Sentences with phrase «warm anomalies now»

Over the last month or so warm sea - surface temperature [SST] and upper - ocean heat content anomalies have increased in the near - equatorial central Pacific, while the SST cool tongue in the near - equatorial far - eastern Pacific has weakened, with warm anomalies now evident there.

Not exact matches

On particular case in point was this past winters extremely warm periods, in fact as I can recall Michael Mann write, about North Americas sea of red temperature anomalies of January as something which is supposed to happen «20 years» from now.

I have a post at Nate Silver's 538 site on how we can predict annual surface temperature anomalies based on El Niño and persistence — including a (by now unsurprising) prediction for a new record in 2016 and a slightly cooler, but still very warm, 2017.

On particular case in point was this past winters extremely warm periods, in fact as I can recall Michael Mann write, about North Americas sea of red temperature anomalies of January as something which is supposed to happen «20 years» from now.

Even now global temperatures are very high again — in the GISS data, with an anomaly of + 0.77 °C November was warmer than the previous record year of 2010 (+ 0.67 °), and it was the warmest November on record since 1880.

Relatively warm waters are now being concentrated (locally the temperature anomaly is as high as +4 C) in the Labrador Sea and adjoining Atlantic waters, between Canada and Greenland, up to Iceland.

When a temperature anomaly of ~ 0.1 degrees Celsius (the difference between 2015 and the previous global heat record of 2014 — please note the above graph is in Fahrenheit, not Celsius) can lead to such an extreme carbon feedback response, we know we can expect a lot more feedback - induced CO2 now that world leaders are about to seal a 3.5 degrees warming deal — if at least 2030 pledges are not raised before the start of COP21, the Paris climate summit.

Should those anomalies turn negative... well, Perhaps that is why we have a new phrase to replace «global warming» followed by «climate change» now apparently we have «climate disruption» which of course can be USED to «prove» whatever those advocates of CAGW want..

Now, since 2007, at the height of the global warming scare tactics about arctic sea ice, the antarctic sea ice extents anomaly CONTINUOUSLY exceeds 1.25 Mkm ^ 2 for 3 years straight now, and is larger than 1.5 Mkm ^ 2 so often for such long times that it is not even newsworthy on a skeptic siNow, since 2007, at the height of the global warming scare tactics about arctic sea ice, the antarctic sea ice extents anomaly CONTINUOUSLY exceeds 1.25 Mkm ^ 2 for 3 years straight now, and is larger than 1.5 Mkm ^ 2 so often for such long times that it is not even newsworthy on a skeptic sinow, and is larger than 1.5 Mkm ^ 2 so often for such long times that it is not even newsworthy on a skeptic site.

Well, ANU, snarky though you may be, you raise a nominally interesting point; the problem, however, is that the amounts are anomalies; so the 90's are on average a certain amount above the average of the base period; now to compare the increase in anomalies in the noughties, which are higher than the nineties and say this is evidence of progressive warming, hottest ever, or whatever is the current alarmist catch - cry, ignores the fact that the true measure of the warming is not the absolute anomalies but their difference; that is the amounts for the noughties should have the amounts for the nineties subtracted from them and then compared with the nineties after they have the eighties subtracted from them.

If you drop the stations with less anomaly, and keep the ones with more warming as gauged by their anomaly, UHI or not, and use their anomaly, now transposed to the grid stations dropped, you may have problems and a biased warming.

Now that we know that temeratures weren't that warm we have to get rid of the medieval warm period terminology and use, maybe, anomaly instead

Skipping past the inconsistency in the text where he says that until now the best estimate for the last interglacial temperature in Antarctica was +3 °C (compared to present) while his «Gore curve» has a zero anomaly compared to today, let's look at the justification for the new «true» estimate of +6 °C warmer.

Now, let's say one argues that anthropogenic forcings after 1950 in part caused the warming that we then observe as an anomaly in 2008.