Sentences with phrase «warming the heat content»

Not exact matches

We've narrowed the uncertainty in surface warming projections by generating thousands of climate simulations that each closely match observational records for nine key climate metrics, including warming and ocean heat content.»

It shows a record warming spell earlier this year, which continues to drive up the 5 - year average of heat content, shown in blue.

Just a general observation in regards to the oceanic heat content value in determining global warming.

It is also not influencing increased ocean heat content, melting ice caps and glaciers, satellites showing tropospheric warming or strato cooling, etc

Thus, during an El - Nino, much of the heat content of the Indo - Pacific warm pool moves from being too deep for surface measurements to detect, to being spread out on the surface of the ocean, where surface measurements can detect it.

We assess the heat content change from both of the long time series (0 to 700 m layer and the 1961 to 2003 period) to be 8.11 ± 0.74 × 1022 J, corresponding to an average warming of 0.1 °C or 0.14 ± 0.04 W m — 2, and conclude that the available heat content estimates from 1961 to 2003 show a significant increasing trend in ocean heat content.

The heat content of the world ocean increased by ~ 2 × 10 ^ 23 joules between the mid-1950s and mid-1990s, representing a volume mean warming of 0.06 °C.

From 1992 to 2003, the decadal ocean heat content changes (blue), along with the contributions from melting glaciers, ice sheets, and sea ice and small contributions from land and atmosphere warming, suggest a total warming (red) for the planet of 0.6 ± 0.2 W / m2 (95 % error bars).

You've got the radiative physics, the measurements of ocean temperature and land temperature, the changes in ocean heat content (Hint — upwards, whereas if if was just a matter of circulation moving heat around you might expect something more simple) and of course observed predictions such as stratospheric cooling which you don't get when warming occurs from oceanic circulation.

This being steric sea level changes (sea level rise from thermal expansion as the oceans warm), heat content, and ocean salinity.

In 2008, climate change sceptic Roger Pielke Sr said this: «Global warming, as diagnosed by upper ocean heat content has not been occurring since 2004».

Related Content Heidi Cullen's Senate Testimony on Climate Science Why Global Warming Slowed in the 2000's: Another Possible Explanation The Heat is On: U.S. Temperature Trends The Keeling Curve (Graphic)

Instead, try adding some warm water to the kibble and letting it soak for a minute — the heat and gravy combo will entice your dog to eat and the added water content is invaluable for overall health.

If it would warm 5 degrees this century, which seem quite possible, that would be about 100 times faster than the average rate during the last deglaciation, although I suppose ocean heat content rises somewhat slower.

Viewed in that way, the data says that the Arctic is warming even more in terms of heat content than we would think, based upon purely thermometric considerations.

Just a general observation in regards to the oceanic heat content value in determining global warming.

Numerous denier arguments involving slight fluctuations in the global distribution of warmer vs cooler sea surface areas as supposed explanations of climate change neglect all the energy that goes into ocean heat content, melting large ice deposits and so forth.

It is easy to make claims that the model internal variability is way off and can simultaneously lead to observed patterns (e.g., upper ocean heat content anomalies, tropospheric warming, etc) but this is not a serious criticism until there's something more that has been demonstrated.

11) In Pacific Ocean Heat Content During The Past 10,000 Years Rosenthal 2013 found Pacific water masses that were ~ 0.65 ° warmer than in recent decades.

The main point I was trying to suggest is for a limited measure of N / S 8 Deg., covered by the NOAA Triton / TAO buoy data sets, the visual indication since 1998 does not appear to support large scale warming in either heat content or isotherms.

It isn't an isolated conclusion from a single study, but comes from an assessment of the changing patterns of surface and tropospheric warming, stratospheric cooling, ocean heat content changes, land - ocean contrasts, etc. that collectively demonstrate that there are detectable changes occurring which we can attempt to attribute to one or more physical causes.

Remember too that ocean heat content increases were a predicted consequence of GHG - driven warming well before the ocean data was clear enough to demonstrate it.

A fluctuation in the location of slightly warmer surface water could hardly cause the global increase in ocean heat content.

In Pacific Ocean Heat Content During The Past 10,000 Years Rosenthal 2013 found Pacific water masses that were ~ 0.65 ° warmer than in recent decades.

# 95 «It is difficult to accept the hypothesis that global warming has stopped while ocean heat content continues to increase.»

As Jamie [Morison] mentioned, water at 300 m depth is much warmer, has a greater heat content and is continuously present but is still on average unable to contribute to any larger heat flux to the underside of the ice, due to the strong stratification of the upper Arctic.

The current energy imbalance at the surface (as demonstrated by the increasing heat content of the oceans) implies there is at least a further 0.5 deg C surface warming in the «pipeline».

The fact that you don't understand the mechanisms of how increased CO2 warms the oceans is irrelevant, since the heat content of the oceans is increasing (and, thus, the planet, as a whole has continued warming despite your «hiatus»).

The connection between global warming and the changes in ocean heat content has long been a subject of discussion in climate science.

Paul S (# 1)-- Since the Planck Response dominates over positive feedback responses to temperature, wouldn't a La Nina - like failure of surface temperature to rise lead to an increase rather than a reduction in energy accumulation compared with accumulation during a surface warming — presumably a small increase, so that the observed rise in ocean heat content would still be substantial?

Gavin, I agree completely with the standard picture that you describe, but I don't agree with the claim that ``... as surface temperatures and the ocean heat content are rising together, it almost certainly rules out intrinsic variability of the climate system as a major cause for the recent warming».

Even with these possible issues, it buys us 50 years of economic growth and technological development and a net reduction in the heat content of the ocean, that the future warming must overcome.

«Firstly, as surface temperatures and the ocean heat content are rising together, it almost certainly rules out intrinsic variability of the climate system as a major cause for the recent warming»

To clarify my above comment, I was suggesting that the observed rise in ocean heat content would be substantial with or without the La Nina effect, representing primarily the persistence of a long term warming trend.

Based on a relatively recent EOS article setting forth the idea that it is not only SST but also the depth profile of the warming that effects hurricane strengthening in the Gulf, would it not be possible that additions Carribean heat content could warm the sea lower down, increasing intensity.

If the Earth's surface is indeed warming, then the heat content of the surface increases day by day.

This makes perfect sense since there is little to no evidence of an anthropogenic global warming effect on global Ocean Heat Content (OHC) data.

And nice graph of Ocean Heat Content, which confirms that at least 90 % of the late 20th century warming was natural not anthropogenic, since the only physical climate mechanism that transfers heat into the oceans is solar radiatHeat Content, which confirms that at least 90 % of the late 20th century warming was natural not anthropogenic, since the only physical climate mechanism that transfers heat into the oceans is solar radiatheat into the oceans is solar radiation.

The error is small enough to have confidence that the ocean heat content has been increasing in the past 15 years, during the so called «hiatus» in global warming.

eadler replied, «It seem to me that you claim that a warmer ocean surface will make the heat content of the ocean increase even more.

We now have excellent proxy volcanic data and pretty good ocean heat content proxy data over the past 2000 years, during which their were both warmer and cooler periods.

With biased profiles discarded, no significant warming or cooling is observed in upper - ocean heat content between 2003 and 2006.

Because minimum temperatures in the stable boundary layer are not very robust measures of the heat content in the deep atmosphere and climate models do not predict minimum temperatures well, minimum temperatures should not be used as a surrogate for measures of deep atmosphere global warming.»

Instead, they discuss new ways of playing around with the aerosol judge factor needed to explain why 20th - century warming is about half of the warming expected for increased in GHGs; and then expand their list of fudge factors to include smaller volcanos, stratospheric water vapor (published with no estimate of uncertainty for the predicted change in Ts), transfer of heat to the deeper ocean (where changes in heat content are hard to accurately measure), etc..

Anthropogenic GHG warming is about the Earth's energy balance, and thus, looking at an average global near - surface temperature, or the total ocean heat content can tell us something useful about that energy balance.

Converting from heat content to degrees C, the ocean warming over the last 30 years is less than 0.1 degrees C, which is probably well within the error bars or the Argo float's measurement ability.

Dana, I think you are pushing in the right direction with this; heat content is a much more direct measure of the underlying changes to the climate system than average air temperatures and climate science communicators should make heat content their first response to the suggestion that global warming is something that waxes and (allegedly, recently) wanes.

And of course, the issue of the consistent rise in the best metric of Earth's energy balance - ocean heat content and the closely related sea level rise, get's ignored as though, through some miracle, a warming ocean holding in the bulk of the anthropogenic energy imbalance gives we troposphere dwelling creatures a free pass.

We have had lengthy heating phase caused by a spurt of insolation, now we have had a big El Nino, a subsequent shift to La Nina and the resulting warm currents moving up the the Western Pacific, causing warming polar oceans and changes in atmospheric water vapor content.

Hansen got the warming right in the 1980s, the hockey stick is validated by numerous oth alternative research methods and ocean heat content and arctic ice continue to rise and shrink as predicted from the understanding of the physical effect of CO2, as have air temperatures in the area.