Sentences with phrase «than those at the surface over»

Our increased understanding of trend uncertainty aloft means that we can no longer dismiss warming aloft of similar or greater magnitude than at the surface over the satellite record.

Not exact matches

Hmm, so you're telling me that a «heat shield» that was made of «special plastic» (as NASA called it back in the day), which was nothing but epoxy smeared over a ss honey comb «protected» the astros barreling into the upper atmosphere at hypersonic 5 miles / sec, or well over 30 times the velocity of a jumbo - jet and thru temperatures *** as quoted by NASA *** that are «10 times hotter than the surface of the sun», and then they «braked» with only a parachute to a safe splashdown?

And he found that dolphin research had an advantage over shark research: «It's easier to study something that comes to the surface every 28 seconds to breathe than something that never comes up at all.»

But rather than a monotonously uniform surface homogenized by impact cratering over the eons, the first up - close look at the asteroid reveals a full palette of mineral «colors» (mapped here in false color reflecting the wide range of rock compositions).

The world's surface temperatures have risen at a slower rate over the past 15 years than at any time since 1951, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

Rather than catastrophic resurfacing that would take as little as 10 million years, Venus may have had gradual turnover of a thin crust stirred by mantle plumes or asteroid collisions that renewed the surface 1 percent at a time over billions of years.

Such stars have masses of at least eight times that of the Sun and high surface temperatures of 10 000 K or more, but they exhaust their hydrogen supply more quickly than starts of lower mass: over some tens of mil - lions of years, compared to billions of years for stars like the Sun.

However, for the globe as a whole, surface air temperatures over land have risen at about double the ocean rate after 1979 (more than 0.27 °C per decade vs. 0.13 °C per decade), with the greatest warming during winter (December to February) and spring (March to May) in the Northern Hemisphere.

The observed fact that temperatures increases slower over the oceans than over land demonstrates that the large heat capacity of the ocean tries to hold back the warming of the air over the ocean and produces a delay at the surface but nevertheless the atmosphere responds quit rapidly to increasing greenhouse gases.

The former is likely to overestimate the true global surface air temperature trend (since the oceans do not warm as fast as the land), while the latter may underestimate the true trend, since the air temperature over the ocean is predicted to rise at a slightly higher rate than the ocean temperature.

«We now appear to be closing in on an explanation as to why the solar corona is over 100 times hotter than the solar surface — the solution to a 55 - year old puzzle,» said Dr. George Withbroe, Director of the Sun - Earth Connection Program at NASA Headquarters, Washington, DC.

Even at more than two tonnes, the S 63 rides more deftly over poor surfaces, and the roar from its 20in rubber is less of an intrusion.

The NX 300 is still a little brittle at lower speeds over less - than - ideal surfaces, but it's exceptionally secure through the bends in a way that belies the inherent handling limitations of an SUV.

Its stiffer chassis was significantly quieter over the ribbed surface at about 35 mph than either the Tacoma or Colorado and seemed to rattle and shake about less.

Bite was improved tremendously over the GLH, but at a cost — a slightly harsher ride, and care had to be taken when pushing the car quickly over surfaces that were less than ideal, as the little Omni could lose grip going over bumps.

After a couple of weeks, blue crystals had grown over every surface, transforming an architectural space most of us wouldn't have looked at twice into an Aladdin's cave that — as in all the best fairytales — had more than a whiff of danger about it.

Even if we assume that all the mass of the sun is at its surface on the equation (I'm too lazy to carry out the 3 - dimensional integration over variable density), the solar angular momentum is 2 * 10 ^ 30 kg x 7 * 10 ^ 8 m * 1 * 10 ^ 3 m / s, or about 1.5 * 10 ^ 41 kg - m ^ 2 / s — about a hundred times less than Jupiter's.

In terms of the gold that a climate science denier might find in the paper, at the very least, they could argue that the fact that the troposphere isn't warming more quickly than the surface shows that the climate models are unreliable — even though the models predict just the pattern of warming that we see — with the troposphere warming more quickly than the surface over the ocean but less quickly than the surface over land.

The former is likely to overestimate the true global surface air temperature trend (since the oceans do not warm as fast as the land), while the latter may underestimate the true trend, since the air temperature over the ocean is predicted to rise at a slightly higher rate than the ocean temperature.

Refering to bands where optical thickness is constant over the interval of each band, if the atmospheric LW absorption is limited to some band (that doesn't cover all LW radiation), than increases in OLR in response to surface warming will occur outside that band, so OLR will drop within the band — there will still be some portion of stratospheric or near - TOA cooling that will be transient, but some will remain at full equilibrium.

However, over land, where there is not very much moist convection, which is not dominated by the tropics and where one expects surface trends to be greater than for the oceans, there was no amplification at all!

Yet that dataset, which, like all the surface datasets, was recently adjusted to deliver the global warming that measurements did not show, now indicates a warming trend over those same eight years at a rate equivalent to more than 1.5 degrees / century.

One can logically wonder at just how much Dr. Dorney knows if he begins his testimony with «Today the surface ocean is almost 30 % more acidic than it was in pre-industrial times, and over the next few decades, the level of acidity of the surface ocean will continue to rise...» when the worries about acidic oceans is pointless since where is the base line?

Surface temperatures over land regions have warmed at a faster rate than over the oceans in both hemispheres.

In addition, a combined analysis of the response at the surface and through the depth of the atmosphere using HadCM3 and the solar reconstruction of Lean et al. (1995) concluded that the near - surface temperature response to solar forcing over 1960 to 1999 is much smaller than the response to greenhouse gases (Jones et al., 2003).

For several days this month, Greenland's surface ice cover melted over a larger area than at any time in more than 30 years of satellite observations.

At this computer - predicted «hot spot» high above the Earth, the UN's models project that greenhouse warming will cause temperature to rise over the decades at a rate up to three times faster than at the surface.&raquAt this computer - predicted «hot spot» high above the Earth, the UN's models project that greenhouse warming will cause temperature to rise over the decades at a rate up to three times faster than at the surface.&raquat a rate up to three times faster than at the surface.&raquat the surface.»

It has been known at least for 50 years that surface is colder than the overlaying atmosphere over Antarctis.

Internal variability can only account for ~ 0.3 °C change in average global surface air temperature at most over periods of several decades, and scientific studies have consistently shown that it can not account for more than a small fraction of the global warming over the past century.

Map of air temperature anomalies for December 2009, at the 925 millibar level (roughly 1,000 meters [3,000 feet] above the surface) for the region north of 30 degrees N, shows warmer than usual temperatures over the Arctic Ocean and cooler than normal temperatures over central Eurasia, the United States and southwestern Canada.

The temperature at the poles of Venus (over 720K) can not be explained by any «runaway greenhouse effect» because there is less than 1W / m ^ 2 from the Sun that gets through the Venus atmosphere to the surface at the poles.

This change in sea level occurred in the context of different orbital forcing and with high latitude surface temperature, averaged over several thousand years, at least 2 °C warmer than present.

Judith with respect your point (i) for the green flag «Long term trend of increasing surface temperatures, for at least the past 150 years» is nothing more than evidence that the earth has apparently warmed over this period.

They discovered that this bottom pressure torque in Drake Passage had an effect more than 10 times larger than the average effect of wind blowing over the ACC at the surface.

Yes, the same amount of energy has to get out into space at the same rate, over the long term, but the absorption by greenhouse gases requires the surface temperature to be higher in order to radiate at a sufficiently higher rate (than would otherwise be the case) to make up for the fraction absorbed.

Then I understand they go back down to around -100 deg.C at the mesopause, but then can be much warmer than the surface (even over +100 deg.C) in the thermosphere.

The wind velocity at which the flow over the rural surface becomes Turbulant (a chaotic mixing feild) is lower than the wind velocity at which the flow over the urban surafce becomes chaotic.?

At the surface, the variability of temperatures over land is much greater than that over the oceans (Fig. 4), which reflects the very different heat capacities of the underlying surface and the depth of the layer linked to the surface.

For example, since showing lights at night was generally not a good idea because of the submarine threat, maybe the measurements were biased more to daytime measurements, where the surface was generally warmer due to solar heating, than to average temperatures over the whole day which would be more typical of peacetime.

Not only did Greenland Ice Sheet surface melt in 2012 occur over a bigger - than - average area, it also began about two weeks earlier at lower elevations and, for any given elevation, lasted longer.

What the report says about climate change and the Arctic: Over the past 50 years, near - surface air temperatures across Alaska and the Arctic have increased at a rate more than twice as fast as the global average.

Hence less than 0.8 W / m ² radiated from the surface do no longer reach the cosmos [26] and are carried away by the evaporation associated with a minuscule temperature increase of the surface: for evaporation at +6 W / m ² / °C, the required temperature increase would be 0.13 °C spread over the 200 years it would take to double the CO2 content of the air at the rate of +2 ppm / year.

We need to find an equation that allows factors other than mass, gravity and insolation to affect V without affecting T because according to the Gas Laws T is determined only by the amount of KE needed to keep the mass of the atmosphere off the surface at a given height over and above that required for top of atmosphere radiative balance.

60 Wind Generation Historically Small wind turbines used for Wind Generation Historically Small wind turbines used for agriculture use — pump water Provide electrical needs for isolated homes Extracts ~ 3 kW of power with wind vanes no larger than 1m long Modern Wind turbines with vanes larger than 50 m can extract megawatts of power from the wind Blades designed to function similar to airplane wings utilizing lift created by the wind flowing over the surface to turn the blades — more efficient Turbines mounted on tall towers or at sea can take advantage of higher winds.

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.

The last time in Earth history when the global average surface temperature was as warm as the IPCC projects for 2100 in its mid-range scenarios, there was very little polar ice and sea level would have been roughly 70 meters (over 200 feet) higher than at present.

Testimony to this assumption is the term that has been employed for more than a century to describe the radiation in all wavelengths received from the Sun: the so - called «solar constant,» whose value at the mean Sun - Earth distance is a little over 1 1/3 kilowatts per square meter of surface.

Over at RealClimate, on this topic they claim» It is extremely likely that more than half of the observed increase in global average surface temperature from 1951 to 2010 was caused by the anthropogenic increase in greenhouse gas concentrations and other anthropogenic forcings together.

While we are hesitant to extrapolate from very short data series (always a dubious procedure) it is entirely plausible that reduction in low cloud over the period could conservatively be estimated to have increased heating at Earth's surface by 5 - 10 Wm - 2, an amount more than sufficient to account for all the estimated warming over the period.

If prospecting is done in, for example, Germany the average reservoir depth for a source at about 100 °C would reach just over 3000 meters below the surface, whereas a source at around 180 °C on average would require a drilling depth greater than 6000 meters.