Sentences with phrase «about global warming science»

Learn more about global warming science and the methodology and sources behind the infographic.

Second, in his courage, his decency, and his understanding of the truth about global warming science, Happer is exactly what America needs to restore a semblance of integrity to the discredited world of US government science after years of corruption, incompetence and neglect.

«In hindsight,» wrote Littlemore, «I played perfectly into the hands of Monckton and his happy radio host, Roy Green, who share the same goal — not to win an argument about global warming science, but merely to show that there still IS an argument.

Neither Gelbspan nor anyone repeating his accusation ever proved the money trail led to an industry directive to lie about global warming science; none of them have proved skeptic climate scientists were instructed to mimic tobacco industry tactics; journalists have demonstrably not offered overall fair balance in to skeptic climate scientists; the «wedge» being driven is one arguably pounded by enviro - activists who push the «skeptics don't deserve fair media balance» talking point; and Gelbspan was not the first one to bring up this talking point.

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.

The term «global warming denier» is so offensive because it seeks to attach skepticism about the warming and / or its supposed Draconian solutions with denying the Holocaust and being «anti science.»

I have always thought that the global warming, or «climate change» debate, was as much about social psychology as science.

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.

They can say «Hey look, one of you smart people decided to come back to our ideology of «ignorance is bliss» where we don't need to worry about global warming, or sharing what we have with the poor or any science and wellfare stuff at all because God will just take care of it...»

«Stop Global Warming: The Solution is You» teaches about the science behind global warming, as well as activism (something I'm especially keeGlobal Warming: The Solution is You» teaches about the science behind global warming, as well as activism (something I'm especially keWarming: The Solution is You» teaches about the science behind global warming, as well as activism (something I'm especially keeglobal warming, as well as activism (something I'm especially kewarming, as well as activism (something I'm especially keen on).

Those who know more about climate science, for example, are slightly more likely to accept that global warming is real and caused by humans than those who know less on the subject.

For Republicans, the more knowledge they have about climate science the less likely they are to accept the theory of anthropogenic global warming (whereas Democrats» confidence goes up).

Can social science explain why people flout reams of scientific conclusions about global warming?

«The evidence before the committee leads to one inescapable conclusion: the Bush administration has engaged in a systematic effort to manipulate climate change science and mislead policymakers and the public about the dangers of global warming,» the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform wrote in its report on the matter in December 2007.

«Now, the question has shifted from whether global warming is happening to what to do about it,» said Naomi Oreskes, a science historian at Harvard University, in an email.

The new report, from a panel of the interagency National Science and Technology Council, says that too little is known about endocrine disruptors to say where they rank compared to other environmental problems such as global warming and loss of species habitat.

An offer to distribute Al Gore's movie about the threat of global warming has put the National Science Teachers Association (NSTA) on the hot seat.

Results of a new study by researchers at the Northeast Climate Science Center (NECSC) at the University of Massachusetts Amherst suggest that temperatures across the northeastern United States will increase much faster than the global average, so that the 2 - degrees Celsius warming target adopted in the recent Paris Agreement on climate change will be reached about 20 years earlier for this part of the U.S. compared to the world as a whole.

Climate Change — Want to know more about global warming — the science, impacts and political debate?

And there was this great, it was my favorite moment of the weekend and it was this very dramatic moment, when basically Emanuel was complaining a little bit, very politely, and smiling about the fact that journalists still are doing stories about, you know, the debate around climate science, but there's not really, of course, there's not a debate, there's consensus that anthropogenic global warming is happening and that, why are you still doing these stories, asking questions?

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?

After naming global warming the top science story of 2004, Discover received numerous questions from readers about the science.

«I've always thought that the phrase «global warming» was something of a misnomer because it suggests that the phenomenon is something that is uniform around the world, that it's all about temperature, and that it's gradual,» Holdren said yesterday at the annual AAAS Forum on Science and Technology Policy in Washington, D.C. (AAAS publishes ScienceInsider.)

RC is about conveying the science of global warming to the public.

Discover Magazine's # 1 story in science for 2004 is that «Evidence of global warming became so overwhelming in 2004 that now the question is: What can we do about it?»

From stem cell research to global warming, human cloning, evolution, and beyond, the science debates are not exactly about science, but come down to a dispute between liberals and conservatives about the right way to think about the future.

Milloy tries to set himself up as a source of information about what is good science, and in trying to put global warming in the same class as copper bracelets, crystals and pyramids he is doing a great disservice to public discourse.

Back in May the University Corporation for Atmospheric Research hosted a National Climate Adaptation Summit that brought together roughly 150 people representing the US science, business and policy communities for a three - day conversation about coping with the impacts of global warming.

I think your discussion about anthropogenic global warming is a little «off topic» in this blog entry, which is about due diligence in climate science, but with the permission of those running the blog, I'd like to explore it a little further.

Re # 4 Naomi Oreskes wrote an article in Science which reported on the papers about global warming published between 1993 and 2003.

In particular, when we speak about targets of 2 degrees, or even 1.5 degrees, we should remember that climate science has yet to uncover a simple deterministic relationship between carbon emissions and the level of future global warming.

Visit the Science Museum at the National Academy of Sciences to learn more about global warming.

The Hot Topic: What We Can Do About Global Warming By Gabrielle Walker and Sir David King (Harcourt) In The Hot Topic, former science advisor to the British government Sir David King teams up with veteran science writer Gabrielle Walker to offer perhaps the most thoughtful and scientifically rigorous work to date on how we got the Earth into this fix, and how we can help get it out.

Meanwhile, surveys suggest that science teachers face criticism over teaching about global warming, and some states have passed legislation seeking to include anti-climate change material in the scientific curriculum.

Again, science had become politicized in the minds of some people, in this case because the most recognizable voice shouting out about global warming and its effects is Al Gore.

In order to assess global events such as the war in Iraq, they need to understand global politics; in order to have an informed perspective about global warming, they need to understand global economics, environmental sciences, and geography; and in order to communicate successfully with their neighbors from other cultures, they need to appreciate cultural differences and have skills that allow effective and respectful cross-cultural interactions.

A prominent science educators» group has drawn the wrath of supporters of «An Inconvenient Truth,» former Vice President Al Gore's film about global warming, as well as some of its own members, by turning down a request that it distribute 50,000 free copies of the movie.

While refutation texts have been widely used to correct misconceptions about controversial science issues (e.g., global warming, GMOs), to our knowledge they have never been tested to correct misconceptions about policy.

Students watched An Inconvenient Truth — former U.S. Vice President Al Gore's documentary about global warming — and studied the science behind climate change (including arguments that it is not a crisis humans caused).

Since the science and theory linking global warming in the short term is much weaker than the underlying rationale for long - term global warning, arguing about short term trends is dangerous.

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.

But in no case should a reporter who wishes to portray with accuracy the debates about global warming, present a minority view unbacked by science and promoted by businesses with a small, old dog in a very tough dog fight, as equivalent to hard science from unbiased scientists with no economic interest in anything but getting the facts and predictions right.

I wondered about the graphs in the merde du jour «Science Has Spoken: Global Warming Is a Myth», by Robinson & Robinson 1997, both from the «Oregon Instutute of Science & Medicine».

However, when people use the term «catastrophic anthropogenic global warming» they are not referring to any real science but are attempting to paint anyone who talks about the science as an alarmist.

Last month, the New York Times reported that Phil Cooney, a former oil industry lobbyist working for the White House, edited scientific climate change reports to significantly exaggerate uncertainty about the science behind global warming.

In the first, I show some of the basic data sets and findings about global warming, including some comments on historic land marks of our science.

RC is about conveying the science of global warming to the public.

David (I don't know about Charles) is perfectly aware of the science of global warming.

I first learned about the Science of Global Warming when I studied undergraduate Physics in the early 1980s (no mere pup, me).

A revealing look at RC's «real science:» When SecularAnimist posts a dubious claim (# 87) about the cause and effects of global warming, it remains here.