Sentences with phrase «without knowing the climate»

Without knowing the climate costs of the products on the market, consumers can not take those costs into account when making purchasing decisions.

Not exact matches

Even without the threat of climate change, we've long known that hurricanes are dangerous.

«There can be no doubt that, without the salary commission legislation, judicial salaries would not be on anyone's agenda in Albany today in the worst economic climate in decades,» Lippman said.

Citing as an example an urban infrastructure improvement project in a municipality of China, WRI researcher Milap Patel said, «without even a risk screening, we didn't know whether this project was vulnerable to climate change.»

You know, that is, we could create a world, where we combated and mitigated climate change but without paying attention to what's going on in the realm of biodiversity, we could save the climate and wake up in a world with so many fewer plants and animals.

Friedman: Absolutely, because without it, if we aren't Noah and we don't build the ark, we could — and I think this is so important for our Scientific American's audience to really understand, because I know they appreciate it — and that is that we could actually save the climate and kill the planet.

Geoscientist Will Daniels, a postdoctoral researcher at UMass Amherst's Climate System Research Center, is set to embark on the trip of a lifetime this month as part of an experiment for NASA, spending 45 days away from Earth as he knows it, without ever leaving the ground.

The IPCC wishes to destroy the world economy and starve the world of energy and food at a cost of $ 76 trillion over the next 40 year's (UN estimate), to keep global temps below 2C, when even their wildly pessimistic and disconfirmed projections (formally known as predictions) now suggest that climate sensitivity could be as low as 1.5 C, without spending a dime.

The Year Without a Summer, also known as the Poverty Year and Eighteen hundred and froze to death, was 1816, in which severe summer climate abnormalities destroyed crops in Northern Europe, the American Northeast and eastern Canada.

Current plans are to build many more coal burning plants, without taking into account what we now know about climate.

Without knowing it, I was living in a climate that aggravated my condition.

I'm having a very hard time with spring collections this year — although it's partly that I've moved from Britain to the US and don't know where to shop yet, and the fact that my wardrobe is transitioning to a different climate — but I'm finding it difficult to find things that a) aren't frilly and b) are androgynous / «soft butch» without being boring.

And parents don't know that our district will be the model for all others — because we do it best — we will collect SSP data in the form of social and emotional surveys, we will change our curriculum to socially engineer our children with social and emotional instruction without parents suspecting a thing, we will assess and survey up the wazoo about academics, school climate, cyberbullying, etc. while willing parents stand by, we will enhance our teacher evaluation program and refine it into a well - oiled teacher manipulation machine, and since our kids would do well no matter what because we have uber - involved parents, it will look like everything the Administrators are doing at the State's recommendation causes the success.

«I decided to do the Tapir trip without knowing much about Ecuador and was pleasantly surprised to discover an amazing country with tons of activities and such a variety of climates - it was like seeing three countries in one trip!

We know, for example, from the work of Santer et al. that the warming trend in the tropical Atlantic can not be explained without anthropogenic impacts on the climate.

Of course, we know that these things happen anyway, even without climate change.

As a professional airline pilot, I wonder how he'd react if a climate scientist without so much as a private pilot's license were to barge into the cockpit during a landing approach and shove Simon aside proclaiming «I know more about flying than you, I'm going to land this airplane with its 300 passengers!»?

And, since they couldn't confirm or deny, they just accept that fact without any skepticism (and this is why «climate skeptic» isn't right) and because it tells them what they already «know», they don't need to look any further, don't need to know any more.

Current plans are to build many more coal burning plants, without taking into account what we now know about climate.

So, while neither any climate model nor any climate data set I'm aware of show any signs of chaotic behaviour of climate (rather than weather), and the major climate variations we know of can all be understood without needing to resort to chaos, I simply find no reason to believe there is chaos in climate evolution.

Does anyone know where I can find the outputs of various climate models, particularly over the satellite era and ideally with runs showing with and without anthropogenic influences?

JP Reisman # 18 It is possible to predict the weather with reasonable skill without knowing anything about climate or its forcing parameters

It's also important to examine whether a world without such efforts — in which citizens had a clear view of both what is known, and uncertain, about the human factor in shaping climate - related risks — would appreciably change.

Since the 155 W / m2 GHE is the GHE forcing based on the present climate (in the sense that removing all GH agents (only their LW opacity, keeping solar radiation properties constant) results in a forcing of -155 W / m2 at TOA for the present climate, and we know that without any GHE, in the isothermal blackbody surface approximation, the temperature will fall approximately 33 K without any non-Planck feedbacks), it can be compared to smaller climate forcings made in the context of the present climate (such as a doubling CO2.)

Any change in a single year — no matter what the variable — can not generally be linked to climate change, although the ice losses in 2007 and 2008 would not have happened without the long - term warming and thinning of the ice cover.

It might be interesting to some readers of this site to know that Crichton's comparison of global climate change theory to eugenics in Appendix I of his novel was adapted without attribution from an essay by Richard Lindzen, «Science and Politics: Global Warming and Eugenics,» which appeared in R.W. Hahn, Ed., Risks, Costs, and Lives Saved, (American Enterprise Institute, 1996).

While I'm skeptical (heh) one can make peer - reviewed contributions to Physical Chemistry without actually knowing anything about it, I'm quite sure that's not true across the breadth of climate - related disciplines.

In the end, one need not know with a high degree of accuracy the intricacies of the climate's variability to show an increased warming trend: 3 Furthermore, there are no models that exist that are able to match recent observed warming without taking rising CO2 levels into account, i.e. if radiative forcings from CO2 aren't taken into account, then models don't match hindcasting.

Without those unpredictable factors, the climate might be predictable, if only we knew more... Regards, lb

Without a hint of self - awareness, Robertson claims that climate scientists are simply elitist ideologues who will hold onto their beliefs in global warming no matter what.

Alas, the climate modelers are no different than the self - deceived jokers in the marketing / sales departments, who made faulty sales projections based on complex Excel formulas without an understanding / appreciation of the underlying nuances and unknown macro, micro, behavioral and innovation economics at work, globally, 24/7.

It is not currently known just how warm the Medieval Warm Period was, but clearly the warmth then was below the tipping point because Earth's climate continued without problem.

The Guardian: We all know that some climate change is natural, in fact, even without humans, the Earth's climate changes.

The idea of tinkering with the earth's climate system on a massive scale without even knowing how it works is the most foolhardy expression of anthropogenic hubris I have ever seen.

As with many other polarized and politicized issues, scientific or otherwise, many people formulate opinions without really knowing it understanding the evidence related to climate change.

I can feel thermal radiation, I believe CO2 has a measured IR absorption spectrum, I believe a CO2 molecule is not a bottomless pit of energy that can be filled without ever spilling over, and this predictable spilling over is measured from spectrometers on satellites and the ground, therefore there is a CO2 greenhouse effect whose net effect on the climate is of some small and as yet imprecisely known size.

Most often if you have uncertainty about the effects of what you are doing, you slow down until you know more about it, yet neither advocate slowing down except as a by - product of looking for energy efficiency and reduced emissions that they suggest would happen anyway without the motivation of their unknown climate change effects.

``... it is extremely unlikely that global climate change of the past 50 years can be explained without external forcing and very likely that it is not due to known natural causes alone.»

Now your incoherence and ambiguity places you in an interesting / awkward position, because now you can never defend the climate science or your peers in the climate field who (like you) know AGW / ACC is a concern without being accused of defending the alleged «dogma» — at least by many readers here.

There is no science without uncertainty, and climate science is no different.

Whatever your motive for participating in what can only be considered a campaign of climate engineering cover - up, rest assured that we, at GeoengineeringWatch.org, will do our best to publicly expose you (and all those like you who are participating in the climate engineering cover - up) to populations that deserve to know the truth about the ongoing highly destructive and dangerous geoengineering programs that were long ago deployed without public knowledge or consent.

Those in a position to understand will... & without cosmetic delays to label time series that are well known to serious climate enthusiasts.

How can one read Andrew Revkin's recent claim in the NYT's Review of Books that «the overwhelming majority of scientists believe humans are influencing climate in potentially calamitous ways» when most of us understand he damn well knows better, without getting depressed.

As John discussed in his post, there are some issues with this hypothesis (i.e. we know observed forcings like solar irradiance and aerosols can explain most past short - term temperature changes without requiring major contributions from these «climate shifts»).

We already know that the sea surface temperatures associated with mass bleaching of much of the Great Barrier Reef in early 2016 would have been virtually impossible without climate change.

Most of that «knowing» comes from mass propaganda and programming, without us realizing that there is a plethora of climate change related phenomenon that has been left out of the equation.

If you know how we can survive the threat of Climate Ruin without geoengineering, then, by all means, please share your ideas.

You're not a climate scientist, but how can you even play one on TV without knowing that methane is a much more powerful GHG than CO2?

(11/13/2011) Not known for alarmism and sometimes criticized for being too optimistic, the International Energy Agency (IEA) has warned that without bold action in the next five years the world will lock itself into high - emissions energy sources that will push climate change beyond the 2 degrees Celsius considered relatively «safe» by many scientists and officials.

I feel that, if IPCC is supposed to be regarded as the «gold standard» scientific summary of what we know about what makes our climate behave the way that it does, it must earn this reputation by being completely objective without a «hidden agenda» to «sell» one side of the story.