Sentences with phrase «accumulating science pointing»
In his State of the Union address to Congress last night, President Obama (no surprise) echoed the agencies» definitiveness on 2014's record heat, but wisely didn't dwell on that, making the point that the pattern is the key (along with the accumulating science pointing to specific rising risks):
https://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/ Not exact matches
Marc Kastner, dean of the School of Science at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) in Cambridge, points out that a high - impact paper accumulates citations over many years, favoring older researchers over younger ones.
Accumulated points can be redeemed for more Spongelab games — none of the games cost real money — or earn discounts on science - themed merchandise.
1) The first point is mainly a values question (how to apportion limited resources in a world with current problems and looming risks), but also has some interpretation of science (that the risks from accumulating CO2 are not significant; see Poinpoint is mainly a values question (how to apportion limited resources in a world with current problems and looming risks), but also has some interpretation of science (that the risks from accumulating CO2 are not significant; see PointPoint 2).
Even with the problems in the Gulf, the science that points to rising risks from accumulating greenhouse gases, and the cheering at a green - jobs fair, there's scant evidence that the country is even remotely engaged in the kind of energy quest that would be required to move off the comfortable fossil - fuel «rung» of what Loren Eiseley called the heat ladder.
If that makes the science unsettled when compared to the billions of data points accumulated by thousands of real climate scientists working over fifty years, then nothing will ever be settled enough for you.
As I said, I like the Italian flag idea, and it's an interesting «visualisation» of science starting with 100 % white and then gradually more percentage points slipping to one side or the other as the evidence comes in, but I can't help but feel that in your analysis it is easier for the evidence to accumulate in red than in green.
A natural consequence of science is that over time, as evidence accumulates and points in a certain direction, is that the experts start agreeing on the most likely explanation (eg that smoking increases the risk of cancer; that GHG emissions will cause a positive energy imbalance of the planet which will warm up as a result).
Right now the politicians are accumulating the tally of points: good science in AR5, mistakes pointed out by critics, changes noted by bloggers like Prof Curry.