Sentences with phrase «uncertainty in science means»

Not exact matches

«The tide gauge measurements are essential for determining the uncertainty in the GMSL (global mean sea level) acceleration estimate,» said co-author Gary Mitchum, USF College of Marine Science.

Unfortunately for policymakers and the public, while the basic science pointing to a rising human influence on climate is clear, many of the most important questions will remain surrounded by deep complexity and uncertainty for a long time to come: the pace at which seas will rise, the extent of warming from a certain buildup of greenhouse gases (climate sensitivity), the impact on hurricanes, the particular effects in particular places (what global warming means for Addis Ababa or Atlanta).

The review, which is being published in the journal Science on Friday, concludes that the human - driven buildup of carbon dioxide under way now appears to be far outpacing past natural events, meaning that, for ocean chemistry particularly, the biological implications are potentially enormous — and laden with the kind of uncertainty that is hard to see as a source of comfort.

«Uncertainty» has meanings within PNS that are unintelligible in science.

He also failed to mention that board member Michael J. Boskin, who served as George W. Bush's chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers, was one of the key culprits of that administration's consistent exaggeration of the uncertainties in climate science as a means for stymieing legislation that would curb carbon dioxide emissions.

The challenge is that the «I» stands for Intergovernmental, and that the word «science» can not be found in the text of the UNFCCC; this means that its parties (governments) should now agree to ask for scientific uncertainties rather than single - minded prosecution; can we expect politicians to do so?

This does not mean that there is no more science to be done, but instead that, in the risk - based framework that society uses in its decision - making, the uncertainties in the science are now small enough to justify public action that will prevent more serious changes in the future.

So, here's a question, VikingExplorer: If, as you have it, unique solutions are not central to physical meaning in science, what's the point of physical error bars and uncertainty intervals?

«He said that public confidence in climate science would be improved if there were more openness about its uncertainties, even if that meant admitting that sceptics had been right on some hotly - disputed issues.»

Gavin Schmidt can parse his words and insist on his «interpretation» as much as he wishes but his meaning is absolutely clear — despite his «uncertainty» post made after «climategate» had outed him: that global warming is happening, that this is caused, in the main, by human made GHGs, that, if mankind does not halt these GHGs, catastrophe will follow and that this is «settled science» and the «consensus».

But if we ignore all the science on impacts and only assume that Earth will warm within a particular range in response to CO2 emissions I think we still have reason for concern because uncertainty about the impacts (what and how much) could still mean that severe and even unforeseen consequences are possible.

But when I look at the single figure in Kevin Trenberth's recent Science paper («Uncertainty in Hurricanes and Global Warming», vol 308, 1753 - 54) the mean SSTA averaged over the tropical Atlantic («10 N to 20 N excluding the Caribbean west of 80 W») sure doesn't indicate recent cooling.

So the uncertainty in science doesn't mean we haven't got enough information to present policy makers with what they need to make policy.