Sentences with phrase «atmospheric physicist who»

I have given you a link to an atmospheric physicist who IS an expert.

Harris cites the work of PhD - level climate scientists and atmospheric physicists who've studied global warming for decades, and none of these skeptics deny climate science in any general sense of the word — that's another unsupportable talking point from believers of catastrophic man - caused global warming.

My standard example of this is the atmospheric physicists who blithely assume that the mean global temperature curve is actually a measurement.

Not exact matches

I gained unexpected influence: Who would have guessed that an atmospheric physicist would have the power to shut down one of the world's largest mining pits when ash falling from the 1980 eruption of Mount St. Helens, in Washington state, threatened both workers and expensive equipment?

No previous mission has been able to tackle that question,» says David Brain, an atmospheric physicist at the University of Colorado in Boulder who is helping design Hope's instruments, a high - resolution camera and infrared and ultraviolet spectrometers.

This underestimation is most dramatic at higher wind speeds, notes Jasper Kok, an atmospheric physicist at the University of California, Los Angeles, who was not involved in the work.

«The amount of visible radiation entering the lower atmosphere was increasing, which implies warming at the surface,» says atmospheric physicist Joanna Haigh of Imperial College London, who led the research, published in Nature on October 7.

Oxford University atmospheric physicist Raymond Pierrehumbert, who is among the scientists who believe cutting methane should be less of a priority than cutting carbon dioxide to tackle climate change, said the study is useful in evaluating methane capture systems at landfills.

They were Jorge Sarmiento, an oceanographer at Princeton University who constructs ocean - circulation models that calculate how much atmospheric carbon dioxide eventually goes into the world's oceans; Eileen Claussen, executive director of the Pew Center for Global Climate Change in Washington, D.C.; and David Keith, a physicist with the University of Calgary in Alberta who designs technological solutions to the global warming problem.

Among atmospheric scientists, physicists, oceanographers and others who study Earth's energy balance there is virtually no debate on either the existence or the causes of global warming.

Scientifically, the meteorologists, climatologists, and atmospheric physicists, who were responsible for «discovering» the human contribution to the terrestrial greenhouse effect, have been the most consistent champions of its importance, while the solar physics community, and especially those interested in solar - terrestrial relations, have increasingly stressed the possible importance of the long - term variations of the solar constant as the chief cause of climate change.

Now, I think it was in 1956 that atmospheric physicist and sometimes - weapons designer Gilbert Plass (who needed to know about IR to fire heat - seeking missiles up the tailpipes of jet fighter at high altitude) noted that CO2 in the upper troposphere could block the escape of IR to space: The Carbon Dioxide Theory of Climate Change, Gilbert Plass (1955)(abstract) In the full paper, available at the above link, Plass spells out the previous notion which his research overturned:

... the Heartland Institute's climate - change summit was forged around a cadre of professional climatologists, atmospheric physicists, and economists who see the effects of a global - warming «hoax» as the death knell for scientific inquiry and the capitalist system of free enterprise.

The main authors are Craig D. Idso, Ph.D., editor of the online magazine CO2 Science, marine geologist Robert M. Carter, Ph.D., a research professor at Australia's James Cook University, and atmospheric physicist S. Fred Singer, Ph.D., who was the first director of the U.S. Weather Satellite Service.

I worked for several years as an editor at a Physics magazine, and countless times, I ran into such prejudices — usually expressed by physicists who worked in nice, clean laboratories and contended that geophysics, oceanography, atmospheric science... (insert your favorite subfield to diss).

The problem that I have met on several occasions is that he presents directly or implies claims of errors in main stream science while the only error is that he is missing some essential points well known to every competent atmospheric scientists and often obvious also to me as a physicist who has learned about atmosphere of own interest after retiring.