Sentences with phrase «what atmospheric scientists»

What any atmospheric scientist knows (I suspect even Judith knows this) is that these brief shallow «pauses» in - between the stronger upsurges are noise from the periodic decadal and multi-decadal oscillations (PDO, AMO) plus strong ENSO years.

Not exact matches

And seriously, who cares what computer scientists, statisticians, philosophers and atmospheric scientists think...

«I'm pleased [the new] results show that what we'd previously theorized,» says Nilton Renno, an atmospheric scientist at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, who was not involved in the new work.

It's what scientists have jokingly nicknamed the mesosphere, the third atmospheric layer from Earth's surface.

It helps lay a foundation that scientists can apply to make predictions about what would allow life to alter exoplanets» atmospheres, and may inspire deeper studies, here on Earth, of how oceanic - atmospheric chemistry drives climate instability and influences the rise and fall of life through the ages.

The timing of such uplift is important in helping scientists to understand how mountains form, how they erode and what impact this may have on global atmospheric circulation patterns and climate.

«We now have an independent measurement of these emission sources that does not rely on what was known or thought known,» said Chris McLinden, an atmospheric scientist with Environment and Climate Change Canada in Toronto and lead author of the study published this week in Nature Geosciences.

What a group of physicists think about climate change matters greatly because climate science is, after all, a branch of physics, and most atmospheric scientists are based in physics departments.

Industry attorney tells judge he «does not know» what atmospheric CO2 levels are, even though data from scientists worldwide are crystal clear

«We're trying to find out exactly what is coming from the rings and what is due to the atmosphere,» Hunter Waite, Cassini team lead for the mass spectrometer instrument and an atmospheric scientist at the Southwest Research Institute in San Antonio, said at the Sept. 13 news conference.

«But no one has had a comprehensive set of observations of what really happens after you seed a cloud,» says Jeff French, an atmospheric scientist at the University of Wyoming (UW) and SNOWIE principal investigator.

As for the paper's conclusion that removing atmospheric carbon is necessary in order to achieve the 2 ˚C target, climate scientist Richard Moss of the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory's Joint Global Change Research Institute in College Park, Maryland, says that's a nearly impossible goal «with what we know about today.»

Scientists routinely observe atmospheric waves around the world, but the persistence of these waves made them unusual, and scientists didn't know what was cauScientists routinely observe atmospheric waves around the world, but the persistence of these waves made them unusual, and scientists didn't know what was causcientists didn't know what was causing them.

One major question is how climate change may be intensifying westerly winds around Antarctica, and what those changes will do to southern polar clouds, says Andrew Vogelmann, an atmospheric scientist at Brookhaven National Laboratory in New York.

That allows scientists to learn how they adapt to climate change and what greater role those lands can play in reducing atmospheric greenhouse gas emissions, especially protecting forests.

«Irene did about what was expected from the forecasts,» said atmospheric scientist Eugene McCaul, of NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Ala. «The rainfall was probably the biggest threat, partly because most ofthe East and New England have had a very wet August even before Irene's onslaught.»

Dr. Schlesinger is an atmospheric scientist and engineer at the University of Illinois at Urbana - Champaign who for three decades has been studying human influence on climate and what to do about it.

His book, «The Two - Mile Time Machine,» is a fascinating account of how scientists have learned to use ice as a history book of climatic and atmospheric changes — and what Greenland has revealed about times when climate jogged abruptly.

What's important here, and remains important, scientists say, is how the patterns of atmospheric and climatic change reveal the most about the involvement of greenhouse gases, not simply the change in global temperature.

What would you say if an atmospheric scientist made sweeping conclusions about your field of medicine, I wonder?

Two British scientists have asked the question literally uppermost in the minds of transatlantic flight planners: what difference will global warming make to atmospheric turbulence?

As a climate scientist, I am focused on what levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide can be considered safe.

As atmospheric carbon dioxide levels rise, scientists look back four million years for answers on what to expect from climate Continue reading What Does 400 ppm Look Lwhat to expect from climate Continue reading What Does 400 ppm Look LWhat Does 400 ppm Look Like?

ATMOSPHERIC and other climate - change scientists need to meet regularly to discuss and debate what is known and what remains to be discovered about climate change.

«What our study shows is that observed water vapor concentrations are high enough and temperatures are low enough over the U.S. in summertime to initiate the chemistry that is known to lead to ozone losses,» said Harvard atmospheric scientist David Wilmouth, one of the paper's co-authors, in an email.

Now thats about 1 % or less of what could be listed so to repeat your quite accurate assessment of the actual climate scientists and it was climate scientists who were being surveyed remember, who apparently believe that an impossible MORE THAN 100 % of global warming is due to human induced releases of atmospheric green house gas [GHG] concentrations

Incoming: New Board of Director Member, Susan Avery In what was to many a surprise announcement, the Exxon Mobil Corporation has elected atmospheric scientist Susan Avery to its board of directors, reversing its prior position stated as recently as April 2016, expressed in a «proxy statement» that included its formal responses to shareholder resolutions.

«For the moment, oceanographers and atmospheric scientists don't see a link to human - caused climate change, but also say what they've seen doesn't match other recognized patterns in ocean conditions.

The trouble is, sea ice researchers and atmospheric scientists have not drawn that conclusion, despite what a new paper by Pilfold and colleagues imply.

If the respected atmospheric scientist can bring up the topic then methinks she should be able to answer to holes poked in her argument... that is what a good blogger / professor would do...

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.

To what extent are scientists forced to read blogs and address every internet poster who thinks they woke up and is now an expert on atmospheric physics?

To make sense of what will happen in the next decades, climate scientists urgently need accurate estimates of how much atmospheric carbon will be sequestered in the soils and water, and how much will linger in the atmosphere.

The ocean absorbs some of the excess atmospheric CO2, which causes what scientists call ocean acidification.

It's one of those definitions that I imagine if I ask 10 atmospheric scientists to tell me what it means, I will get 12 answers.

No, what I'm doing is drawing attention to an important and uncomfortable reality: that scientists from the academies of science of two major global economies (China and Russia — between them responsible for 34 % of global CO2 emissions, more than the US and EU combined (24 %)-RRB--- have a wholly different view of mankind's responsibility for recent atmospheric temperature increases from what seems to be the view of most relevantly qualified Western scientists.