Sentences with phrase «warming science also»

Scientist Who Spearheaded Attacks on Global Warming Science Also Directed $ 45 Million Tobacco Industry Effort to Hide Health Impacts of Smoking Former National Academy of Sciences President Admits Being Paid $ 585,000 by Tobacco Companies.

Not exact matches

I should also note a thrust of my Leadership and the Environment keynote is that although I support science, education, innovation, and the approaches to reducing pollution, resource depletion, overpopulation, global warming, and our other environmental problems, I believe we need leadership in the style of Martin Luther King Junior, Nelson Mandela, Vaclav Havel, Mohandas Gandhi, and so on.

The term also came up among those rejecting the science of global warming and the importance of creation care.

The study's findings suggest that future sea level rise resulting from global warming will also have these hot spot periods superimposed on top of steadily rising seas, said study co-author Andrea Dutton, assistant professor in UF's department of geological sciences in the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences.

«As the climate gets warmer, the thawing permafrost not only enables the release of more greenhouse gases to the atmosphere, but our study shows that it also allows much more mineral - laden and nutrient - rich water to be transported to rivers, groundwater and eventually the Arctic Ocean,» explained Ryan Toohey, a researcher at the Interior Department's Alaska Climate Science Center in Anchorage and the lead author of the study.

The 2011 UNEP / WMO assessment and the related article by Shindell et al. in Science in 2012 indicate that an aggressive program to limit emissions of these substances could relatively inexpensively cut projected warming between the present and 2050 in half while also having tremendous co-benefits for health, air quality, and improved energy efficiency, in the US and around the world.

But the win was also a hopeful sign for scientists who have watched from the sidelines in disbelief as politicians cut science funding and distorted research on evolution, stem cells and global warming.

Warm ocean waters along Alaska's coast have also contributed, Rick Thoman, climate science and services manager for the NWS's Alaska region, said.

The science also says warming by permafrost might be lower than 1.5 degrees F.

Pioneering scientist, social activist, humanitarian — Mary - Claire King is also foremost a free spirit who for over four decades has marched to the beat of her own drummer, animated by the impulse to solve iconic scientific puzzles, a passion for victims of disease and social injustice, and a warm humility that belies her profound impacts on science, on medicine, and on society.

I was familiar with the idea that a warm drink can be calming, but also began to think about the «science» of tea — that certain herbs can soothe the nervous system, and help with stress and anxiety (1).

Single mom loving life, warm personality, loves to have fun, but also enjoys anything to do with water.I'm a Science Teacher candidate.

It also links in with science Unit 4C: Keeping Warm, and Unit 3C (3): Choosing materials for a purpose.

Besides reeling in an energetic kitten or a lap warmer, you will also catch a great adoption package from The Haven that includes a free month of pet health insurance, a free bag of Science Diet food and 30 days of flea, tick and heartworm prevention.

Re # 8 (and to expand on # 13): I also think that a basic strategy of the global warming deniers is to focus on one aspect of the science over which there is some combination of real and manufactured dispute and then try to make people think that this is the one crucial piece of evidence on which the whole theory of anthropogenic warming rests... and thus that the dispute over this aspect throws the whole theory into question.

Social scientists also know, with decent rigor, that the fight over human - driven global warming — both over the science and policy choices — is largely cultural.

A simplistic conclusion of the style «if ice ages are natural, the current global warming must also be natural» is not science (sorry).

The APS is also sponsoring public debate on the validity of global warming science.

Please post a list of the supposed benefits of global warming (GW which you also defend does not exist)-- it is so much fun to debunk junk science.

I would suggest that the judge's need to ask some of the questions posed might to his credit reveal a willingness to learn, but I think also reveals a considerable misunderstanding of global warming science, and even a rather primitive thinking, that for instance human breathing might be an issue.

In her piece, Klein, spends a lot of time focused on the valuable body of social science research I've also explored here showing the normal nature of the wide range in human perceptions of global warming (and other kinds of risks saddled with complexity and uncertainty).

The robin story is purely anecdotal but the article published on the same day as yours by Jim Robbins (no relation to earlier robin) entitled «In a Warmer Yellowstone Park, a Shifting Environmental Balance» is also an example of the NYT conveying science to the readership.

(And, as the Guardian noted aptly, also the time where the «climate science denialists feverishly yell -LSB-...] that global warming stopped in 1998.»)

David Victor, the University of California, San Diego, political science professor and author of «Global Warming Gridlock,» noted some subtler aspects of the announcement that point to ever more efficient coal use in China, but also unrelenting growth in coal use — and carbon dioxide emissions.

Given the total irrelevance of volcanic aerosols during the period in question, the only very modest effect of fossil fuel emissions and the many inconsistencies governing the data pertaining to solar irradiance, it seems clear that climate science has no meaningful explanation for the considerable warming trend we see in the earlier part of the 20th century — and if that's the case, then there is no reason to assume that the warming we see in the latter part of that century could not also be due to either some as yet unknown natural force, or perhaps simply random drift.

We also apologize to Heartland staff, directors, and our allies in the fight to bring sound science to the global warming debate, who have had their privacy violated and their integrity impugned.

It seems to me that «Earth's Energy Imbalance» paper is not strictly a science paper; there are also policy warnings e.g. «this example [~ 0.6 C warming in the pipeline]... implies the need for near - term anticipatory actions».

But it's also clear that more science clarifying overall trends in temperature over a mostly sub-zero continent will have little bearing on what societies choose to do, or not do, related to accumulating greenhouse gases, warming and the resulting rise in sea levels.

Mark Bowen, the author of «Censoring Science: Inside the Political Attack on Dr. James Hansen and the Truth About Global Warming» (Fresh Air interview) said he was initially skeptical about the investigation, but was pleasantly surprised that it captured not only the basic violations of the public trust, but also dealt with «the subtler aspects of censorship — the delaying of information, the sorts of intimidation that cause self censorship.»

The newest paper, in the current issue of Science, «Varying planetary heat sink led to global - warming slowdown and acceleration,» argues that the Atlantic not only has shaped the current plateau, but also was responsible for half of the sharp global warming at the end of the 20th century.

Indeed, throughout the Science Bulletin paper on Why models run hot, it is self - evident not only that I and my co-authors, including Dr Soon, accept that our returning some CO2 to the atmosphere from which it originally came will cause some global warming, but also that we are thoroughly familiar with the scientific reasons why — all other things being equal — more CO2 in the atmosphere will cause some warming.

As we documented in our paper, research has also shown that when people are aware of the expert consensus on human - caused global warming, they're more likely to accept the science and support climate policy to address the problem.

Of course, there are plenty of older scientists who are enjoying the gravy train of gloval warming climate crisis science, but there is also a large percentage who are disgusted by all the gorging and self - righteousness.

A growing number also express doubts about the validity of climate science or reject outright the notion that carbon dioxide and other warming emissions represent a significant environmental threat.

The article also quoted Dr. Patrick Michaels, director of the Cato Institute's Center for the Study of Science, who said: «October 1st marks the 17th year of no global warming significantly different than zero and those 17 years correspond to the largest period of CO2 emissions by far over any other 17 - year period in history.»

What is astonishing about Tol's campaign is that he does not himself deny the physical science of global warming and also admits that the percentage consensus on man - made climate change is in the high nineties.

About 1980ish, some old ideas like the greenhouse effect were brought out of mothballs and re-examined with new tools and techniques; simultaneously several researchers and theoreticians released their notes, published, or otherwise got together and there was a surprising consilience and not a small amount of mixing with old school hippy ecologism on some of the topics that became the roots of Climate Change science (before it was called Global Warming); innovations in mathematics were also applied to climate thought; supercomputers (though «disappointing» on weather forecasting) allowed demonstration of plausibility of runaway climate effects, comparison of scales of effects, and the possibility of climate models combined with a good understanding of the limits of predictive power of weather models.

They also need to take an aggressive role in calling out other scientists who make dire predictions but don't really understand the science of global warming or the uncertainties.

Just to add the appropriate emphasis to what the past 164 years of empirical science tell us, the «C3» estimator replica above also reveals what would happen to «global warming» if the entire U.S. economy shuts down for one year, eliminating some 5.8 billion tonnes of CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion - again, it's a nothing - significant outcome for the climate.

The scientists also put paid to claims that global warming has «stopped» because global temperatures in the past 15 years have not continued the strong upward march of the preceding years, which is a key argument put forward by sceptics to cast doubt on climate science.

23 Sept: Live Science: Becky Oskin: Climate Scientists: IPCC Report Must Communicate Consensus Climate experts also told LiveScience they would like to see the new report stress the scientific consensus on climate change, and emphasize the link between human activities and global warming.

Nova and her husband, fellow climate denialist David Evans — whose name was attached to Nova's email address in Fred Singer's messages — also run Science Speak, a «scientific modeling and mathematical research company» that challenges evidence the world is warming.

While President Bush's recent public statements seem to indicate that he may also be falling for global warming junk science so far, he's only for voluntary cuts in greenhouse gas emissions as well as «technology - based solutions.

Dr. E. Calvin Beisner, founder of the Cornwall Alliance for the Stewardship of Creation, and Tom Harris, executive director of the International Climate Science Coalition, also will be recognized for their contributions to the global warming debate.

However, he also supports the idea that warming has recently stopped and has argued against some well - established points of climate science, such as observed sea level rise and glacier melting.

Just a snippet to give a flavour: At the present time, in its anti-global warming stance, a stance based on twisted science, America is alone — and also the largest producer of greenhouse gas emissions»

Also See: Watch Now: Climate Depot's Morano on Fox News Mocking «Climate Astrology»: «This is now akin to the predictions of Nostradamus or the Mayan calendar» — Morano: «There is no way anyone can falsify the global warming theory now because any weather event that happens «proves» their case... Man - made global warming has ceased to be a science, it is now the level of your daily horoscope» — Gore [in 2006 film] did not warn us of extreme blizzards and record cold winters coming»

Professor John Christy director of the Earth System Science Centre at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, said the Arctic had indeed warmed, but there was also anecdotal and other evidence suggesting similar melts from 1938 - 43 and on other occasions.

Big Oil and Big Coal funded sympathetic think tanks like the Heritage Foundation and the Competitive Enterprise Institute and also outright front groups with names like Friends of Science and the Global Climate Coalition, all of which came up with an endless stream of arguments for why global warming wasn't happening and even if it was, nothing should be done about it.

Nearly everyone I have encountered who dismisses AGW is either pretty ignorant about doing science (that's fine, I am sure they are good at other things - it's unrealistic to believe scientific literacy could be universal), or are just plainly unable to contemplate or accept the changes required in the organisation of human affairs (even though these changes would also happen in the absence of global warming), or are just full of anti-environmental politics for various delusional reasons of their won.