Sentences with phrase «warming science make»

Not exact matches

You likely deny evolution and global warming for no other reason than it makes you uncomfortable and hold science to the impossibly high standard of having to explain every conceivable mystery about the natural World before you will accept it, but some moron at a pulpit doing magic hand signals of a Sundaymorning is enough to convince you he is communicating with some sky - god and turning grocery store bread and wine into flesh and blood.

John Beddington, the UK government's chief scientific adviser, says that climate scientists should be less hostile to doubters who question man - made global warming, and that public confidence in science depends on more openness to varied opinions.

You likely deny global warming for no other reason than it makes you uncomfortable and hold science to the impossibly high standard of having to explain every conceivable mystery about the natural World before you will accept it, but some moron rolling around a floor speaking in tongues is enough to convince you he is channeling a spirit.

Jon, I don't believe in the myth of man - made global warming because the science behind it is bunk — I'm sure you think I'm weird.

Cooney himself made 294 edits to the administration's 364 - page Strategic Plan for the U.S. Climate Change Science Program posted July 24, 2003, «to exaggerate or emphasize scientific uncertainties or to deemphasize or diminish the importance of the human role in global warming,» and Cooney and the CEQ played a role in eliminating climate change sections in the EPA's draft Report on the Environment as well as its National Air Quality and Emissions Trends Report.

When the ground is frozen above a cave no water seeps into it, making such formations «relicts from warmer periods before permafrost formed,» the researchers wrote in a study published online in Science on 21 February.

While they will certainly miss out on the pleasure and intellectual excitement that come from knowing how the world works, how much science do they actually need to know to make up their minds about the issues surrounding genetic engineering or global warming?

The repercussions of the findings, which were published Thursday in Science, could make it harder to hold warming to limits set during recent United Nations climate negotiations — but they're being received cautiously by other climate scientists, with questions raised over the results of the analysis.

The new text will say: «To describe those who don't accept climate science or dispute the world is warming from man - made forces, use climate change doubters or those who reject mainstream climate science.

The leak of the Heartland memos — including a disputed one purporting to outline a strategy to pay a Department of Energy contractor to prepare school curriculum teaching children that the science behind man - made global warming is unsettled — rocked the climate world last week when they were released to bloggers.

The main claims of fact he makes in support of his contention that Global Warming science is an «idealogy, underpinned by false assumptions» are:

In their paper published in the journal Science Advances, the team describes their sequencing study of three types of plants and the comparisons they made with other plants that had been previously sequenced, and why they believe that what they found might help such trees survive as the planet warms.

In the same E&E ClimateWire interview, Bast criticized the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) as climate science capitulators who committed what he called «pre-emptive surrender» for admitting there is serious man made warming and engaging the policy arena.

For years, we at Greenpeace have been working to make public the secret paper trails that show what everyone already knows: climate science deniers - #Fakexperts - are few and far between, and most of them are paid by companies most responsible for global warming to downplay the problem.

It warms my heart to hear you found inspiration on the blog — and I really hope you continue to honor yourself and your science and the fashion you love — and whatever else makes you happy.

I would describe my self as a kind, warm hearted person, who has a strong work ethic, i am very determined to succeed in life, i want to go to college for Video Game Design and Computer sciences, I like to make a woman feel good about herself, because everyone has lots of potential the only...

With a glint in his eye and that signature crooked smile, Damon sells this direct - address device beautifully — aided by Drew Goddard's warm and wickedly smart adapted script — making dialogue like «I'm going to have to science the shit out of this» into winsome laugh lines.

Best way to keep you hedgie healthy is to feed a good diet (I like Hills Science Diet Feline Mainenance), keep them warm (get a under cage heating pad, I like the reptile heating pads made by Fleuker), and get her a chinchilla metal flying saucer.

To prime the pump, I mentioned a couple of instances that I reported on Dot Earth, including a report estimating 300,000 deaths a year from global warming and contentious statements made about the predicted die - back of the Amazon rain forest at a climate - science summit in Copenhagen early last year.

The authors make it clear that they don't disagree with the reality of global warming, but blogs everywhere are using it as a propaganda tool to paint global warming as a fraud and the climate science community as a bunch of confused clowns.

Climate change skepticism seeps into science classrooms Some states have introduced education standards requiring teachers to defend the denial of man - made global warming.

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.

Global warming is not rocket science but George Will and a few others make it seem that way.

[Added Dec. 31, 9:00 a.m. In mid November, he made a prediction, posted on the National Science Foundation website, that the period from December through February would see unusual cold in the east, as the west remains warm given the power of this ElNiño.]

This opening statement «'' One of the pillars of the case for man - made global warming is a graph nicknamed the hockey stick» states the science education level and the verificational level in relation to reference material of the journalist, IMO.

There was no mention of Dr. Seitz made in the commentary «Oregon Institute of Science and Malarky,» yet the inclusion of his letter urging support for the petition is probably much more important to the «anti Gobal Warming cause» than the article.

Finally, we returned to the science, and I addressed a theme that's come up on this blog, and that I think contributes substantially to making the human response to climate change (or global warming) a particularly vexing problem — the reality that while the basics of the science are clear, the science on questions that matter most to society is not.

Dan De Silva @ 32, you have this thing where you think climate scientists make up science that suggests the world is warming because they are «biased» in some way politically or otherwise.

The main claims of fact he makes in support of his contention that Global Warming science is an «idealogy, underpinned by false assumptions» are:

If you are going to make claims about the role of CO2 in the warming of the earth climate system, I suggest you first make an effort to understand what the science actually tells us.

Those who rail against the media for including too many voices of doubt in some stories on global warming science and policy might want to step back a minute and review the chart below, from last December, showing just how invisible coverage of climate is compared to the stories that make the cut each day.

If a scientist who does understand AGW science says it is not proof of warming he is not denying science, he's denying the conclusions some have made, or the methodology used to reach those conclusions, etc..

NASA Reneges on Transparency — Still No DSCOVR Documents Tags: Desmogger, dscovr climate satellite, Government Policy, Mitchell Anderson, Nasa, NASA, NASA climate change, nasa global warming, News We made, Science, Science, US

But science doesn't know how exactly much warming a human - enhanced GH effect will result in, or what our best policy options are for dealing with the anticipated impacts, though many excellent suggestions are being made.

I wish that people who write articles about global warming and others who affect and make energy policy like the environmentalists and the teary eyed soccer moms who support them, had some training in science, technology and economics.

A new study published Monday in the Proceedings of the National Academies of Science provides the clearest evidence yet that human - induced global warming made that drought more likely.

More than 650 scientists from around the world dispute the claims made by the United Nations and former Vice President Al Gore about global warming, saying that science does not support that climate change is a manmade phenomenon, according to a posting on the Senate environmental committee's press blog.

Just as missing data in some areas of climate science does nt prevent us from making rational statements about global warming, so to the fact of missing mails does not prevent us from describing clearly what we do know about the mails.

Or is Paul defending against the charge by making a numbers argument — the scientists in question are on the same side as the consensus, so to challenge any aspect of global warming science or politics is to make a statement about «the majority of scientists» (many of whom are in fact social scientists)?

If the Authors «want to examine... loci at which scientific knowledge is made,» Why not just say what we already know as «virtually certain»: the ipcc's method is almost exclusively «computer - simulated climate science» = gigo; «Expertly» guided by demonizing CO2 and disasterizing Global Warming and spurred onward always by the ethical maxim that «We «mainstream» Climate Scientists are all gonna die from Green Back Starvation Syndrome if we don't gin up some more demonizing and disasterizing «Climate Science» before it's too late!&science» = gigo; «Expertly» guided by demonizing CO2 and disasterizing Global Warming and spurred onward always by the ethical maxim that «We «mainstream» Climate Scientists are all gonna die from Green Back Starvation Syndrome if we don't gin up some more demonizing and disasterizing «Climate Science» before it's too late!&Science» before it's too late!»?

He adds that he is not making any definitive statements on the science of global warming.

«Ben Santer [federal climatologist] just published a pal - reviewed paper in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science loudly proclaiming that the dreaded man - made global warming signal has emerged from our naturally chaotic climate... pretty much what he wrote in Naturefor the UN's 1996 edition of this conference, 16 years ago.

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.

Dana, I think you are pushing in the right direction with this; heat content is a much more direct measure of the underlying changes to the climate system than average air temperatures and climate science communicators should make heat content their first response to the suggestion that global warming is something that waxes and (allegedly, recently) wanes.

And yes, nowadays, expert scientist John Holdren (Obama's former science Czar), just like his comrade Professor Stephen Schneider, fears not man - made Global Cooling but Global Warming:

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.

And to the point that Dr Curry is making, if we want to get politics out of the science of global warming then would it be so bad if we were to politely ask the UN to butt out?

The fact that we can't control China, India, and other countries makes all this discussion, the expensive satellites, expensive super-computer models, and money dumped on climate science an exercise in futility as far as mitigation of global warming is concerned.

I believe her emphasis on uncertainty has made a valuable contribution to the climate science dialog, even though, as she knows, I disagree with her about the merit (as I see it) of the IPCC attribution of most post-1950 warming to anthropogenic GHGs.

Roger disputed that carbon (as CO2) caused any warming, that honest, unaltered science thought CO2 to be the consequence rather than the driver of temperature increases, that increasing CO2 in the air was sourced by natural phenomena rather than mostly man - made, and that to decrease CO2 to levels required by regulation would start to starve plants, making more folks on the planet to starve accordingly.