Sentences with phrase «warming projections predicted»

Not exact matches

The response to global warming of deep convective clouds is also a substantial source of uncertainty in projections since current models predict different responses of these clouds.

None of this «oh, natural variation and cool spells are expected to interrupt the warming (for more than a year or two)» crap... that's not what has been predicted, and if temperatures do not rebound in a big way soon, AGW projections will continue to look foolish.

Even if the study were right... (which it is not) mainstream scientists use * three * methods to predict a global warming trend... not just climate computer models (which stand up extremely well for general projections by the way) under world - wide scrutiny... and have for all intents and purposes already correctly predicted the future -(Hansen 1988 in front of Congress and Pinatubo).

Citing the work of Dr. John Christy and Richard McNider at the University of Alabama in Huntsville (UAH), which compared climate model projections with temperatures measured independently by satellites and weather balloons, he said «the average warming predicted to have occurred since 1979 (when the satellite data starts) is approximately three times larger than what is being observed.»

Clearly, observed temperature trends are predicting a future temp that resembles the IPCC projection if CO2 was held constant - the actual trends are multiple times below the «runaway» and «accelerating» global warming that Obama and the IPCC still push.

But a growing body of scientific evidence suggests that the projections of climate change that have been made by the current family of computerized climate models has been overdone — that the world will warm up significantly less than has been predicted as a result of our ongoing carbon dioxide emissions.

If the only evidence we have for AGW are the model projections and none of them predicted what is actually happening, how can anyone predict a resumption in warming in 10, 20 or 30 years.

Put this all together, and you find that while individual solutions of the climate equations may have predicted the slowed warming of the last few years, that single solution wasn't statistically valid as a projection and so was given only a small weight in the overall model or multi-model means.

However, the climate projections that are incorporated in Tol's economic model are likely wrong — they predict too much warming from future carbon dioxide emissions.

The impact on our «understanding and attributing climate change» is major, of course: if up to 50 % of past warming can be attributed to solar forcing (as many solar studies have concluded) then the whole model - predicted (2xCO2) climate sensitivity estimates are in serious question and, with these, all the projections for future climate change caused by AGW.

The «pause» and the many observation - based studies showing a much lower 2xCO2 ECS than previously predicted by the models cited by IPCC in AR4, gave IPCC the possibility for a paradigm shift to refocus away from its CAGW premise to one of reduced warming projections based on the lower observed CO2 sensitivity.

These projections, summarized, by the IPCC in 2007, predict a significant warming of the planet unless drastic decisions about greenhouse gases emissions are taken, and perhaps it is already too late to fix the problem, people have being also told.

The lack of warming for more than a decade — indeed, the smaller - than - predicted warming over the 22 years since the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) began issuing projections — suggests that computer models have greatly exaggerated how much warming additional CO2 can cause.