Sentences with phrase «warming policy debate»

How Conservatives Can Win The Global Warming Policy Debate,» Forbes, Aug 3, 2016.

9 % closely followed the U.S.global warming policy debate in November and 11 % the Kyoto conference in December, according to Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, «Public Attentiveness to News Stories: 1986 — 2006» (accessed 5/07); Krosnick et al. (2000), TV counts p. 241, doubts in 15 percent of newspaper stories and 8 percent of television, p. 242, politicization p. 253; Mahlman (1998), pp. 101 - 103.

Not exact matches

Alice Hill, who directed resilience policy for the National Security Council in the Obama administration, said the wider debate over cutting climate - warming emissions may have distracted people from promptly pursuing ways to reduce risks and economic and societal costs from natural disasters.

Debating whether climate policy can fuel economic growth, with Christopher Horner, «The Politically Incorrect Guide to Global Warming & Environmentalism» author & Competitive Enterprise Institute; Chris Miller, Greenpeace global warming campaign director and CNBC's BeckWarming & Environmentalism» author & Competitive Enterprise Institute; Chris Miller, Greenpeace global warming campaign director and CNBC's Beckwarming campaign director and CNBC's Becky Quick

Despite the tensions over policies, the debate ended on a warm note, when Mrs Clinton said the first person she would call would be Mr Sanders, if she won the nomination.

Don Thanks for these interesting comments I think you were a bit warmer Perhaps one major lesson of these debates is that there seems to have been a significant under - supply on the blogosphere (i) detailed tax policy and distributional arguments.

While scientists and policy experts debate the impacts of global warming, Earth's soil is releasing roughly nine times more carbon dioxide to the atmosphere than all human activities combined.

The Global Warming Policy Foundation is an independent think tank chaired by the former British finance minister Nigel Lawson that claims to «bring reason, integrity and balance to a debate that has become seriously unbalanced, irrationally alarmist and all too often depressingly intolerant ``.

I was somewhat involuntarily thrust into the center of the public debate over climate change at this very time, when the «Hockey Stick» temperature reconstruction I co-authored, depicting the unprecedented nature of modern warming in at least the past millennium, developed into an icon in the debate over human - caused climate change [particularly when it was featured in the Summary for Policy Makers (SPM) of the Third Assessment Report of the IPCC in 2001].

We debated global warming and environmental policy in my high school debate class in 1994.

Any discussion of global warming, whether in a news story or debate over policy or Gallup poll question, ideally should start with clarity about what's being discussed.

And there's far more murk in the policy debate, with the biggest questions being how much warming is too much and what policies, investments or strategies are most likely to limit regrets.

To keep a full view of the debate over relevant policies, you'd also do well to track the flow of links from the Global Warming Policy Foundation, a pro-fossil, anti-regulation group * in Great Britain.

Of course, there are quite a few experts in climate science and policy who warn that debating whether the research pointing to a disruptive human climate influence is, or is not, settled is a complete distraction from the reality that the basics are not in dispute (more CO2 = warming world = rising seas and lots of changing climate patterns).

In the talk, Victor, trained in political science, warns against focusing too much on trying to defeat those denying the widespread view that greenhouse - driven climate change is a clear and present danger, first explaining that there are many kind of people engaged at that end of the global warming debate — including camps he calls «shills» (the professional policy delayers), «skeptics» (think Freeman Dyson) and «hobbyists.»

My reading of this statement is that you are saying that the likelihood that global warming is increasing the destructive potential of hurricanes (and is likely to do so increasingly in the future) is irrelevant to the policy debate about hurricane damage.

Finding myself in the same foxhole as Steve Schneider when the «Nuclear Winter «balloon went up — it was launched on the anniversary of Orson Welles» War of The Worlds Broadcast with a media graphics package prepared by the Creative Department of that great K - Street PR institution Porter Novell Inc., I remarked to him that it all seemed like a bad joke on Cold War policy analysts, played at the expense of the credibility of climate modeling on the eve of the global warming debate.

Michele wanted to get both sides of the global warming debate represented in the discussion, so her first guest was Jay Drake - Hamilton, science policy director for Fresh -LSB-...]

Pingback: Judith Curry: Let's Abandon Consensus - Dogma In Favour of Open Debate The Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF)

It is also widely stated by people (like Lawson) expecting to have credibility in debates about global warming policy.

Pingback: Judith Curry: The New Climate Sensitivity Debate The Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF)

Pingback: Donald Trump And The Shifting Sands Of The Climate Debate The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF)

Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF) Chairman Nigel Lawson accused the BBC of silencing the debate on global wWarming Policy Foundation (GWPF) Chairman Nigel Lawson accused the BBC of silencing the debate on global warmingwarming.

A truly serious public policy debate over what to do about GHG - driven global warming has not yet occurred in this country.

Global warming contrarian Bjorn Lomborg told POLITICO he is trying to defend the «smart middle» ground in the climate policy debate.

Berlin (AFP)-- Dismissed a decade ago as far - fetched and dangerous, schemes to tame global warming by engineering the climate have migrated from the margins of policy debate towards centre stage.

After the third TV debate on foreign policy, Al Gore, a long - time politician and environmentalist, asked on Twitter: «Where is global warming in this debate?

Mann's paper passed through the peer review process unscathed, and went on to become a key cornerstone of the entire anthropogenic global warming (AGW) hypothesis and the subsequent policy debate.

Although Lawson and his Global Warming Policy Foundation have been discredited and attacked by numerous scientists and senior politicians, his thinktank continues to receive significant coverage, wrongfully distorting the public and policy debate over climate cPolicy Foundation have been discredited and attacked by numerous scientists and senior politicians, his thinktank continues to receive significant coverage, wrongfully distorting the public and policy debate over climate cpolicy debate over climate change.

Mr. Graham said that any Senate debate on the highly charged subject of illegal immigration would make it impossible to deal with the difficult issues involved in national energy and global warming policy.

Its forecasts, released every five to seven years, drive climate policy worldwide, so even the small change raised debate over how fast the planet is warming and how much time we have to stop it.

Almost every time I post something on climate change policy, the comment thread quickly devolves into a debate over the existence of antrhopogenic global warming at all.

This strategy could help policy makers overcome a fundamental conflict in the debate over global warming: carbon dioxide, the main heat - trapping gas in the air, is an unavoidable byproduct of burning fossil fuels like coal and oil — and combustion of fossil fuels is the foundation of industrial societies.

The debate is sort of encapsulated in two quotes: One is Robert Kennedy Jr. saying that if people only had the facts about global warming and understood how urgent this issue was, then they would take action, the right policies would come up and people would support the right candidates.

Further confusing the policy debate, the models that scientists have come to rely on for climate predictions have greatly overestimated warming.

From creationism / evolution to global warming or stem cells, scientific concepts are central to policy debates, but the public and policymakers rarely have the background to appreciate the scientific context of policy debates.

«Politics Tilts Global Warming Debate, Book Says,» Cato Policy Report, Vol.

More to the point, it was wielded in a public and political debate about global warming policy.

Global warming sceptics using media campaign to discredit IPCC Lord Lawson's group Global Warming Policy Foundation is attempting to distort media debate on climatewarming sceptics using media campaign to discredit IPCC Lord Lawson's group Global Warming Policy Foundation is attempting to distort media debate on climateWarming Policy Foundation is attempting to distort media debate on climate change

Moreover, as I've argued here previously, the emphasis, or hope that science can conclusively answer the debate about global warming almost concedes to the alarmist / precautionary perspective that, if «climate change is happening», then so the policies are justified.

Tribe's comments seemed to be more aimed at giving conservative pundits some ammunition in the public debate about global warming policies than thoughtful legal reasoning.

Even if the warming is, say, 6; then the debate is over policy.

All this is being disturbingly tied in to the climate change debate by hijackers of the environmental movement who have spuriously associated fears over global warming with over-population, suggesting that the solution is to implement depopulation policies and punishments for those who flout them.

Ridley had written a number of articles in British and American publications, including a Wall Street Journal article titled «Your Complete Guide to the Climate Debate,» where he supported his arguments by referencing publications by the Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF).

FoS lists their goal as «To educate the public about climate science and through them bring pressure to bear on governments to engage in public debates on the scientific merits of the hypothesis of human induced global warming and the various policies that intend to address the issue.»

We've listened to scientists who know their way around the debate within the atmospheric science and climatological communities and they're concerned that publicity about global warming is driving energy and environmental policy instead of good science.

Given all the reports, and all the evidence, the environment minister is surely exactly the right person to discuss and debate the extent to which the warming and changing climate is contributing to increasing risks including bushfire risk, the extent to which the Australian government is prepared to contribute to global efforts to combat it, and the way its domestic policy will work.

London, 21 February: A new report published by the Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF) shows that both the science and policy of the climate debate are shaped and driven by an almost flawless example of classical GroupPolicy Foundation (GWPF) shows that both the science and policy of the climate debate are shaped and driven by an almost flawless example of classical Grouppolicy of the climate debate are shaped and driven by an almost flawless example of classical Groupthink.

Climate change skeptics like James Taylor, environmental policy fellow at the Heartland Institute, a conservative think tank, said the pushback in schools and legislatures reflected public frustration at being told «only one side of the global warming debate — the scientifically controversial theory that humans are creating a global warming crisis.»

Throughout the 1990s, when the coalition conducted a multimillion - dollar advertising campaign challenging the merits of an international agreement, policy makers and pundits were fiercely debating whether humans could dangerously warm the planet.