Sentences with phrase «global warming issues do»

Not exact matches

The hot spot is not a local safety or health issue, but methane does contribute to global warming.

Which Gasoline Corporations Usually do not Use Ethanolthe real problem with «global warming» hysteria has caused big issues in other spots over the boards and perhaps performs into why we have been in Iraq!back again during the eighties the global warming lunatics released their own individual doctrine which went similar to this.

I don't weigh in on the global warming issue, so your complain doesn't apply to me.

Seriously, if you don't believe in global warming (and other climate related issues) you are dumb AF.

That's what I do in every other issue like global warming, vaccines, etc..

It's funny that when cloth was the only option (and we weren't mega-producing disposables and tossing thousands per child into the landfill) we didn't have the global warming issue.

«The issue should no longer be whether global warming is occurring, but what is the rate of warming, what is its practical significance, and what should be done about it.»

If you believe, along with almost every scientist who has studied the issue, that global warming poses a genuine threat to humanity, doesn't this suggest that we should be doing something about it?

This approach also relieves pressure on politicians who want to do something about global warming but don't want to impose burdens on the public, a key consideration at a time when high fuel prices and the economy are explosive issues.

But turning to the more complex climate issue, he added, «And then later this year, hopefully late this summer, do the global warming part of it.»

They found that for only four issues did Republicans give less than a midpoint score of 5: global warming (4.8), evolution (4.4), gay adoption (3.9), and mandatory health insurance (3.5).

While they will certainly miss out on the pleasure and intellectual excitement that come from knowing how the world works, how much science do they actually need to know to make up their minds about the issues surrounding genetic engineering or global warming?

«There are so many issues around nuclear power, we don't see it as being the answer to global warming and the electricity sector.»

Erik Conway, co-author of Merchants of Doubt: How a Handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Global Warming, noted that there's even a word (which he did not coin) for manufacturing of fake knowledge — «agnogenesis.»

A Warmer Earth, and Fewer Insured Private insurers also point fingers at a changing climate, citing a report issued by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) earlier this year that concluded global warming is to blame for a doubling over the past five years of natural disasters — and that the situation will worsen if nothing is done to stop it.

Smith's work didn't specifically address this issue, but he said the global warming slowdown isn't surprising given its comparatively short time frame.

I find it confusing that the NWS Climate Prediction Center issues «climate» outlooks which have nothing to do with the subject of climate change or global warming.

But what does that really mean, and how can our small actions possibly make a dent in an issue as huge as global warming?

After completing the visual effects, but before the movie came out, he felt a pull to do «important work,» and so he left the entertainment industry and started a small nonprofit that teaches people about global warming and other environmental issues.

The issue of human - induced global warming was of concern even back then — although the public didn't pay much attention.

It's a dilemma facing a growing number of teachers as they tackle the subject of global warming in the classroom: How do you make students understand the urgency of the issue without paralyzing them with fear?

Opinion polls for the past decade have consistently shown that the public would like to see something done about the global warming problem, along with many other environmental issues.

Even in America Repabulican do not realize global warming is very serious issue.

Although I don't know how the hostess picks themes or manages to manage things, in my brief experience with the blog, you are much more likely to find a sensible and creative discussion of how to actually address the issue (global warming, sustainability, and related matters of living well within our environment) on the family, local, or cultural levels than you are to find a large acrimonious debate among (often anonymous) people.

I differ, asserting, as I did here the other day, that those most worried about global warming are already energetically opposed to Trump, while climate change remains a «meh» issue for middle - of - the - road Americans.

First of all, people who know the facts of global warming realize that it is not an «ideological» issue, and don't care whether phony «skeptics» call themselves «conservative» or «liberal».

While it is true that changing stratospheric ozone levels do impact the planets radiative balance (and vica versa) it is a 2nd order issue and global warming and ozone depletion should be viewed as two separate issues.

Renewable energy currently tends to have higher up - front costs than fossil fuel - based power systems do, but in the long run equipment depreciation is lower and the fuel (sunlight and wind) is free, thus any honest cost analysis over the lifetime of the power - generating equipment will conclude that solar is cheapest, wind second, nuclear third, and fossil fuels are unworkable in the long run due to the global warming issue.

Boy, did Ron Rosenbaum ever do a selective reading of Dot Earth last week when he wrote a column for Slate on journalists» responsibility to cover dissent on global warming (and other issues).

As a philosophy professor teaching a course in environmental ethics, I want to do justice to the issue of global warming — at least, as best I can given my layperson status when it comes to climatology.

It also doesn't help that there are almost no grass roots mobilization efforts being carried out by national environmental groups over the issue of global warming other than 350.org.

The immediately quantifiable effects of air pollution are so much worse than the feared effects of global warming I don't really see why we would conflate the issues.

I know some here will decry that I am not talking about the issues because I do not try to obsfuscate with a discussion of the spot market price of coal vs long - term contracts, or use of coal in locations other than Kansas, or Al Gore's footprint, but the issue of Global Warming IS politics (non-ratification of Kyoto and negative flag - waving ads about politicians who oppose coal), it IS public relations («Clean Coal», cleanest coal - fired plants, surface mining and mountain - top reoval rather than strip mining, etc.), and it IS about misrepresentation (Peobody framing the debate as coal vs NG when it is really coal vs every other energy source), and it IS about greed (the coal industry doing everything it can to scuttle every other energy alternative).

-- Doesn't believe that global warming is an issue; OR — Doesn't believe that excessive carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is a cause; OR — Doesn't understand that free marketplaces don't generally respond sufficiently to things that don't have costs or prices.

In an interview regarding an issue of vast importance such as global warming, a science writer (who himself knows important components of the «big picture» answer to a question of vital importance) asks someone else the question without ultimately providing a full answer to the public, perhaps leaving many people thinking that the question really doesn't have a comprehensive and sensible answer.

I am not a trained climatologist or scientist to comment on the issue of global warming, but I do have some very serious thoughts on the matter:

What prompted you to do an in - depth look at global warming stances and the issues underlying this «crisis»?

the editorial board of NYT did a piece called «The One Environmental Issue» on Monday, talking about how global warming is «the» only issue at hand when it comes to our wIssue» on Monday, talking about how global warming is «the» only issue at hand when it comes to our wissue at hand when it comes to our world.

I don't think that there is anything distinctive about the issues we face with regard to fringe opinions concerning global warming.

In this video, Stott raises the big issue of «cosmic rays» and its contribution to climate change, but then backs off and says he didn't say it was causing global warming and that it's just a «hot topic» of research.

Anyone eager to understand, and move past, the deep political polarization around global warming would do well to explore the findings in «Solution aversion: On the relation between ideology and motivated disbelief,» published in the November issue of the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.

But, as is so clear in considering the interface of science and society on a host of tough issues — from nanotechnology and synthetic biology to global warming — the views of the average person, let alone an elderly folkie, do matter.

(I'm not referring to the WSJ news division, which tends to do a reasonable job of reporting on scientific issues, including global warming).

Although these are difficult matters, at a minimum, given the history of the situation, the vital importance of the global warming issue, the available information, and so forth, I think the following would be necessary to do justice to the phrase «in the public good»:

The European Centre for Medium - range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF), which normally doesn't make much noise about climate issues, has since made a statement about July global mean temperature being record warm:

I will discuss a selection of the global warming - related issues that are raised in between the car chases, shoot - outs, cannibalistic rites and assorted derring - do.

I accept there is something approaching a scientific consensus that global warming is real and should be addressed urgently, but contributions wishing to radically change the figures do need to consider credibility issues of this kind.

Journalists dealing with global warming and similar issues would do well to focus on the points of deep consensus, generate stories containing voices that illuminate instead of confuse, convey the complex without putting readers (or editors) to sleep, and cast science in its role as a signpost pointing toward possible futures, not as a font of crystalline answers.

His handlers evidently did not buy assertions of some pollsters (which were challenged elsewhere) that voters had grown more impassioned about broader environmental issues, including global warming, as a result of the gulf petro - calamity.

The authors do not provide a history of global warming; rather they use the issue to illustrate «entrepreneurial politics.»