Sentences with phrase «warming processes over»

In some parts of the Arctic Ocean, the shallow regions near continents may be one of the settings where methane hydrates are breaking down now due to warming processes over the past 15,000 years.

Not exact matches

Listening and responding with warm understanding serves to establish the first strands of the interpersonal bridge called «rapport» over which the counseling process moves back and forth.

Place all four sandwiches on the oiled griddle; allow to heat a few minutes until surface is golden brown; turn sandwiches over and repeat process on other side; serve warm.

Don't over process, or they will become warm and pasty.

The Gland Electric Portable Baby Food and Bottle Warmer are safe and reliable with its automatic on and off feature plus it come with controls and warnings to indicate that the process is now over.

The Michigan Tech chamber works differently due to cloud mixing between a hot and cold surface, the same process that forms clouds or fog over a lake on fall days when the water temperature is warmer than the air temperature.

The Michigan Tech chamber creates clouds through cloud mixing between a hot and cold surface — the same process that forms fog over Portage Lake on fall days when the water temperature is warmer than the air temperature.

The key conclusions were that: It is «unequivocal» that global warming is occurring; the probability that this is caused by natural climatic processes is less than 5 %; and the probability that this is caused by human emissions of greenhouse gases is over 90 %.

Over what time period might this savannization process release carbon «equivalent to several years of worldwide carbon emissions», and how does that affect the assessment offered by Gore, Hansen and others that we have perhaps ten years in which to substantially reduce CO2 emissions to avoid irreversible catastrophic warming?

process where cold winds blowing over a relatively warm lake cause rapid cloud formation and precipitation.

Make over your drink: When you need a winter warm - up, Clerkin recommends DIYing a mix of non-Dutch processed cocoa and sugar.

The process is pretty simple, all you have to do is melt your dark chocolate in a double boiler over a pot of boiling water, or in a bowl over warm water.

Both have been chosen because of their hopes for a brighter future, but over the decades, Frank (now played by George Clooney) has become disillusioned, and it's up to Casey and Athena to bring him around and in the process save the world from... Well, I won't spoil it, but let's just say this is the sort of movie in which a discussion of global warming plays a supporting role and the senselessness of Hollywood movies and video games receives its obligatory culture - war spanking.

I live in North Jersey... However, the car I was looking for was in Philadelphia (about 130 miles away)... Loreal new this and called me the day I was... coming down... She wanted to let me know there was a scratch on the windshield... I was impressed with that because, she was more concerned with me traveling over 250 miles (both ways) than making her sale... Regardless, when I arrived and met Loreal, she was informative, friendly and greeted me with a warm friendly smile... What surprised me was this continued throughout the process... Loreal, was very accommodating and every concern I had, She guided me through this... I realize this is only the «honeymoon» period of having this car....

coming down... She wanted to let me know there was a scratch on the windshield... I was impressed with that because, she was more concerned with me traveling over 250 miles (both ways) than making her sale... Regardless, when I arrived and met Loreal, she was informative, friendly and greeted me with a warm friendly smile... What surprised me was this continued throughout the process... Loreal, was very accommodating and every concern I had, She guided me through this... I realize this is only the «honeymoon» period of having this car....

Well, for one thing, it's very difficult to understand how a warming process dependent on airborne greenhouse gases could suddenly, over a period of a year or two, shift heat from the atmosphere to the oceans.

In a more recent paper, our own Stefan Rahmstorf used a simple regression model to suggest that sea level rise (SLR) could reach 0.5 to 1.4 meters above 1990 levels by 2100, but this did not consider individual processes like dynamic ice sheet changes, being only based on how global sea level has been linked to global warming over the past 120 years.

What most people seem to forget here, is that on one hand there are fundamental thermodynamical arguments which demand that hurricane intensity increase over time, while on the other hand, there are these two big chunks of ice sitting in both polar regions, which will counteract the warming process in their own special way.

The glaciers have been receding over the past four decades, as the world has gradually warmed up, but the process has now accelerated alarmingly.

Andf as we have seen, «climate change» is probably a better description of the process than global warming anyway, since warming temperatures aren't all that is likely to happen over time.

My own guesstimate starts with events that have either been formally attributed (in a probabilistic way) to climate change — an example is the 2003 European heatwave — or which have a demonstrable link to physical processes consistent with a climate influence — examples include Hurricanes Katrina and Sandy, both of which were observed to rapidly intensify over unusually warm waters.

There is ample evidence in the UK of increasing fuel poverty (i.e., household spending over 10 % of disposable income keeping warm in winter) in the regions of wind farm deployment where higher electricity bills are needed to cover the rent of the land (from usually already rich) landowners, a direct reversal of the process whereby cheap energy over the last century has lifted a significant fraction of the world's poor from their poverty.

Yes, the paper is interesting but very speculative with unmeasured processes (cold water over warm can only be «stable» for very strong salinity anomalies — I still believe in buoyancy).

Over the 5 long term, this warming conforms to a complex trend that can be simplified as a monotonic curve, but the actual pathway is steplike... this rules out gradual warming, either in situ in the atmosphere or as gradual release from the ocean, in favour of a more abrupt process of storage and release.

«Some or all of these processes will be enough, Lovelock estimates, to tip the earth into a catastrophic hotter state, perhaps about eight degrees centigrade warmer in temperate regions like ours, over the course of a very few decades, and that heat will in turn make life as we know it nearly impossible in many places.

In response to claims made by Bob Carter that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change had not uncovered evidence that global warming was caused by human activity, a former CSIRO climate scientist stated that Bob Carter was not a credible source on climate change and that «if he [Carter] has any evidence that [global warming over the past 100 years] is a natural variability he should publish through the peer review process.»

The potential effects of such processes were taken to the extreme in the 2004 movie The Day After Tomorrow, in which floating meltwater produced by warming climate caused the North Atlantic to freeze over almost instantly, in turn locking much of the United States in ice within days.

Monitoring the ocean to its full depth with consistently calibrated instrumentation all over the globe — and doing so for decades at a time — is critical to track how global warming impacts the oceans» ecosystems and biogeochemical processes.

Part of the absorbed radiation warms the surrounding air, a process that tends to stabilize the air over a city, which in turn increases the probability of higher pollutant concentrations.

Over many decades this process forms a deep lens of warm, saline North Atlantic Central Water.

I'm very convinced that the physical process of global warming is continuing, which appears as a statistically significant increase of the global surface and tropospheric temperature anomaly over a time scale of about 20 years and longer and also as trends in other climate variables (e.g., global ocean heat content increase, Arctic and Antarctic ice decrease, mountain glacier decrease on average and others), and I don't see any scientific evidence according to which this trend has been broken, recently.

Then, especially when there is excessive cloud cover over the oceans, the Sun's energy absorbed above the clouds can actually make its way down to the ocean surface (and below) warming the oceans by non-radiative processes, not by direct solar radiation which mostly passes through the thin surface layer and could barely raise the mean temperature of an asphalt paved Earth above -35 C.

Our team agreed upon definitions of categories to put the papers in: explicit or implicit endorsement of human - caused global warming, no opinion, and implicit or explicit rejection or minimization of the human influence, and began the long process of rating over 12,000 abstracts.

I did this because Anthony Watts and Joe D'Aleo published a document claiming that the GHCN data, and the way it was processed, exaggerated estimates of how much the globe has warmed over the last century or more.

Since to me (and many scientists, although some wanted a lot more corroborative evidence, which they've also gotten) it makes absolutely no sense to presume that the earth would just go about its merry way and keep the climate nice and relatively stable for us (though this rare actual climate scientist pseudo skeptic seems to think it would, based upon some non scientific belief — see second half of this piece), when the earth changes climate easily as it is, climate is ultimately an expression of energy, it is stabilized (right now) by the oceans and ice sheets, and increasing the number of long term thermal radiation / heat energy absorbing and re radiating molecules to levels not seen on earth in several million years would add an enormous influx of energy to the lower atmosphere earth system, which would mildly warm the air and increasingly transfer energy to the earth over time, which in turn would start to alter those stabilizing systems (and which, with increasing ocean energy retention and accelerating polar ice sheet melting at both ends of the globe, is exactly what we've been seeing) and start to reinforce the same process until a new stases would be reached well after the atmospheric levels of ghg has stabilized.

The relatively steady rate of warming of both ocean and atmosphere over the past four decades indicates that this must be caused by another process.

A process involving «positive feedback» causes the warming to fuel itself, until it reaches a point that finally tips the climate pattern over.

The combination of saying that an unknown process (which is a blatant lie) starts the initial warming which is then taken over after 800 years by the CO2 feedback is absurd.

Over hundreds of millions of years the Sun actually warms up due to complicated processes in its core, but over, say, 100,000 years the heat and light we get from it is pretty much rock - constOver hundreds of millions of years the Sun actually warms up due to complicated processes in its core, but over, say, 100,000 years the heat and light we get from it is pretty much rock - constover, say, 100,000 years the heat and light we get from it is pretty much rock - constant.

Knowing that abrupt and frequent climate changes attend the end extreme interglacials, and accepting your premise that CO2 can either cause warming by whatever process you propose, or ameliorate the drop to the glacial state, applying the Precautionary Principle absolutely requires that we avoid any possibility of climate back - sliding over the next, at least, 4,000 years:

This process may because by a warm surface; the air near the surface being forced to rise over higher ground or instability within a weather front.

«Aside from eliminating emissions and avoiding 1.5 °C degrees global warming and beginning the process of letting carbon dioxide drain from the Earth's atmosphere, transitioning eliminates 4 to 7 million air pollution deaths each year and creates over 24 million long - term full - time jobs by these plans,» Professor Jacobson said.

View enlarged image Models that account only for the effects of natural processes are not able to explain the warming over the past century.

A survey of over 400 German, American and Canadian climate researchers conducted by Dennis Bray of the Meteorologisches Institut der Universitat Hamburg and Hans von Storch of GKSS Forschungszentrum and reported in the United Nations Climate Change Bulletin, for example, found that only 10 % of the researchers surveyed «strongly agreed» with the statement «We can say for certain that global warming is a process already underway.»

The key sentences in the article itself read: «But the commonly heard — and generally correct — statement that glaciers are disappearing because of warming glosses over the physical processes responsible for their disappearance.

In previous postings here at WUWT I have estimated the human contribution to net warming since 1880 at 0.2 ºC, the natural cycles and processes contribution over which we humans have no control at 0.3 ºC to 0.4 ºC, with the remainder of the supposed warming of 0.8 ºC due to data bias and cooking of the books by the official climate Team.

Then consider that whenever the number of photons does decrease (every day after the peak at noon) that the number of GHE interactions MUST also decrease, and that the number of unused GHGs (in the GHE process) MUST increase, thus establishing that there is AN EXCESS of GHGs over those used in the GHE process, and therefore ALL of the GHGs generated (either by man as CO2, or as WV by feedback) do NOT necessarily have to be in use to create more GHE warming.

As a reviewer of the Greenland paper in question, the key item is that «The positive - feedback mechanism between melt rate and ice velocity appears to be a seasonal process that may have only a limited effect on the response of the ice sheet to climate warming over the next decades.»

The warming that is occurring now, over just a few decades, can not possibly be caused by such slow - acting processes.

Two studies cautioned that simplified calculations used to process observational data could result in incorrect predictions of evaporation due to warming over land.