Sentences with phrase «actual number of scientist»

Has the Earth warmed since the 1850's because of increased CO2 release due to fossil fuels use by man, the actual number of scientist who agree plummet well into the LOW 30 %.

The actual number of scientists who backed that claim was «only a few dozen experts», he states in a paper for Progress in Physical Geography.

The actual number of scientists...

Not exact matches

Meredith: CSI, they're all scientists, they're all heroes and Numbers is a classic case, that's mathematicians being heroes, and they're just very few actual villains in television that are scientists; most of them are heroes.

The K - index is the ratio of the scientist's actual follower number to the follower number «warranted» by the citation count.

This year researchers discovered the actual number is «certainly less than 10» and probably no more than six, says Doug Melton, a molecular biologist at Harvard University and one of the scientists the president consulted before his decision.

The trend in how children perceive scientists parallels an uptick in the actual number of female scientists.

What particularly interested me was the number of scientists who had been pushed out of CSIRO, or had left of their own volition, after being tightly censored in what they could say about global warming, and the emissions reductions that would be needed to stabilise the climate (the latter point is particularly sensitive since any actual number implies a target and government policy is opposed to targets).

Based on more recent research, however, a number of scientists suggest this could occur in a few centuries, and some, like Jim Hansen, seem to think the change could occur even more rapidly, although it is not completely clear if by this he means the commitment to this much rise or this much actual rise during the 21st century.

When he presented his misleading graph, when he said 97 % of climate scientists agree, (knowing full well the actual situation that the number is bogus and misleading,) when he mentions adjustments to satellite data but not to surface temperatures with major past cooling and absurd derived precision to.005 * C, when he defends precision in surface global averages but ignores major estimates of temps and krigging in Arctic, Africa, Asia and oceans or Antarctica, he forfeits credibility.

The frontpage for the conference website makes a number of misleading or false statements, but one phrase that caught my eye was «The scientists speaking at this conference...» This list of speakers contains so few actual scientists (and even fewer climate scientists) that labeling the speakers as «scientists» is misleading.

As for the number of scientists actually doing climate science, properly defined, even if «only» 620 appear as actual authors of the sections in IPCC - 2007 science report, this work is supported by well over 2,000 climate scientists whose work in the peer - reviewed literature is referenced in that document.

Since to me (and many scientists, although some wanted a lot more corroborative evidence, which they've also gotten) it makes absolutely no sense to presume that the earth would just go about its merry way and keep the climate nice and relatively stable for us (though this rare actual climate scientist pseudo skeptic seems to think it would, based upon some non scientific belief — see second half of this piece), when the earth changes climate easily as it is, climate is ultimately an expression of energy, it is stabilized (right now) by the oceans and ice sheets, and increasing the number of long term thermal radiation / heat energy absorbing and re radiating molecules to levels not seen on earth in several million years would add an enormous influx of energy to the lower atmosphere earth system, which would mildly warm the air and increasingly transfer energy to the earth over time, which in turn would start to alter those stabilizing systems (and which, with increasing ocean energy retention and accelerating polar ice sheet melting at both ends of the globe, is exactly what we've been seeing) and start to reinforce the same process until a new stases would be reached well after the atmospheric levels of ghg has stabilized.