Sentences with phrase «when unprecedented warming»

Not exact matches

It may have been unprecedented for the Cannes Film Festival to present the Palme D'or to both lead actresses alongside their director when Blue is the Warmest Color won the prize, but you can understand why they made that decision after seeing the film.

Well, we hear that the 1980 - present warming is «unprecedented» when in fact it's very close to the warming from 1910 - 1940, which supposedly is natural.

I was somewhat involuntarily thrust into the center of the public debate over climate change at this very time, when the «Hockey Stick» temperature reconstruction I co-authored, depicting the unprecedented nature of modern warming in at least the past millennium, developed into an icon in the debate over human - caused climate change [particularly when it was featured in the Summary for Policy Makers (SPM) of the Third Assessment Report of the IPCC in 2001].

WHEN you are a man - made global warming alarmist prosecuting your case as «unprecedented», you need to make sure that no recent climate era was as warm or warmer than the present, even if that means having to rewrite the past to fit your theory.

Of course, logic and ethics had no chance when you were faced with defending it, since the Hockey Stick graph (the only one reproduced multiple times in color in any IPCC summary) was the primary basis for convincing the Media and Policy Makers that immediate action was needed to offset unprecedented warming, obviously caused by unprecedented increase in CO2.

However warm spikes due to high solar output punctuated this cooling trend roughly every thousand years.22 The unprecedented Holocene glacier growth during the Little Ice Age occurred when solar output was extremely low.

Consequently, the next time a serious drought takes hold of some part of the world and the likes of Al Gore blame it on the «carbon footprints» of you and your family, ask them why just the opposite of what their hypothesis suggests actually occurred over the course of the 20th century, i.e., why, when the earth warmed - and at a rate and to a degree that they claim was unprecedented overthousands of years - the rate - of - occurrence of severe regional droughts actually declined.»

There was a time when it was an all too common belief today's warming was unprecedented but now that's a much less certain proposition.

And this unprecedented warming of ocean waters occurred during a 30 - year period when human CO2 emissions were some 85 % less than the modern era (166 billion tonnes of CO2 emissions versus 784 billion tonnes for the most recent 30 - year span).

That's why Michael Mann was heralded as a climate change hero when he sacrificed his career as a respectable scientist to create a bogus historical temperature reconstruction which deleted all past climate variation of the last 2,000 years so that modern warming would appear as an UNPRECEDENTED!

Reality: When warming finally exceeds the unprecedented per century trend rate (11.5 °C) previously reached during the Rutherford Hayes administration (1877 - 1881), for an extended period (say, 2 years as a minimum).

I have already dealt with the proposition that the warming effect is not significant — both ice core data and the fossil record tell us that it is unprecedented in at least the last 55 million years (when the Himalayas began to form) and very significant.

Joshua, the first sentence of the Marcott abstract, «Surface temperature reconstructions of the past 1500 years suggest that recent warming is unprecedented in that time» Now when you dig through the paper and check the supplements you find that that statement is «not robust».

They believe those who work for the government when they say, «we have modeled your future;» and, then the people don't understand when they learn that the, Global warming computer models are confounded as Antarctic... (It's unprecedented: across the globe, there are about one million square kilometers more sea ice than 35 years ago, which is when satellite measurements began).

The study showed that the current warming is unprecedented for 11500 years, but it really did not because of it's proxies» low resolution, but it did not have to because we know that the spikes did not exist (as there is no mechanism for that) in the past and the current warming, the spike, though a product of dubious procedures and «not robust» in the study (but this does not matter because we know from instrumental records that there's a spike), is unprecedented, because we know it is (and we know why and we already know that it's gonna continue)... So what exactly did this «excellent study» add to the knowledge when all that it was supposed to add, it did not but we already know all of this without the study.

In view of all you've written Zeke, should the record ever be used to make press releases saying «warmest on record» or unprecedented when no matter how honest the endeavour, the result has to be somewhat of a best guess?

Recently, an article citing over 80 graphs from scientific papers published in 2017 — and another 55 graphs from 2016 — established that modern «global» warming is not actually global in scale, and that today's warmth is neither unprecedented or remarkable when considering the larger context of natural variability.

Hundreds Of Scientific Papers Challenge «Global» Warming Recently, an article citing over 80 graphs from scientific papers published in 2017 — and another 55 graphs from 2016 — established that modern «global» warming is not actually global in scale, and that today's warmth is neither unprecedented or remarkable when considering the larger context of natural variaWarming Recently, an article citing over 80 graphs from scientific papers published in 2017 — and another 55 graphs from 2016 — established that modern «global» warming is not actually global in scale, and that today's warmth is neither unprecedented or remarkable when considering the larger context of natural variawarming is not actually global in scale, and that today's warmth is neither unprecedented or remarkable when considering the larger context of natural variability.

And it was just one in a long series of threats I've received since the late 1990s, when my research illustrated the unprecedented nature of global warming, producing an upward - trending temperature curve whose shape has been likened to a hockey stick.

When I first took notice of global warming I noticed that almost every scientific assertion contained the word «unprecedented».

When what is said is that a crisis causing unprecedented for the last 1000 years warming is taking place but you also notice a very very similar warming (determined using thermometers and not by proxy about 100 years ago a time when the IPCC says it could not be AWhen what is said is that a crisis causing unprecedented for the last 1000 years warming is taking place but you also notice a very very similar warming (determined using thermometers and not by proxy about 100 years ago a time when the IPCC says it could not be Awhen the IPCC says it could not be AGW).