Sentences with phrase «other climate scientists agree»

Not exact matches

He agrees with other scientists who think that the U.S. must begin a series of talks with the European Commission and the European Space Agency as well as with counterparts in India, China and Japan to find a way to develop an international climate observing system.

As with perceptions of scientific consensus on other topics, public perceptions that scientists tend to agree about climate change tend to vary by education and age.

As you point out other studies agree with the MBH study so I would have thought what amounts to a sudden global climate shift would be of major interest to climate scientists everywhere yet one sees relatively little written about it.

James (comment # 177) I agree with you that I would be making a very academic point if no climate scientists were suggesting a general connection between hurricanes (and other extreme weather events and climate change).

If not, the only way you can suppose that climate has always changed (which wasn't common knowledge until the last one hundred years) is by agreeing with the research and opinion of many climate scientists and others, who have built up a picture of a constantly changing climate over the history of this planet.

In the case of climate change, those measurements after measurements by thousands of scientists for over fifty years are adding up to an extremely compelling and robust argument because they all pretty much agree with each other: we can send people to the moon, and our excess CO2 is changing the climate.

I agree on very many issues with you, but I can not avoid the impression that the animosity in both ways between you and some of the other climate scientists is due to unwillingness to understand, what the other side is really saying.

Climate scientists agree that rising levels of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases trap incoming heat near the surface of the Earth and are the key factors causing the rise in temperatures since 1880, but these gases are not the only factors that can impact global temperatures.

Or we might think of climate scientists who are have criticisms of the work of other climate scientists, but legitimately think it is important to note that they don't agree with the basic, likely attribution of climate change to ACO2.

This may mean that 97 % of climate scientists agree on BS, 2 % are wrong in other ways and only 1 % has any freaking clue at all.

Trouble is, Mack, there are lots of other peer - reviewed climate scientists who don't agree with him, and my climate science isn't good enough (yours seems to be — what exactly are your qualifications?)

Some scientists criticized aspects of the new study, but agreed that an initial focus on the other greenhouse gases could achieve significant slowing of climate warming, as long as carbon dioxide cuts were also made.

Indeed, of all the silly things that have been said about the climate by political operatives and others who can not accept the 150 - year old physics of greenhouse warming for ideological reasons, perhaps the silliest is the claim that scientists do not agree about those fundamental physics.

, asks well - known scientist Art Robinson, who spearheaded The Petition Project which to date has gathered the signatures of 31,487 scientists who agree that there is «no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate.»

The study cites Spencer and Bast along with other «manufacturers of doubt,» whose work to undermine the public understanding of this consensus has been stunningly successful — only 12 percent of Americans, their previous work found, know that more than 90 percent of scientists agree on this — and has resulted in «cascading effects on public understanding that climate change is happening, human caused, a serious threat, and in turn, support for climate change mitigation and adaptation policies.»

I largely agree, but would add that there are plenty of other reasons for policymakers to keep climate scientists at arm's length..

Over the last three years, I've had the opportunity to meet with scientists who occupy different positions on the climate spectrum: Some are out - and - out «skeptics»; some broadly agree with the so - called «consensus» but dislike its intolerance; others define themselves as «lukewarmers» or have only relatively modest disagreements with Mann & Co - yet even that can not be tolerated by the Big Climate enfclimate spectrum: Some are out - and - out «skeptics»; some broadly agree with the so - called «consensus» but dislike its intolerance; others define themselves as «lukewarmers» or have only relatively modest disagreements with Mann & Co - yet even that can not be tolerated by the Big Climate enfClimate enforcers.

Within that group they determined how many scientists really did agree with the most important IPCC conclusion, namely that humans are causing significant climate change — in other words the key parts of WG I.

While other scientists differ on pinpointing particular numbers and limits, many who study climate change agree that some kind of action is needed.

I completely agree, and have said so on this blog, that Judith has to tread softly because she is a respected climate scientist, and is still trying to reach out to those other scientists who have been caught up in the paradigm paralysis she speaks of.

It is also telling that Richard Lindzen, a well known critic of other climate scientists, happens to agree with us on this.

To get past the political logjam, Wilhite and other Nebraska climate scientists are working to broker a compromise in which the University of Nebraska agrees to underwrite a full climate - impact study for the state.

In a poll of scientists in different fields by Doran and Kendall Zimmerman (2009), 97 % of those who published at least half of their peer - reviewed research in the climate field agreed that human activity was significant in changing global temperature; at the other extreme, only 47 % of economic geologists (typically employed by oil companies and the like) concurred.

Two other important records from satellite instruments — one from MODIS and the other from MISR — don't agree well over land, so scientists hope that data from other other sensors like SeaWiFS might help resolve some of the discrepancies and reduce the overall uncertainty about aerosols in climate models.