Sentences with phrase «year paleo records»

Not exact matches

Moreover, random interactions within the sun's magnetic field can flip the fluctuations from one cycle length to the other, matching the paleo - temperature record for ice ages on Earth for over the past 5.3 million years, when ice ages occurred occurred roughly every 41,000 years until about a million years ago when they switched to a roughly 100,000 - year cycle.

You implied that there was nothing in the paleo record showing a rapid release of methane but there was a paper in October suggesting a very rapid release which caused warming of 5C in 13 years (and rendered the ocean surface acidic).

Over even longer time scales (hundreds of years) there are a number of paleo - records that correlate with records of cosmogenic isotopes (particularly 10Be and 14C), however, these records are somewhat modulated by climate processes themselves (the carbon cycle in the case of 14C, aerosol deposition and transport processes for 10Be) and so don't offer an absolutely clean attribution.

It is a fact that there are cyclic warming and cooling events (periodicity 1400 years plus or minus a beat timing of 500 years) in the paleo record and roughly every 8000 years to 12,000 years the cooling is abrupt and there is a larger magnitude change.

The Reference also has a Table 1 of other proxies and paleo - temperature records that show periodicities of between, «55 - 76 years.»

You can see from comments on this blog that paleo records from millions of years ago are more valued than our recent experiences during the Holocene.

Unlike the stock market and instrumental record, paleo has a few million years of data that might help better define what those dragon kings are.

It shows the Hockey stick paleo reconstructions - smoothed 50 year records - and decadal CET instrumental (and reconstruction) The blue lines closed at the top represent glacial retreats and closed at the bottom glacial advances.

If you agree with the paleo proxy records that, according to Bob's link demonstrate a tiny variation in climate over thousands of years, you are effectively agreeing with the statement above.

You are comparing 50 year smoothed paleo model proxieswith annual highly variable instrumental records.

These real - world events can be constructed not only from the historical record, but, for example, from the paleo - record and by sequencing different historical time periods together (e.g, the driest 10 years in the historical record, etc).

If the paleo part of the chart has a granularity of 120 years, and the present temps are the annual instrumental record (tortured to bend upwards), then it is clear that the medieval warm period (error bars) still make it stick up above the most stretched out hockey stick to date.

Natural variability has never been properly evaluated with respect to the human and paleo records dating back millions of years and only now with satellite measurements do we have the ability to evaluate weather and climate trends with any degree of statistical probity.

Few people have read paleo - climatology text books, are aware of the glacial / interglacial cycle, are aware that the paleoclimatic record has unequivocal evidence of cyclic gradual changes and cyclic abrupt climate events, are aware that the abrupt climate change events such as the abrupt termination of the last 22 interglacial periods lacks an explanation, are aware that all of the past interglacial periods are short (roughly 12,000 years) and that they have ended abruptly, and so on.

The warming trend of the past 100 years is not duplicated in the paleo record.

For example, we know that if the climate wasn't changing, it would be broken, since the evidence tells us that the climate is in a state of continuous change, moreover; nothing about contemporary change is unusual compared to the paleo record, and this is even true when we compare changes in recent 5 year averages to the changes in multi-century averages recorded in ice cores.

The coarser 50 year time scale noted in figure 4 appears to have completely masked the decadal variability of up to 2C through the record which is up to ten times larger than the paleo reconstructions using proxies.

There is no argument about the accuracy of the temps or sea level rise during this 30 year period that occurs with paleo records.

The dating of the Sargasso Sea record is 50 years out, because they misunderstand the use of «BP» (Before Present) dates in paleo - records, which refers to before 1950 AD, not the present day.

Also, the extreme event validity is very difficult one for climate models because even in the paleo record we don't have an exact analogue for what we might be looking at in 100 years.

There are periods of millions of years in the deep paleo record when CO2 is high and the planet is cold and periods when CO2 is low and the planet is warm.