Sentences with phrase «warming for decades»

«Even if we could stop adding the greenhouse gases tomorrow, the earth would continue warming for decades and remain hot for centuries.

But both of them show continued warming for decades.

The problem of course is that non warming for decades more delays for another generation any chance of practical and pragmatic carbon mitigation — and the beast is still wild and angry.

Such as the lack of global warming for decades hence predicted more than a decade ago now.

So even if humanity stopped burning fossil fuels tomorrow, the earth would continue warming for decades.

For example, while the planet has been warming for decades, that doesn't mean winter will stop happening or that places will no longer experience cold periods.

My essential point remains — the likelihood more than not of no warming for decades at least emerging from decadal climate shifts.

And we still get the prospect of no warming for decades yet.

They helped get us into the mess we are now in by denying the evidence of global warming for decades, the reckless encouragement of population growth both in Australia and abroad (at least, indirectly, by its support of President George W Bush who as cut funding to family planning aid to the Third World) and they certainly won't be helping to get us out of the mess.

The United Nations, he said, has been promoting cap and trade style efforts to combat the non-existent threat of global warming for decades.

They are indeed counterproductive — the nature of a dynamic climate suggests the likelihood of non warming for decades at least.

The world is not warming for decades hence becaus of large sscale ocean and atmospheric patterns — something that has been known to science for at least a decade.

Because of the slow nature of the carbon cycle and ocean thermal inertia, even if we were to immediately cease all anthropogenic carbon emissions right this very second, worldwide, we'd still see more warming for decades.

The world is not warming for decades hence — despite the progressive denials of mainstream freakin» climate science.

The ocean's thermal inertia, which delays some global warming for decades and even centuries, is accounted for in global climate models and its effect is confirmed via measurements of Earth's energy balance (see next section).

The low atmosphere has been warming for decades due to climate change.

=== > Third, we know that these same scientists have been predicting rapid, continuous, accelerating dangerous global warming for decades but it hasn't happened...

Part of problem is that even with current levels of emissions, the inertia of the climate system means that not all of the warming those emissions will cause has happened yet — a certain amount is «in the pipeline» and will only rear its head in the future, because the ocean absorbs some of the heat, delaying the inherent atmospheric warming for decades to centuries.

She was demonstrating that the scientists were actively researching global warming for decades and she was right.

It suggests that the planet is not warming for decades at least — but at a risk of a certain instability.

After all — I am right and he is wrong — the world is not warming for decades at least — most change has been quite natural — but there remains some small risk of catastrophic change.

Harris cites the work of PhD - level climate scientists and atmospheric physicists who've studied global warming for decades, and none of these skeptics deny climate science in any general sense of the word — that's another unsupportable talking point from believers of catastrophic man - caused global warming.

The ocean's thermal inertia, which delays some global warming for decades and even centuries, is accounted for in global climate models and its effect is confirmed via measurements of Earth's energy balance (see next section).

Unfortunately, the bully isn't going away anytime soon since human emissions to date have locked in climate change - fueled warming for decades if not centuries to come.

While credible climate scientists and institutions have understood global warming for decades now, Anthony Lupo's position on climate has fluctuated significantly.

Without knowing it, residents of Nenana, Alaska, have been betting on global warming for decades.

Few things feel as old - manish or winter ready as a pair of pants made of this hearty wool, which has been keeping my Scottish ancestors warm for decades.

And yet the world is not warming for a decade or three more at least and the recent warming is very minor and misattributed.

@CH: That the planet is not warming for a decade to three hence is a little more complex — and seemingly well above webby's pay grade.

The policy question is what if the first of these is just dead set wrong (difficult as is for space cadets to imagine — and remembering that models can't help us here) and the planet resolutely refuses to warm for a decade or three more at least?

That the planet is not warming for a decade to three hence is a little more complex — and seemingly well above webby's pay grade.

In the article, headlined «Time that climate alarmists fessed up,» Bolt claimed that «the planet hasn't actually warmed for a decade - or even 15 years, according to new temperature data from Britain's Met Office.»

The climate shifts in the Pacific suggest no warming for a decade or three more.

Or that there has been no warming for a decade, UN IPCC «science» is crumbling at its foundation, and increasing numbers of climate experts are publicly dissenting from IPCC orthodoxy.

Oh and the world is not warming for a decade or three at least and some eco-socialists are intent on bringing down capitalism and installing a world government.

Summing up: My question for sTeve is: why would you choose the GISS estimate of temperatures, which shows parts of the past decade as higher than 1998 and considerable average warming, over the other three monitoring agencies, which show much less or no warming for the decade?

Shallow and misguided space cadets such as FOMBS notwithstanding — the world is still not warming for a decade or three at least.

PolitiFact also evaluated Cato's claim that «There has been no global warming for a decade now,» and found it to be false.

Suppose for a moment that the unthinkable happens and the planet doesn't warm for another decade — and then cools.

Not much warming for a decade, maybe, perhaps, possibly.

At this stage — it is to no warming for a decade or three more and to considerable uncertainty after that.

If natural variations are the dominant cause of recent warming — as the satellite data suggests — then the planet may not warm for decades and the future beyond that is unknowable.

NASA assures us that the world is not warming for a decade or three more.

-- One week after ICCC 6 I can hardly keep up with all the mainstream sources confirming what so - called «deniers» have held for a while — no global warming for a decade, and warnings about declining solar activity causing global cooling.

As far as I can tell from the actual climate facts — no warming for a decade — those formulas are wrong.

I could be wrong, but that's where the physics of CO2 points, and that's what the empirical evidence points to at the moment (no warming for a decade while CO2 continues to increase).

When the world does not warm for a decade or more there is no «global warming» occurring.

And because heat can be stored in places other than at the surface, a lack of surface warming for a decade tells you almost nothing about the underlying long - term warming trends... I judge that there is virtually no merit to suggestions that the «hiatus» poses a serious challenge to the standard model [of human - caused global warming].»

BTW — I have already given a probability a number of times — virtually certain — > 99 % probability of no warming for a decade.

Not exact matches

Invest in a warm coat that will outlast harsh winters for years, or even decades.