Sentences with phrase «warming since»

The main basis for the claim that there has been «unusual» global warming since the Industrial Revolution arises from the various global temperature estimates constructed from weather station records.

They can cite the IPCC: «It is extremely likely that human influence has been the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-20th century.»

Actually, the oceans have been warming since 2003.

A major peer - reviewed paper by four senior researchers has exposed grave errors in an earlier paper in a new and unknown journal that had claimed a 97.1 % scientific consensus that Man had caused at least half the 0.7 Cº global warming since 1950.

Hi colby, I have been interested in global warming since attention started being paid as to man being the culprit and have been seeking what may or may not be the truth to this phenomina.

There Has Been No Net NH Warming Since The 1940s In the press release for a newly published and controversial peer - reviewed scientific paper, Australian scientist Dr. Jennifer Marohasy unveiled one of climate science's better - kept secrets.

Level 1 was «explicit endorsement with quantification»: i.e., the abstracts stated specifically that more than 50 % of the warming since 1950 was attributable to Man.

So, if man - made global warming were occurring, it should not be confused with the natural global warming since the Little Ice Age.

Ie hadcrut4 is compatible with 0.18 C / decade warming and RSS as much as 0.2 C / decade warming since the end of 1997.

A cursory glance at Cook et al. 2013 shows that only levels 1 - 3 are included in the consensus; they explicitly or implicitly agree that most of the warming since 1950 is anthropogenic.

By 2012, an international panel of leading researchers in the field said there was at least a 95 percent chance that human activity has caused global warming since 1950.

As the science continues to mount up against AGW (i.e. latest Aqua satellite data supporting «negative» feedback and GISS, UAH, RSS, Hadley data showing no warming since 1998 and a trend towards cooling), I see «doubters» getting rounder and rounder, and Pachauri, Gore, Hansen, et al getting flatter and flatter.

The myth of no warming since 1998 was based on the satellite record estimates of the temperature of the atmosphere.

Just my personal crusade against the «No warming since 19xx meme,» whhich is a pervasive and blindinly stupid meme.

The main basis for the claim that there has been «unusual» global warming since the late 19th century is that the global temperature estimates constructed from weather station records suggest a warming trend of about 0.8 - 1.0 °C since about 1880.

The satellites show warming since 1998 too.

Last week The Mail on Sunday provoked an international storm by publishing a new official world temperature graph showing there has been no global warming since 1997.

When increasing CO2 is added, their models can simulate average global warming since the 1970s.

Christopher Monckton of Brenchley, an expert reviewer for the IPCC's imminent Fifth Assessment Report, who found the errors in Cook's data, said: «It may be that more than 0.3 % of climate scientists think Man caused at least half the warming since 1950.

Last year the world was 0.62 C hotter than the 20th Century average (13.9 °C)-- that already includes part of the warming since preindustrial times.

How has this process been followed for AGW or, more specifically, for the premise that the observed warming since the modern record started has been caused principally by AGW and that this represents a serious potential threat to humanity and our environment (let's call this the «dangerous AGW» hypothesis or dAGW, which Trenberth would like to see as the «null hypothesis»)?

No one knows what it will do for the next 15 years, although it would seem likely that the long - term warming since 1850 of around 06 - 0.7 C per century would resume.

warrenlb, that site contains no valid scientific evidence of human causality in any of the climate warming since 1900 (or before, for that matter).

This was not the case when using the response to solar forcing based on the alternative reconstruction of Lean et al. (1995), in which case they find a very small likelihood (less than 1 %, as opposed to approximately 10 %) that solar warming could be greater than greenhouse warming since 1950.

There has not been any warming since then as Met Office temperature record proves.

«how will more realistic assessment of data set uncertainty influence the IPCC AR5 conclusions and confidence levels regarding the attribution of warming since the mid 20th century?»

While it can be shown statistically that global warming ended by 1998 no statistics are required to show that there has been no detecable global warming since 2002 because all that is needed is the application opf a best fit straight line.

The only actual warming since the satellites started operating is a step warming that began with the 1998 super El Nino, raised global temperature by a third of a degree in four years, and then stopped.

«The climate has been warming since the 1700s, okay, since the end of the «Little Ice Age,»» Curry explained.

So, how will more realistic assessment of data set uncertainty influence the IPCC AR5 conclusions and confidence levels regarding the attribution of warming since the mid 20th century?

Schlesinger's conclusions check pretty well with the physical observations since 1850, as well as with the IPCC claim of «most of the warming since 1950».

It assumes close to 100 % of the warming since 1850 is due to humans, an assumption that goes much further than the iconic «it's now extremely likely that most of the warmings since 1950 is due to humans» statement in AR5.

The IPCC stated with 95 % confidence that most of the global warming since 1950 is human - caused, with a best estimate that 100 % is due to humans over the past 60 years.

So here it is: «It is at least 95 percent likely that human activities — chiefly the burning of fossil fuels — are the main cause of warming since the 1950s.»

The much embarrassing «Pause» continues to ignore the predictions of the wrong - way IPCC and government - funded climate «scientists» - you know, the «experts» who have been long predicting end - of - the - world global warming since the late 80's.

And if you look for why the sea surface temperatures are warming since the 1970s, you don't have any explanation other than greenhouse warming.

Of course the climate is warming since the last age and will continue to do so until the tipping point where we begin to slide into the next age.

Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) are to blame for global warming since the 1970s and not carbon dioxide, according to new research from the University of Waterloo published in the International Journal of Modern Physics B this week.

From where I sit, we have been talking about global warming since the late 1980's.

If all of the cooling in the usa from 1950 to 1975 is caused by increasing aerosols (Schneider et al) then all of the warming since 1975 is caused by decreasing aerosols.

There has been no warming since October 1997 i.e. 14 years: have a look there.

lolwot, there are certainly some in your camp who believe that all of the warming since the Little Ice Age has been from human GHGs.

As a result, the global warming since 1997 in the HADCRUT4 data is too low, because they fail to show the additional warming in the Arctic.

eg see here spatial distribution for warming since 1980.

This followed the assertion made by Prof Carter that no significant warming since 1998 meant that the AGW theory was being proved wrong.

The ARGO record shows that the upper ocean has stopped warming since it started in 2003.

So the infilled GISS data, which extends out over the Arctic, would show the greater warming since the 1970s... until the warming stops for Northern Hemisphere sea surface temperatures and for the low - to - mid latitude land surface air temperatures.

So if the 2015 - ’16 rise and fall of temperatures are natural, and the 2002 - 2014 trend is cooling (below link), even according to HadCRUT4, why has there been no anthropogenic warming since... well, when?

And as far as the Antarctic is concerned: There hasn't been no significant warming since 1955 (the 7 station series from New Zealand show the same and for what it's worth I don't trust the BOM temperature - series)

The IPCC concluded that «the effects [of greenhouse gases], together with those of other anthropogenic drivers, have been detected throughout the climate system and are extremely likely to have been the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-20th century.»