase but cites temperature records do not show a temperature rise in the last century • Phytoplankton chlorophylla seems to have not materially changed from the 1970s to 1990s • Disputes O'Reilly's and Verbug's claims of increased warming and decreased productivity • Rejects Verburgs contention that changes in phytoplankton biomass (biovolume), in dissolved silica and in transparency support the idea of declining productivity.

The graph confirms there has been no statistically significant increase in world's avg temp since January 1997»

The fact that global temps have already gone up by more than 0.5 C since the mid 70s and we are still pumping increasing amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere with no immreiate sign of stopping would seem to back that up.

Ocean currents and weather have as much to do with Artic ice as temperatures, but UAH for 60 - 85N shows increasing temps from 1991 to 2007, and generally decreasing temp anomaly since.

Air temps in arctic are almost precisely the same as the average for the past 50 years — So it is unlikely air temps have created ice loss — BUT CONVERSELY — the increased open arctic water SHOULD be affecting the arctic air temp - but is not (large expanses of 1 degree C arctic water make it difficult for air temps to drop to minus ten C — but since that is what is happening, then in fact there must be much more cold air around to create «normal» arctic temps for this time of the year)

Why isn't a TCR type of simulation, but instead using actual history and 200 year projected GHG levels in the atmosphere, that would produce results similar to a TCR simulation (at least for the AGW temp increase that would occur when the CO2 level is doubled) and would result in much less uncertainty than ECS (as assessed by climate model dispersions), a more appropriate metric for a 300 year forecast, since it takes the climate more than 1000 years to equilibrate to the hypothesized ECS value, and we have only uncertain methods to check the computed ECS value with actual physical data?

2010 tropo temps have been at or nor record highs all year, consistent with GCM's when looking at the long term forcing from the 40 % increase in CO2 since the 1700's.

Followed by a temp.PLATEAU ever since 2000, which makes evident that NO MORE future temp - increases (11 years equalized, El Ninos will still happen) will occur.

So it is natural for us to read «Most of the observed increase in global average temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations» as being a statement about the proportion of observed degree C temp increase caused by humans.

increased crop yields and perhaps a slight increase in temperatures that are actually net beneficial since the temps of the LIA are without doubt not desirable.

In addition, the warming we see is hugely disproportionate, mainly where it is driest and coldest since the increase in water vapor if you look at your mixing ratios will affect where temps are lowest first.

Tamino's graphic display of the various data sets, adjusted as indicated, is available here: https://tamino.wordpress.com/2018/01/20/2017-temperature-summary/#more-9559 UAH, even with their flawed data, show an.7 degree increase in global temps since 1980.

I have also read, though it will probably be open to much conjecture, that there has been a slowing in CO2 level increases, a cooler ocean temp emerging and a slowing trend to sea level rises since 2006.

Have the runways increased near the temp gage at your airport since 1920?)

«What if» the reported average surface instrument temp increase is overstated, especially since ca 1980.

To claim that the global avg temp might as well have decreased 0.7 degrees as increased 0.7 degrees since preindustrial times flies in the face of basic physics, namely that the planetary temperature is governed (a.o.) by the planetary energy balance, and that this balance has substantially changed over the past 100 or so years due in large part to anthropogenic climate forcings, with a bit of help from natural climate forcings.

The thing about AGW CS is that since 1900 CO2 concentration has gone up 40 % but temp only 0.7 %; a CS of 3C should have seen a temp increase of 40 % of 3C or 1.2 C; however of that 0.7 C increase a solar effect has been either 0.4 C [TAR] or 0.1 C [AR4]; natural variation, even if neutral or stationary [and there is compelling evidence that this is problematic and I am not referring to McLean et al], will have contributed something because there have been more + ve PDO's in the period.

However, there have been several downward movements in temp during that general upward trend; notably the increase in temp from 1910 - 1940 was as steep if not more pronounced than the post 1976 increase; AGW effects should have kicked in from about 1960 onward when CO2 levels ramped up but temp was down until 1976 and has been flat since either 1998 or 1995 if you believe Phil Jones and Lubos.