Sentences with phrase «warming is harmful to human»

about Do Americans Understand That Global Warming Is Harmful to Human Health?

Not exact matches

The take - home message, directly in sync with the core findings of the last two assessments from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, can be distilled to a fairly straightforward statement: Rising concentrations of carbon dioxide will result in long - lasting warming that will progressively produce more harmful impacts on conditions and systems that influence human wellbeing.

General American Climate Value Survey Findings -73 percent of Americans believe global warming is happening - But only 18 percent «strongly believe» global warming is real, and is harmful and caused by humans -74 percent said they want the US to be an international leader in global warming solutions

PF: While human ingenuity seems almost endless, do you think it's harmful to rely solely on technology to confront the challenges that global warming poses?

A physicist is no more likely than a sociologist to know what human emissions will be 50 years from now — if a slight warming would be beneficial or harmful to humans or the natural world; if forcings and feedbacks will partly or completely offset the theoretical warming; if natural variability will exceed any discernible human effect; if secondary effects on weather will lead to more extreme or more mild weather events; if efforts to reduce emissions will be successful; who should reduce emissions, by what amounts, or when; and whether the costs of attempting to reduce emissions will exceed the benefits by an amount so large as to render the effort counterproductive.

Continued warming would be harmful, and perhaps very risky when it comes to human welfare and prosperity.

As opposed to comprehension of rudimentary scientific facts, knowledge acquired via graduate - level training and publishing in climate science does appear to increase the likelihood of viewing global warming as real, human caused, and harmful, if other factors are held constant.

The fight has evolved from clashing over human actions and whether they are warming the planet to portraying the consequences of warming as harmful, insignificant or even beneficial.

It is unclear to me whether they ruled this because greenhouse gases cause global warming, which is harmful, or if the greenhouse gases themselves are harmful for humans to inhale.

The parallel sources to these in the global warming argument are the 19,000 scientists who signed the OISM petition that human expulsion of CO2 is not harmful.

«Too expensive to act»: Some contrarians admit that global warming exists, is caused by humans, and indeed has harmful effects, but assert that it is too expensive to mitigate global warming (they ignore the principle of risk management, use economic scenarios that ignore benefits of new technologies, assume a high «discount rate», and ignore devastating future economic costs of unbridled global warming).